A. Pope, J.J. Harper - Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing

T he companion volume ...
~igh-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing

By ALAN POPE, Director of Aerospace Projects;
and KENNITH L. GOIN, Staff Member,
Experimental Aerodynamic Division, both of Sandia[}orporatior~.
I '-
"The book is well

•
organized and contains a sufficiency of theory
to provide an understanding of the use of wind tunnels, but not so
much as to make the text unwieldy. There is a large amount of
detailed practical information which makes the text very usable
for instruction, test planning and conduction, and data reduction. \,
The material on wind tunnel design is especially good.
"I believe that this book will probably take its. place as a _recog-
'. nized authority in high-speed wind tunnel testing .... " -Professor
Richard Ross, Deportment of Aerona_utical Engineering, Wichita
State University. 47 -4 pages.
Jehn Wiley & Sons New York • london

I
• Sydney ,
Low-SDeed
Wind Tunnel
Tesling
I
( ~~
'j
Low-Speed
Wind Tunnel Testing
Alan Pope
Director of Aerospace Projects, Sandia Corporation
John J. Harper
Professor" and-Head, Nine-Foot Wind Tunnel
;i'~ Georgia institute of Technology
I
John Wiley & So~s, Inc., New York London I Sydney
IcPA5
,k,Z:a_ ~ /1 ~~
The radical open-circuit propulsion wind tunnel of the Canadian

National Research Council. The inlet is to the left and there is no ',' C
diffuser. (Courtesy National Research Council.) Of ( "

Preface
It is apparent that the low-speed wind tunnel, suffering for almost a

decade from emphasis on high-speed flight, is about to come into its own
again. Not only will current tunnels be busy, but also new tunnels will
have to be built to handle the new problems that are arising. These
concern V/STOL aircraft, helicopters and compound helicopters, re-entry
vehicles, missile low-speed stability and wind loads in the launch position,
automobile streamlining and rain flow, building loads, ground effect
machines, smoke nuisance, and many more. Some of the new work
requires both new methods and tunnels, whereas the up-to-date airplane
uses all of the old techniques and some of the new.
Basic test methods have really changed but little. The same understand-
ing of tunnel design is still needed, as is the theory of wall corrections.
New techniques, especially for measuring forces on models, have almost
replaced the old external balance.
The changes have made Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing a difficult book
to write, and we hope we have supplied enough of the old procedures and
at least a start on the new ones. The scope of the book remains the same:
to help students who are taking a wind tunnel course; to furnish a
reference for low-speed wind tunnel engineers; and to aid beginners in the
field of low-speed wind tunnel design. Separation of the high-speed
coverage (which may now be found in High-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing, by
Pope and Goin) makes for a smaller book, better organized for low-speed
work.
The senior author takes this opportunity to welcome the assistance of
Professor John J. Harper. Much of the new material has been contributed
by him.
Copyright © 1966 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Albuquerque, New Mexico Alan Pope
Atlanta, Georgia John J. Harper
All Rights Reserved
"This book or any part thereof
must not be reproduced in any form
without the written permission of the publisher.
I
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 66-17619
Printed in the United States of America
v
Contents
Abbreviations IX
1. The Wind Tunnel 1

2. Wind Tunnel Design 36
3. Instrumentation and Calibration of the Test Section 85
4. Model Force, Moment, and Pressure Measurements 126
5. Testing Procedure 192
6. Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections 300
7. The Use of Wind Tunnel Data 378
8. Small Wind Tunnels 398
9. Nonaeronautical Uses of the Wind Tunnel 406
10. Testing Helicopters 433
Answers to Problems 450
Appendix: Numerical Constants and Conversion of Units 451
Index 455
VB
Abbreviations
In view of the large number of aeronautical research centers being set up, a list
such as this must be considered incomplete. However, it may be of help in
identifying the source of particular publications.
Abbreviation Complete Meaning
ACA Australian Council for Aeronautics, CSIR

Arnold Engineering Development Center (Air Force), Tullahoma,
AEDC
Tennessee·
AFCRC Air Force Cambridge Research Center, Cambridge, Massachu-
setts
AFSWC Air Force Special Weapons Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico
AFWL Air Force Weapons Laboratory, Kirtland Air Force Base,
Albuquerque, New Mexico
AGARD Advisory Group for Aeronautical Research and Development
AIAA American Institute of Astronautics and Aeronautics
Applied Physics Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University, Silver
APL
Spring, Maryland
ARC Air Research Committee (British)
Ames Research Center of the NASA, Moffett Field, California
ARC
ARIS Aeronautical Research Institute of Sweden, Ulsvunda, Sweden
ARI, TIU Air Research Institute, University of Tokyo (Japanese)
Aerodynamische Versuchsanstalt (Gottingen Institute for Aero-
AVA
dynamics), Gottingen, Germany
Ballistic Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Mary-
BRL
land
CAl Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute, Moscow, U.S.S.R.
CSIR Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Australia
CNRC Canadian National Research Council, Ottawa, Canada
DTMB David Taylor Model Basin (Navy), Carderock, Maryland
Deutsche Versuchsanstalt fur Luftfahrtforschung (German
DVL
Institute for Aeronautical and Space Research), Berlin and
Gottingen, Germany
Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule (Swiss Institute of
ETH
Technology)
Guggenheim Aeronautical Laboratory of the California Institute
GALCIT
of Technology, Pasadena, California
JAM Journal of Applied Mechanics
,
f
JAS Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences (United States)
ix
x / Abbreviations
Abbreviation Complete Meaning

JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, California
JRAS Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society (British)
LFA Luftfahrtforschungsanstalt Hermann Goring (Hermann Goring
Institute for Aeronautics), Braunschweig, Germany Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing
LRC Langley Research Center of the NASA, Langley Field, Virginia
LRC Lewis Research Center of the NASA, Cleveland, Ohio
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachu-
setts
MSC Manned Spacecraft Center of the NASA, Houston, Texas
MSFC Marshall Space Flight Center of the NASA, Huntsville, Alabama
NACA National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, now NASA
NAMTC Naval Air Missile Test Center, Point Mugu, California
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington,
D.C.
NOL Naval Ordnance Laboratory, White Oaks, Maryland
NPL National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, Middlesex, England
NRTS National Reactor Testing Station, Arco, Idaho
ONERA Office National d'Etudes et de Recherches Aeronautiques
(National Bureau of Aeronautical Research), Paris, France
ONR Office of Naval Research, Washington, D.C.
ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
PRS Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (British)
QAM Quarterly of Applied Mechanics
R&M Reports and Memoranda (of the Air Research Committee)
RAE Royal Aeronautical Establishment, Farnborough, Hants, England
RM Research Memorandum of the NASA
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers (United States)
TCEA Training Center for Experimental Aerodynamics, Rhode-Saint-
Genese, Belgium
Technical Memorandum of the NASA
™
TN Technical Note of the NASA
TR Technical Report of the NASA
WADC Wright Air Development Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base, Ohio
Chapter one
The wind tunnel
Experimental information useful for solving aerodynamic problems may

be obtained in a number of ways: from flight tests, drop tests, rocket
sleds, water tunnels, whirling arms, shock tubes, water tables, rocket
flights, flying scale models, ballistic ranges, and subsonic, nearsonic,
transonic, supersonic, and hypersonic wind tunnels. Each device has its
own sphere of superiority, and no one device can be called "best."
This book considers only the design and use of low-speed wind tunnels,
where low speed means below 300mph or so. An alternative definition
would be "where compressibility is negligible."
Because they make it possible to use models and because they are
always available, wind tunnels offer a rapid, economical, and accurate
means for aerodynamic research. Their use saves both dollars and lives.
The nations of the world support aeronautical research, of which wind
tunnel testing is a major item, according to their abilities and desires.
Usually each nation sets up a separate organization that augments the
activities of the armed services, and further work is farmed out to
universities and industry. In the United States this central agency is
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, with offices in
Washington, D.C. and whose laboratories are at the Goddard Space
Flight Center in Maryland, the Langley Research Center in Virginia, the
John F. Kennedy Space Center in Florida, the Marshall Space Flight
Center in Alabama, the Mississippi Test Facility in Mississippi, the
Manned Spacecraft Center in Texas, the Lewis Research Center in
Ohio, the Flight Research Center in California, the Ames Research
Center in California, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California.
In addition the armed services have tunnels of their own. The Air
Force has several at Wright Field, Ohio, and at Tullahoma, Tennessee.
The Navy has tunnels at the David Taylor Model Basin in Carderock,
Maryland and the Naval Ordnance Laboratory at White Oaks, Maryland.
The Army has tunnels at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland. In
addition, nearly every aircraft corporation has at least one wind tunnel.
1
2 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing
The Wind Tunnel / 3
S~nce .t~e wind tunnel is a device intended primarily for scale-model
so that we may write .
testing, It IS proper that we pause now and consider how scale tests can
Elastic force e-- pa2/2
best be conducted so that the results may be most effectively applied to
full-scale craft.
The important force ratios (as identified with the men who first drew
1:1 Important Testing Parameters attention to their importance) then become
. Wh~n a body mo~es through a medium, forces arise that are due to the Inertia force p
Reynolds number = =\._ VI (1: 5)
VISCOS!tyof the _medIum, its inertia, its elasticity, and gravity. The inertia Viscous force P-
force IS proportional to the mass of air affected and the acceleration given
h Inertia force V
that mass: Thus, while it is true that a very large amount of air is affected M ac num b er = =- (1 :6)
by .a movmg body (and e~ch parti~le of air a different amount), we may Elastic force a
logt~ally say that the merna force IS the result of giving a constant accel-
e~atlOn to some "effective". volume of air. Let this effective volume of
3
· d b
F rou e num er =
Inertia force
Gravity force
=
JV -
2
lg
(1 :7)
air be k1 , ~here I is a characteristic length ofthe body and k a constant
for the particular body shape. Then we may write
Many many wind tunnels tests are seriously sensitive to Reynolds
number' effects and no test should be attempted without reading Section
Inertia force e-; pf3Vlt
7: I, and following the study with a discussion with the experienced
where p = the air density, slug/ft": V = velocity of the body, ft/sec; operators of the tunnel to be used.
t = time, sec. . The last two equations, it will be noted, use the square root of the ratio
Substituting IIV for t, we get rather that the ratio itself.
[3 . A model under such conditions that it has the same Reynolds and Mach
p V "" pZ2V2
Inertia force ,...._, numbers as its full-scale counterpart will have forces and moments on it
. ZIV (1: 1)
that can be directly scaled. Flow patterns of the two bodies will be exactly
similar. If the body in question is in free flight (a spin or dynamic model)
The viscous force, according to its definition, may be written
the model should in addition be maintained at the same Froude number
as its full-scale counterpart. Further discussion on testing parameters
Viscous force+-; p- VI (1 :2) may be found in Sections 5: 17,5: 18, and 5:24.
where p- = coefficient of viscosity, slug/tt-sec. Fortunately, all three of the similarity conditions rarely need be applied
The gravity force is simply simultaneously. For models held rigidly in a wind tunnel the Froude
number loses its significance. Below a value of 0.4, Mach number effects
Gravity force = pl3g (1 :3) are rarely important; and above a value of 1,500,000 the Reynolds
number effects are frequently predictable. Hence, for a great majority of
where g = acceleration of gravity. problems, models are adequate for high-quality research; and frequently,
By definition,. the bulk modulus of elasticity of a gas is the stress needed when they are not, some devious means can be employed to make them
to ~evelop a unit change in volume. It is given the symbol E and has the work. Increased pressure. can be used directly to build the Reynolds
umts of pounds per square foot. We have then number; gases having qualities different from those of air can reduce the
speed of sound in the medium and save tunnel power, * and, when Froude
Elastic force e-> El2 (1 :4) number must be matched, the squared term enables small speed increases
The speed of sound in air a is related to its elasticity according to * For a given. power input to a wind tunnel, the substitution of freon 12 for air
makes it possible to increase the Mach number of the stream by a factor of 2.5, and
E = pa2 the Reynolds number by a factor of 3.6. Added complexity in operation and data
analysis is the price to be paid for the gain.
4 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The. Wind Tunnel I 5
8r----r---,r---,----,----,----,----,---~ frequently encountered because full agreement in terminology has not
0 yet been reached. The tunnel itself is often called a "wind channel."
7 The contracting cone may be called an "entrance cone" or a "nozzle."
The wind tunnel fan may also be referred to as a "propeller." The testing
,5
section may be called the "working section," "throat," "channel," or
III 6 "jet." Sometimes the word "jet" means "open jet" (no solid boundaries).
.2'" 10 The uncertainty of the nomenclature is rarely confusing, however, for
'E the sense of the context usually removes any doubts about the meaning
.r:;-
bD 5 15 Q) intended.
c .!!!
2 '0
;t::
,....,I
20 {l
~ 4
,g '"
ro
Ul
~ 25 s
Q)
..0
:S
E I 30.g
':::1
'" 3
Ul
.a
'0
-0
35 ~
J::
»
Q)
Q: 2 40
45
50
1
60
70
0 80
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Velocity, mph ~ 5600 I---+--~\-'~~---t---__t_--~
Fig. 1: 1 Reynolds number values for a range of velocities and altitudes, standard
atmosphere.
--
Ul
o
IV
Ul
I to produce great. improvements. It may be safely stated that an over-

whelming percentage of aerodynamic problems can be helped or solved
by wind tunnel model tests.
For convenience the values of Reynolds number per foot are presented
for standard air up to 80,000 ft altitude in Fig. 1: 1. Values of plfl for a
range of tunnel conditions are given in Fig. 1: 2. Standard sea-level
pi fl = 6380, sec/ft2.
The following paragraphs discuss the nomenclature and types of wind
tunnels, and examples of each are given.
1:2 Nomenclature
A conventional single-return wind tunnel, its component parts marked
with their common names, is outlined in Fig. 1: 3. * Other terms are
T, degrees fahrenheit
* This
figure is actually a little oversimplified since a tunnel with an air exchanger
would in all probability not have a breather.
Fig. 1:2 pip- for a range of temperatures and pressures.
6 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The Wind Tunnel / 7
Fig. I :5 Double-return wind tunnel.

Breather
Diffuser
Test section
The closed circuit may be one of three types: single- (Fig. I: 3), double-
Fig. I: 3 A conventional single-return wind tunnel. Although we have defined low- (Fig. I: 5), or annular- (Fig. 1: 6) return. Of these, only the first is in
speed tunnels as not needing air exchangers for cooling, we have let the figure show general acceptance at present. In the double- and annular-return arrange-
how they look. An alternative cooling device would be a radiator near the corner ments, the particular air that scrapes along the walls of the return passage
vanes before the settling chamber. forms the center of the jet and hence passes directly over the model.
Unless the contraction ratio is large, this air is extremely turbulent and
1:3 Types of Wind Tunnels tends to make the interpretation of the test data difficult. A further dis-
. Th.ere are' two basic types of wind tunnels. The first, called an open- advantage of the double-return tunnel is that a variation in velocity
circurt (or "Eiffel" or, "NPL") * tunnel, has no guided return of the air distribution may be caused by yawing a large model. In the single-return
(see Fig. I :4). After the air leaves the diffuser, it circulates by devious tunnel, ·the general mixing and' stabilizing effect of the fan tends to re-
paths back to the intake. If the tunnel draws its air directly from the establish any flow variation due to the model, but in the double-return
atmosphere, entirely fresh air is used. type the flow deflected to one side can remain there, impairing the roll and
The second type, called a closed-circuit or "Prandtl," "Gottingen," or yaw data.
"return-flow" tunnel, has, as the last name implies, a continuous path Further identification of wind tunnels may be made through the cross-
for the air (see Fig. 1:3). The speeds shown are to illustrate the speed sectional form of the test section. It may be square, rectangular, rectan-
changes in the circuit, There is nothing significant about the values. gular with tempered corners, octagonal, circular, or elliptic. The test
section may be completely walled in (closed jet) or it may consist simply
of an open space with the air streaming from the entrance cone to the
Diesel engine exit cone. Whether the test section is open or closed, the boundaries
200 H,P,
affect the flow about the model, and the test data must be corrected to
Annular return passage
Test
section
Fig. 1:4 Sketch of British Aircraft Corporation's new V/STOL open-circuit tunnel.
Annular dead air space
* Strictly speaking, the Eiffel-type tunnel has an open jet, whereas the NPL type has
a closed jet. Both are open-circuit tunnels. Fig. 1 :6 Annular-return wind tunnel.
8 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The Wind Tunnel I 9
agree with free air results. The nature and magnitude of these corrections For example, the full-scale Reynolds number of a quarter-scale model of
are discussed in Chapter 6. a 200-mph airplane would require 800 mph under normal pressure con-
Tunnels other than low-speed tunnels include those which operate ditions. This is far into the compressibility range and might be unreason-
close to the speed of sound (nearsonic), through the speed of sound able from a power standpoint. With a pressure of 8 atm, the full-scale
(transonic), above the speed of sound (supersonic), and in the high super- Reynolds number is attained with only 100 mph.
sonic range (hypersonic). The design and use of these tunnels is beyond Though the Variable-Density tunnel is no longer used for testing
the scope of this book, but may be found in Ref. 1:21. because of its extremely high turbulence, it did provide early clues
A few specialized tunnels exist wherein the models fly freely and moving- to the effect of the Reynolds nJrnber on airfoil characteristics. The VDT
picture cameras record their movements for later consideration. These now serves as a pressure reservoir for several small high-speed tunnels.
include the NASA Spinning tunnel and the NASA Free-Flight tunnel. The British Compressed-Air Tunnel is a second' tunnel similar in size
1:4 Single-Return Tunnel and capacity to the American VDT. The newer 7 by 10 ft tunnel of the
Several of the schools in this country have wind tunnels generally RAE also has an annular return.
similar to the design outlined in Fig. 1: 3. The test. section of these tunnels It might well be mentioned in passing that high pressure is no cure-all
is about 65 ft2 in area, and about 300 hp is employed. This size makes a for getting a high Reynolds number, since model strength may be a
good low-speed (about 125-mph) setup, economical to build and operate, limiting factor.
and fully capable of the majority of tests required. Some of the tunnels 1:7 Full-Scale Tunnel
can be operated with either open or closed jet.
Typical equipment for this type of tunnel includes a sting and a three- The Full-Scale tunnel at Langley Field (Ref. 1: 3) is capable of testing
point suspension system for the models and a turntable for panel tests. actual airplanes of moderate size under near-flight conditions. Housed
in a large building whose walls form part of the double-return passages,
1 :5 Single-Return, Pressure Tunnel this remarkable tunnel attains wind velocities up to 118 mph with an
The Wright Brothers .wind tunnel at the Massachusetts Institute of open jet 60 ft wide and 30 ft high.
Technology.js a step above the lower-power tunnel mentioned in Section A full scale tunnel serves several purposes impossible to ajtain in any
1: 4. Using 2000 hp, the tunnel was designed for 250 mph with the test tunnel accommodating models only:
section at standard pressure, 396 mph with it at 0.23 atm, or 145 mph at 1. Full-scale prototypes may be "cleaned up."
3.5 atm. The low pressure yields the highest Mach number, and the high 2. Alterations to actual airplanes may be made without regard to
pressure yields the highest Reynolds number. It takes about two hours weight or airworthiness.
to obtain either of the nonstandard pressures. 3. Flying scale models of very large planes may be tested.
The Wright Brothers tunnel is one of the few with an elliptic jet, having 4. Actual engine installations may be run under near-flight conditions.
one of that form 10 ft by 7.5 ft. The major portion of the tunnel is of (See Fig. 1: 7.)
metal; the test section is wood. Cooling for the 2000 hp is obtained by 5. A correlation between flight and small model tests may be obtained.
running water over the metal shell. (See also Ref. 1: 1.) In addition to the well-known tunnel at Langley Field, two other full-
scale tunnels are in existence: the large wind tunnel at Chalais- Meudon,
1:6 Variable-Density Tunnel
France, whose jet is 26 ft by 52 ft; and the Full-Scale tunnel at Moffett
The Variable-Density tunnel (VDT) of the NASA (Ref. 1:2) was the Field, California, whose jet is 40 ft by 80 ft. (See Fig. 1: 7.)
pioneer high-pressure tunnel, being capable of 20 atm. For structural
reasons it had an unusual annular return passage, with the 5-ft-diameter 1:8 Smoke Tunnel
working section at the tunnel center. This arrangement yields the minimum A different approach to the problem of studying air flow is made
steel requirement but is poor with respect to model visibility, room for possible by a smoke tunnel (Fig. 1: 8.) (Refs, 1:4 and 1: 8.) In this type
an optical system, and general accessibility. of apparatus, nozzles just ahead of the model emit cleaned smoke in
The advantage of the pressure lies in the possibility of attaining high streamer form. This smoke follows the air flow and makes the flow
Reynolds numbers without either very huge models or very high speeds. patterns visible. Smoke tunnels are usually low-velocity tunnels (about
Filler tube
Heater
filaments
Asbestos wicks
Screw top I~--"""_with internal
'glass jars heater filaments
Paraffin oil or
model train Condensate
smoke oil
Fig. 1:9 Smoke generator.
40 mph) and most of them have two-dimensional test sections. Much

Fig. 1:7 Readying the Ryan XV-SA VTOL full-scale aircraft for a test in the Ames more is to be learned from those with three-dimensional test sections,
Full-Scale Tunnel. (Courtesy Ryan Aeronautical Company.) and new tunnels should be built with this capability. A simple but effective
smoke generator is shown in Fig. 1:9. Paraffin oil or model train smoke
oil provide a dense white unobjectional smoke. As shown in Fig. 1:8 one
must be careful to provide laminar flow into the test section or diffusion
of the smoke will result. Examples of smoke pictures are shown in
Figs. 1: 10 and 1: 11.
Fig. 1: 10 Smoke picture, low low Reynolds

0(, number. (Official Photograph
Fig. 1: 8 Smoke tunnel. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.)
Fig. 1:11 This picture, by Professor F. N. M. Browne of Notre Dame, shows the
manner of transition on a body of revolution. As made visible by smoke, the laminar
layer forms a row of annular waves, called "Brownies" (after their discoverer),which
then break down into fully turbulent flow. The student should realize that he is looking Fig. 1: 12 NASA 5-ft Free-Flight tunnel in operation. (Official Photograph, National
at a phenomenon of which possibly 99.9 % of the world's aerodynamicists are unaware. Aeronautics and Space Administration.)
1:9 Free-Flight Tunnels 1:10 Spin Tunnels

The NASA has several free-flight tunnels in which no balance is The tailspin is a possible maneuver for essentially all airplanes. It
utilized. In these tunnels, models dynamically as well as dimensionally occurs when the maximum point of the lift curve is exceeded and the
similar to their full-scale counterparts fly under the influence of gravita- curve slopes downward with increasing angle of attack. A slight roll in
tional, aerodynamic, and inertia forces, and motion pictures are made this regime will produce less lift on the wing going down (increasing «),
of their flight (Fig. 1: 12). and more lift on the wing going up, thus feeding energy into rolling the
In the NASA Free-Flight tunnel the model is kept in a steady-state airplane. The separated flows over the ailerons usually make them useless
glide, balanced between gravitational forces and the slightly inclined air- for stopping the roll, and recovery by reducing the angle of attack is then
stream. The model controls are remotely movable. Various glide paths the only method available. Excessively rearward positions of the center
can be simulated by changing the tilt of the tunnel and its airspeed. Two of gravity (c.g.) tend toward flattening the spin and making recovery
operators are thus required, one for the model controls and one for the harder or perhaps impossible. 'Spinning a large airplane may result in
tunnel. The free-flight tunnel yields information on stability and accelerations at points distant from the c.g. such that crew members will
controllability. be held immobile by the centrifugal forces. Avoidance of and/or recovery
The Gust tunnel comprised a model catapulting rig and a vertical air- from spins is an essential part of an airplane's development.
stream. The model is catapulted. through the vertical airstream, and The spin tunnel is a special type of tunnel that has a flow in the test section
motion pictures are made of its path. A small recording accelerometer which is vertically upward and of sufficient speed so that scaled models
in the model furnishes data on its behavior. By varying control screens of aircraft can, while spinning, be held suspended for observation of spin
in the vertical duct, nearly any gradient can be made to appear in the recovery. Only a few spin tunnels exist in the world today. One with a
gust. 20-ft test section is very active at the Langley Research Center of the
\

variable- pitch propeller having a pitch change up to 6 deg per
second. Although early spin tunnels had fairly low velocities (say 60 to
80 ft/sec), the newer aircraft with high wing loadings need as much as
140 ft/sec.
-Whereas most tunnels can be operated by one man (after setup), spin
I UF
VH tunnels take three: one for speed adjustment, one for photography, and
one to inject the model.
Fan
The spin tunnel is useful for a number of other tests besides spin
recovery. These include pilot escape by jumping or ejection, tumbling of
tailless aircraft, parachute performance (including various rotating types),
;
I t and the motion of parachute or rotorchute stabilized bodies. Parachute
testing would be enhanced by changing the gradient to one with the
1= maximum velocity (again 5 to 10 per cent) in the center, since parachutes
fl=====:::::::1 = move towards areas of highest velocity.
1 Testsection 1 Figure 1: 14 shows a model being injected into a spin tunnel. Models
and spin tunnel testing procedures are discussed in Section 5: 18.
\'R~===:;::;:==Ii'"I- f_Ne\:t=::;:::;:===+"j
r
I- 1
I
I
I
Fig. 1: 13 Vertical wind tunnel with open test section.
NASA; a smaller one is at the NAE in Ottawa, Canada; a 15-ft pressur-

ized spin tunnel is at the RAE in Bedford, England; and there is a spin
tunnel in Russia. Spin tunnels (Fig. 1: 13) differ from ordinary tunnels
with vertical test sections in that they (1) have a saucer-shaped velocity
gradient in the test section about 5 to 10 per cent lower at the centerline
Fig. 1: 14 Studying the spin recovery of the X-22A tilt-duct V/STOL aircraft in the
than at the edge, which tends to keep the spinning model in the center; Langley spin tunnel. The man at the left adjusts the speed of the vertical airstream, the
and (2) they have a fast-response drive system (say one-half G) to adjust center man makes a photographic record, and the man at the right has just tossed
the tunnel speed to rapid changes in model drag. Almost the only the model in so that it starts spinning. (Courtesy National Aeronautics and Space
drive capable of such rapid changes is a synchronous motor with a Administration.)
\
16 f Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing
The Wind Tunnel f 17
1:11 Open-Circuit Tunnels
Open-circuit tunnels (also called "straight-through" tunnels) were the'
first type of tunnels built. As shown in Fig. 1:4 they consist of an entrance
cone, a settling chamber, a nozzle, a test section and a drive usually in the
diffuser. If the test section is open, the tunnel is called an "Eiffel" tunnel
(after Gustav Eiffel, builder of the Eiffel Tower, who in early days was
an active aerodynamicist). It must then have a "house" around the test
section or, with downstream drive, most of the air would enter at the
test section entrance cone and little stream across the test section. If the
test section is closed, the tunnel is called an "NPL" tunnel, after the
National Physical Laboratory in England, which pioneered this type.
. Although one might look at an open-circuit tunnel and instinctively
assume the type to be inherently inefficient, there is no basis for the
assumption. The energy carried around the return passage of a closed-
circuit wind tunnel is only a few per cent of the total. The purpose of the
return passage is to feed "good" air into the settling chamber-uniform,
free of gusts, with some control over its temperature-s-and to contain
the noise, not to save power. The price for this is an increase of cost
of from 60 to 100 per cent over that for an eq.uall.Y-performing....Q~
circuit tunnel. Perhaps we should qualify our statements on power by
saying that one would normally have more flow control screens in an
open-circuit tunnel, so the end result would be perhaps 10 to 15 per cent
Fig. 1: 15 Wind tunnel in a wind tunnel. Yaw test of the open-circuit BAC V/STOL
more power. wind tunnel; 1/25 scale model in 9 ft x 7 ft .test section. (Courtesy British Aircraft
The overwhelming percentage of closed-circuit tunnels is ample proof Corporation.)
that most designers have decided that the increased utility of the closed-
circuit tunnel is worth the cost. A few small open-circuit tunnels have been 2 per cent variation in test section dynamic pressure) crosswind velocities
built and operated successfully in buildings, being not truly open-circuit ensue when the crosswind velocities are about equal to the speed at the
in the sense that the room provides a return, some control of temperature entrance cone honeycomb with the wind coming at 45 deg, and about half
and, hopefully, the absence of birds and insects. Recently the need for this when the winds are at 90 deg. Only very light winds from the rear
wind tunnels with very large test sections for V/STOL work has renewed q~arter (135 deg) are tolerable. Gach in Ref. I :24 notes that for a given
interest in open-circuit tunnels (especially when the additional 60 to 100 wind tunnel a~d fan system the wind creates a relative change in speed
per cent represents $300,000 to $500,000), and several have been built. ~ V/V proportional to (Vw/V)2, where V is the speed at the fan, and V
New tools are available to alleviate their "ills." Much of the discussion is the straight in-wind velocity. For a given outside wind, ~V/V is in~
below is from the work of Emslie (Ref. I: 17) and Knowlton (Ref. 1:25). versely proportional to the power consumed in the wind tunnel. Gach
also notes that controllable pitch fans are responsive enough to be used
Let us begin by discussing the disadvantages of open-circui,t tunnels.
in a servo circuit which couId sense and adjust the drive system to com-
They are Subject to Gusts. Gusts can cause variations in the test section
pensat~ for gusts. Indeed, with the very large tunnels being contemplated,
dynamic pressure, and in the distribution of dynamic pressure across
four, SIX, or seven fans may be used in a lateral plane and the tunnel
the test section. Emslie in Ref. I: 17 attacked the problem of cross flow
engineer faces with pleasure the prospect of being able to compensate
by building a model of his open-circuit tunnel and putting it in a wind
for poor velocity distribution in the test section due either to tunnel
tunnel (Fig. 1: 15). These studies have been long awaited. The model
design or to gusts. This adjustment would be more effective if the fans
was yawed from 0 to 180 deg. It turned out that acceptable (less than were upstream of the test section.
Another approach to the gust problem might be entrance and exit The Fans are Very Vulnerable to Model Failure. As seen in Chapter 2,
towers that would admit or reject air in a vertical direction. While bene- the usual practice in closed-circuit design is to place the fans after the sec-
fiting from the reduction of velocity variation due to the nearly horizontal ond set of turning vanes where they not only have the protection of two
gusts one then spends much more money for the tunnel an~ also moves sets of corner vanes but are in a region of moderately high velocity, which
to regions where the gusts are not slowed by the natural gradients near the is good from the standpoint of fan efficiency. In the open-circuit situation
the fans stand a good chance of being damaged if a model failure occurs.
ground. .
A simpler solution, provided that the winds are mo~erate, is a honey- A multiple fan installation would be helpful, since individual blades are
comb to help straighten the flow followed by a succession of flow contr~l then cheaper, and the individual fan shrouds are such that a lateral chain
screens. Providing for four screens at the entrance and two at the exit, reaction is not apt to occur. Another helpful fact is that we are dealing
and trying things out first with half that many, seem reasonable. with low-speed tunnels. The low speed does not help from an impact
standpoint because the fan tip speed will be adequate for destruction, but
Open Circuit Tunnels are Noisy. Tunnel noise is a two-edged swo~d. because there is then a better chance for the flying part to fall to the tunnel
Most tunnel engineers believe fan noise-both direct and that carried floor and because the necessary safety net becomes cheaper in terms of
around by the vibration of the walls-contributes to the turbulence and power. Again fans upstream of the test section have an advantage, if the
its uncertainty (Section 7: 1). In an open-circuit tunnel the. nois.e may efficiency loss can be ameliorated.
cause a lot of neighbor nuisance, but probably less aerodynamic nuisance. The above discussion is intended not to build a great case for open-
circuit tunnels with or without upstream fans, but rather to point out that
They are at the Whim of Outside Weather-Rain, Snow, and Temperature. few open-circuit tunnels have been built during the last decade (nor have
That this is true is unassailable, and there is little one can do about the closed-circuit tunnels, for that matter), and' the new devices and under-
general problem except build one's tunnel in a region of calm, warm air. standing of flow controlling warrant a new consideration of their "faults."
To a minor degree, since cold will be more of a problem than heat, both And here we might say a few words about their advantages, other than
snow and relative humidity (and gust problems as well) will be reduced cost. (1) A large lateral flow variation caused by certain V/STOL tests
if the fans are upstream of the test section. Drop curtains across the test will not carry around the circuit; (2) engines may be operated in uncon-
section are essential during model changes for both crew comfort and taminated air; (3) there are no cooling problems; and (4) noise will
zero readings. probably not hurt the airstream.
The Test Section is Below Ambient Pressure. This, of course, is a

1:12 Low-Turbulence Tunnel
function of the tunnel speed if the fans are downstream of the test section,
and for high speed can pose quite a problem because of jetting around the Tunnels have been especially designed to have an extremely low tur-
model supports. A sealed console room will help, but with. a loss of bulence level in the airstream. In fact the (then) NACA in 1946announced
pressure equalization time. Again, fans upstream of the test section would the completion of a very low turbulence tunnel capable of testing three-
help. A few years ago the turbulence they create would have been un- dimensional models at high Reynolds numbers. As is the case for all
acceptable, but now the understanding of flow control screens makes the low-turbulence tunnels, this one is characterized by a high contraction ratio
problem easily handled. and the use of a number of fine mesh turbulence-.reducing screens in the
There May be Dirt, Insects, and Birds Coming Through the Tunnel. settling chamber. The fine mesh screens serve to break up the larger
Here again screens at both entrance and exit solve the insect ~nd b~rd eddies into smaller ones that decay more rapidly. Figure 1:16 shows a
problem, but dust may remain a nuisance. Since we .are dealmg :'ith schematic of a low-turbulence tunnel. Note that one wall is adjustable
to provide for a "built-in" pressure gradient along the tunnel axis. This
low-speed tunnels in general, the cutting effect of dust is. far less seno~s
than for the high-speed case. The first entrance screen, which may be quite is a particularly useful feature if any boundary layer measurements in the
coarse (say house screen), should be tipped out at the top a few degrees presence of a known gradient are to be made. Additional information
on the design of low-turbulence tunnels may be found in Refs. 1: 19,
to encourage leaves to drop off. Provision to reverse the tunnel flow to
1:20, and 2:24.
backwash the screens is appealing.
Dam pi ng screens The tunnel itself is worthy of comment since it entails the usual wind-
Axial blower 40" x 40" tunnel aerodynamic difficulties plus the addition of ice. This leads to a
working large-capacity cooler just before the settling chamber, water spray nozzles
section
(heated to prevent their freezing and to assure proper cloud formation) in
the settling chamber, and steam-heated guide vanes to prevent ice accretion
from plugging the first and second turns. The fan is protected by a l-inch
mesh wire screen but even so suffers from the high humidity and from
Fig. 1: 16 An open-circuit low-turbulence tunnel with contraction ratio 9.8 to 1.0. ice pieces that get by the screen.
1 :13 Stability Tunnel

A tunnel directly designed for dynamic stability work was located at the
Langley Field branch of the NASA. Its most vital feature was its ability
to subject the models to curving airstreams that simulate those actually
encountered when an airplane rolls, pitches, or yaws. The rotating air-
stream for simulating roll was produced by a motor-driven paddle just
ahead of the test section. Curved air of properly varying velocity for
simulating pitch and yaw was produced by a combination of a curved test
section and velocity screens. The proper use of this apparatus made
possible the determination of the stability derivatives, but it has been
deactivated.
1 :14 Two-Dimensional Tunnel
The NASA has several two-dimensional tunnels designed for and
devoted entirely to airfoil tests. For this type of airfoil research the test
section is quite fiat, and the model spans the shorter axis from one wall
to another. Such a tunnel is shown in Fig. 5: 16. This tunnel has a test
section 3 ft by It ft, and, like the Low-Turbulence tunnel at Moffett
Field, achieves extremely low turbulence through the use of screens in
the settling chamber.
Many tunnels of varying jet shapes have alternative two-dimensional
jets that may be installed when needed. Some of these special jets consist
merely of large endplates for the airfoil models; other contract the
entire stream to a narrow jet and have an additional diffuser downstream.
Properly designed, a two-dimensional jet insert can increase the maximum
speed of a tunnel by 70 per cent. See Section 2: 13.
Fi,g. 1: 17 Inspecting two types of icing-rate meters after comparative icing tests in the
1:15 Ice Tunnel Icing Research Tunnel at Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory of the National Aero-
A great deal of very important work has been done in the NASA ice ~a~tlcs. and Space Administration, The lower device is a rotating-disk continuous-
indicating meter. The upper U-tube device is an NASA pressure-type ice detector and
tunnel at the Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory in Cleveland. Here,
I: meter no~ III q~~ntlty use on world-wide air routes to gather statistics of the duration
in a 6 by 9 ft test section, models are subjected to icing conditions and and s~venty of IClllgencounters for aid in designing protection for all-weather aircraft
the formation and methods of removal of ice are studied (Fig. I: 17). (Official Photograph, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.)
I
I
All exposed instrumentation must be specially designed to remain ice- is, of course, to try to modify present tunnels to yield a larger test section.
free. Total head tubes are electrically heated and have a water blow-out Modifications could include testing in the diffuser after making changes to
provision between readings. improve the flow, or-if one is lucky enough to have roorn-s-building a
The effects of ice are in general to increase the drag and reduce the test section in the settling chamber. For those who decide to do this, let
maximum lift of the wings, to reduce the propeller efficiency, and to in- us suggest that model tests be made before any hardware is constructed.
crease the drag of the fuselage. Successful solutions to the icing of air- The adverse pressure gradients from the entrance cone behind the V/STOL
frame and instruments have been attained through the efforts of flight test section feed forward and greatly thicken the V/STOL boundary layer
test and ice-tunnel work. Work on jet engine icing is currently proceeding. so that wall divergence far greater than normal may be required.
Three designs are being considered for the new V/STOL tunnels: (1)
1:16 All-Purpose Tunnel
Ordinary single-return types of sufficient size, but fairly low speed (say
There are several tunnels that may be run with both open and closed 100 mph); (2) same as above but with (a) tandem test sections (see Fig.
test sections, and a few that vary their test-section sizes. The Rhode- 5:63) (b) variable-size test sections, or (c) replaceable test sections of
Saint-Genese tunnel in Belgium does even more than this and deserves different size; or (3) large open-circuit tunnels. It comes as a surprise to
special mention for remarkable utility in the low-speed range. Funda- tunnel designers that the cost of the shell of a tunnel with tandem test sections
mentally, it has a closed test section. A second tunnel is made by replacing is little more than that for a tunnel with the single large test section. Such
the diffuser with a larger one and leaving the test section open. This tunnels are a little longer, but the additional portion has a small average
yields an open-throat tunnel 9.8 ft in diameter. Still a third tunnel is made diameter, and not a lot of structural material is added. The increased
by rotating the entrance cone into a vertical position to form an open- costs of the tandem test section can come from duplication of equipment
circuit tunnel with a vertical test section. Thus, the same power plant and the necessity of removing model support structure in the front test
and return passage are made to serve three purposes. section when testing in the rear one. A square test section seems to be
preferable to a round or a flat rectangular one for all V/STOL work.
1:17 V/STOL Tunnels Velocities needed for V/STOL tunnels are less than for the typical
Currently there is substantial interest in aircraft which can either rise airplane tunnel; 100 mph usually suffices. However, compound heli-
and land vertically ("vertical take-off and landing") or which require only copters (those that use wings for part of their lift and have extra engines
a short distance for take-off and landing (short take-off and landing). for thrust) are capable of speeds of over 260 mph and helicopter designers
These craft produce a great downblast of air, and wind tunnel boundaries . would like similar speeds .in their testing facilities.
can produce significant effects. There are three approaches to these As for size, tilt-wing models are running about 8 ft in span, and
effects: use ~ large test section, a fairly large open test section, or a fairly rotors about 10 ft in diameter. These numbers indicate that test sections
large test section with slotted walls. A further possible improvement is greater than 15 by 15 ft are desirable, and probably 20 by 20 are adequate.
to use a moving belt for the floor to better simulate the real relative The single-return tunnels are covered extensively in later pages. Of the
motion. The size of models for such tunnels is measured by the ratio of open-circuit tunnels, one of the most interesting is the one built by the
model jet momentum to tunnel stream momentum (a maximum value of British Aircraft Corporation and described by its designer, K. Emslie,
0.125 has been suggested but often exceeded with no apparent ill effect). in Ref. 1: 17. It has a moving belt for ground simulation, a large 18 by
Sometimes one considers the ratio of model jet area to tunnel area, and en- 18 ft test section, and for economy's sake is a straight-through tunnel.
deavors to keep this below 0.0015; again this is a preliminary number. Several of its more interesting features are mentioned below.
Helicopter rotor area may be far larger than jet area but here the tunnel
must be large enough that the wall effect (See Chapter 6) does not vary 1. The floor is a moving belt which can be synchronized with the wind
excessively across the rotor span and produce an effective twist. Most tunnel speed to help carry the wake downstream. Some development
helicopter aerodynamicists would agree that a variation of more than 2 work with what must be the world's widest belt was necessary, the cus-
deg across the rotor span would be excessive. tomary crowned pulleys not being efficacious in this installation.
All of the above points to a very large test section; studies range from 2. Attaining wing Reynolds numbers usually considered to be necessary
a minimum of about 15 by 15 ft to as much as 40 by 40 ft. One approach (e.g., say 1,500,000) appears to be almost impractical from a model size
The Wind Tunnel I 25
24 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing
Section 5: 27 for testing V/STOL models, and Section 1: 12 for further
and tunnel speed standpoint. Possibly more work on boundary layer
data on open-circuit design.
tripping will be necessary. An open circuit propulsion tu~nel has been
scale-studied and built by the National Research Council of Canada 1 :18 Automobile Wind Tunnels
(Ref. 1:22). There are a few wind tunnels specially designed for testing full-scale
Setting very low speeds in a wind tunnel is always a vexatious problem. automobiles. One is at the Ford Motor Company, and one is run by the
The airstream does not have enough energy to develop a sufficient fluid Motor Industry Research Association in Lindley, England (Ref. 1 :23).
head (See Section 3: 3), and in addition, many ele~tric drives have poor The desirable characteristics for such a tunnel include a test section such
speed control at low output. Still further, the dnve of the model may that frontal area of the car is no more than 10 per cent of the test section
run the tunnel. Screens in the return passage can help cure the last trouble, area; the possibility of simulating rain, snow, sleet, and sun heating; and a
and a small drive motor on the same shaft as the main drive will cure the speed up to about 120 mph. For studying engine cooling, the rear wheels
motor surge as might keeping up the drive rpm but using a very flat fan should be on dynamometers capable of simulating expected road grades.
Air temperatures of from -20°F to + 160°F should be available. Desir-
2
pitch. Good speed control, down to q = 0.2 Ib/ft would make most
engineers very happy. . . able but not essential would be a moving belt under the car to better
Speed control in the tandem tunnels is usually han~led by usmg the simulate the real relative motion, an arrangement to spin the front as well
piezometer rings (see Section 3: 10) for t~e small section, Others have as the rear wheels, and screens to produce wind gradients. The balance
used calibrated anemometers. A hot-Wire anemometer can also be should be capable of measuring lift, drag, and pitching and yawing
employed. Low-speed tunnel surge is usually helped by screens. See moments. Figure 1: 18 shows a car in the Ford wind tunnel, which is
able to meet many of the above requirements. See Section 9: 8 for testing
procedures.
1 :19 Table of Low-Speed Wind Tunnels

Table 1: I furnishes data on a number of wind tunnels. It is admittedly
not complete, since many of the smaller classroom-type tunnels have
r been omitted.
Problems
1 :1 What difficulties are encountered when testing in a pressure tunnel that

are not met in other types of tunnels?
1:2 What disadvantages would there be in utilizing natural wind velocities for
testing?
1:3 Look up the available references on three similar tunnels, and prepare a
short paper discussing them.
1:4 For what type of work is a full-scale tunnel most suited? not suited?
1:5 Discuss some of the necessary features of a smoke tunnel.
1:6 Explain the difference between an Eiffel- and a Prandtl-type tunnel.
Fig. 1: 18 An automobile being tested at 90 deg. yaw. (Courtesy Ford Motor

Corporation.)
c, ..§< c,
.s:: p.. e,
.s:: o .s:: ..§<
o o o .s::
o
8
00
o
00
N
- -
00' ~ .,.,
o
N
N
8
N
N
o o o
,.; ,.;
-.i-
.::: .::: .:::

o
"0 o
_ 000
x<!:!-'"
~§x x x'& .,.,_x
~8~ r-
0::3 x ..... -.,.,
"<l" " .00 r..: 00
I
r
I
o
r.:
....
o
o
\0
000
Ot-.,.,
.... M
o
.,.,
o
o
00
N
o
00
N
o
....
N
o
N
N
"0
1;l
"0
1;l
"0
"
"0
1;l ~o .,.,
"0 "0
1;l
"0
,1 "0
o o
ce
o o o o "'"o 1;l
o e o o o e o o o
e
io
:0
B
E
~
o
::l o
Ol>
C4 .5
CIl
o
~
o
~.
'"o
z
.::: .::: ....
-
o
x -x
o
~
.
t-. e- 8
28 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The Wind Tunnel / 29
c,
.a
c,
..c::
c..
..c:
c..
..c::
c..
..c:
~
o
o o o o o
o 8 o
0
o
o
N
..,
o r- '"
r- '"
r- '" r-
Cl
o
.;: 0
000 00 0
~... 'z: o
i:i~
oj
-.i -.i '" ..t o\-.i '"
o
u
.:::
X x
-
o
x
00
r- 00
00 N
o ~
o
'"
00
-.i
o
S
o
o '"
N
'" N
o
'"
o
0\
o
o
-
'"'" '"
r-
o
00 ~
-c
U
00
~I,f)
0
0'\
11o "'.,'"o" ~o ""'.,'""'""'" "'~o" -e~ "0~

-e -e -e
-e ~
~ ;1
"'" o o c, o
o
o o
o
o o o 00
00
o o o o o
...oj ...
<=
-::l
::l~
<= o
<= ...
<
e-
X
'-
o 0\
::i
0.
0. ,.c::
_g- ,.c::
o
o o o
o o o
-e-
'" '"
00 0
.<f
o
N
,..._ r- ....
00
o o
o
...; N N o N vi·
,..._ 00
00 o 'C 0 ....
00 '"
'" <'1-
., '"
<1;:;
0.0 ] -e -e ., .,
"I:l"l:l .,
-c "0
1A
"I:l
1A
"I:l
1A
-o
1A
"0
1A
00 1A 1A
"'''' ~ o o o o o
o
o o
o e
o 00
00 o o o o o o
,,!:,,!: E
uu_ ::I
::1::1
·5·5 ~
, , .,
"0"0-
.,.,.0
'"
000"'::I
000
..0 ..0
0:: 00 00
<1 ::I ::I
o .9 o
.... o
....
to 00
.5 o
,5 "I:l
2 .0
"0
"I:l E
~ ~ ~ ~
.:::
'C
X
The Wind Tunnel / 33
0..
.c: o
o o o
\0
00
8
N
\0
0\ o
00
0\
<:l
o
'';::
0
(),_
"'~
... "'
;:P:::
o
U
V) ~
o ~
00
0\0_ ...... 0\ ~:;t!::~~

~ ~ x~ x 'g_~ -g ~ -g ~ § X
V)_C""I \0 \0
~g~
O'\M.q-
~~~g.....;g~o
\C)ll) ...... I-t- ....\D""" ::!
o
,..:
o
I
\0
o S
-
V) 00
".c: o r-
V)
"0.. 0\ o N 00000000
__r-oo
o
o 8
~s N
00
0-0'\
N_ 0\ 0\00
N N
"0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0

~
o [ ~
o
<:l
<U
~
o
~
o
<U
'"
o
!=:
o ~
o
"00 ...
'" ce ~
o
"0
~
o
o o o o
0..
e o o 0..
o o 00 e o
~
"0..
?::
:~
5
0..
o
<:l
o
'+=l
~ ~~~~~~~
"'
()
o
00000000
uoouuooo
....l (f}(I)(I)(f}(I)V)(f}(I)
00000000
~~~~~~~~
-e-
o '"o o '2
z Z Z o
...
o o ~
E-< E-< o
<l
.,..... 0. _g.o. 0. 0.
.0.
.<=: ~ References and Bibliography
.c: o.<=: .<=: .<=:
'".,E 0
~
0
0
r- ~-
Oon
MN
0
on
'"
0
0
M
on
00
M
.~
CIl
1:1 John R. Markham, The M.I.T. Wright Brothers Wind Tunnel, SAE Journal,
c: September, 1941.
0
·z 1 :2 Eastman N. Jacobs, The Variable-Density Tunnel, TR 416, 1932.
"._0
~~ 1:3 Smith J. DeFrance, The NACA Full-Scale Wind Tunnel, TR 459, 1933.
c:~
0
1 :4 C. Townsend Ludington, Smoke Streams, Coward-McCann, New York.
U 1:5 C. H. Zimmerman, Preliminary Tests in the NACA Free-Spinning Tunnel,
.;:l Q TR 557,1936 .
~""
., .,"
.....
N
1 :6 John Stack, The NACA High Speed Wind Tunnel and Tests of Six Propeller
,...)
-e Sections, TR 463, 1933.
c: .:::
;:1_
.::: 1:7 Antonio Ferri, Investigations and Experiments in the Guidonia Supersonic
o
0'-
....r-
~ ::: xt!:~"C
™
-0.
., oj ~§ ....x X
\0
X
t"--N'jI ~ Wind Tunnel, 901, 1939.
..... ~ ~o
0-. ...
N
~on r- oo
• • 00
0'\\0·0
-MO'\~
;:I
1:8 Mario Pittoni, The Breda Wind Tunnel, ™ 922, 1939.
1 :9 J. Ackeret, High-Speed Wind Tunnels, TM 808, 1936.
0) 1:10 W. S.. Farrer, Smoke Investigation of Air Flow, JAS, July, 1932.
o
§<; 00 1: 11 A. Bailey, Development of High-Speed Induction Wind Tunnel, R&M 1468,
;:s~ '=!
.0"
1932.
.... es
:s~ 1:12 A. Bailey, The Development of a High-Speed Induction Wind Tunnel of
r-<
Rectangular Cross Section, R&M 1791, 1937.
~o_
..... ..-._ 1: 13 A. Bailey, Further Development of a High-Speed Wind Tunnel of Rectangular
~~ '"l::! Q ~
J:Ll~ <:u Z M Cross Section, R&M 1853, 1938.
;:::!
Z -c 1: 14 W. F. Lindsey, Choking of a Subsonic Induction Tunnel by the Flow from an
.:i
..... Z IJ.l
< ~.,.""'" Induction Nozzle, TN 2730, 1952.
~E
~.<=:
"0.
l<:!
c
<.,)
'-"
c:i
Po<
<Zl
~
<Zl
- - -~- --
00
00 00
~
N
r-<
~
<Zl
~ 00 M
600
onoor- 1:15
1:16
Louis W. Habel, The Langley Annular Transonic Tunnel and Preliminary Tests
of an NACA 66-006 Airfoil, NACA RM L8A23 (Declassified), 1948.
A. I. Neihouse, Design and Operating Techniques of Vertical Spin Tunnels,
0";
0) .,
";-0 AGARD Memorandum AGI7/P7, 1954.
0.'"
o.Q 0
o
o .,
'" '" ;S ~ .;:l .,
c:
1:17
_u....
., 0. 00 0 0. 0 0. K. Emslie, The V/STOL Test Facility, Rept. AX 286, English Electric Aviation
0 00 j;Q 0 ~ 0 Ltd., Lancashire, England, 1964.
"'0
1:18 D. C. Hazen and R. F. Lehnert, Smoke Flow Studies at Princeton University,
c:... E c: c: 'Princeton Univ. Dept. of Aeronautical Engineering, Rept, 290, 1955.
~;l B., ;; ~
.,
B
...
00 B
'"';' ... 0:; ., 1:19 G. B. Schubauer, W. G. Spangenberg, and P. S. Klebanoff, Aerodynamic
ZOb .u....
o ;:s ;:s
0.
c:
.~.~
0 .u Characteristics of Damping Screens, NACA TN 2001, 1950.
>.
r-< ~c: ~ Ob Ob 1 :20 G. B. Schubauer and W. G. Spangenberg, Effect of Screens in Wide Angle
00 .9 c: 0 .9
Vi uu CIl Vi Vi CIl Diffusers, NACA Rept. 949, 1949.
'"
3 1 :21 Alan Pope and Kennith L. Goin, High-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing, John Wiley
.,
0
.§.§ and Sons, 1965.
e ;; 1:22
.~ 0 .,..,.
00
.<=:.<=: ..Q
c: .,
c: .,
c: D. Brown, 1/12th-Scale Model Tests of an Open Circuit VTOL Propulsion
!:l o " Tunnel, CNRC LR-349, 1962.
"0'"
~~
::!
,...)
8'" -~
"00o
CIlCll
.§
N
S
S
J:Ll
~
J:Ll
E!
E!
J:Ll
1 :23 R. A. C. Fosberry, R. G. S. White, and G. W. Carr, A British Automotive
Wind Tunnel Installation and Its Application, SAE Rept. 948C, 1965.
.5 1:24
t: Alain Gach, Some Effects of Atmospheric Disturbances on an Open-Return
<::l
<..l
Low-Speed Wind Tunnel, Princeton Univ. Rept. 700, July, 1964.
'-" '"
0 ] :25
c: ~ ~ ~ Marcus P. Knowlton, Preliminary Design Considerations for a V/STOL Wind
~ .,,; ..; .,,;
.... <l
c:
0
"
;;
~....:~....:~....:
Tunnel, Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory, FDL-TDR-64-146, January,
1965.
;:s 8
~~
~ ~(/) ~Vl ~
r-< "eO ..;:::t: ::t:
:s r-< '~Q'~Q'~Q
~ o ttt2 J:Ll <Zl CIl CIl
X
Wind Tunnel Design / 37
As a final step in the design, the losses in the test section, corners,
diffusers, and entrance cone are calculated and summed up to get the
Chapter two input power.
From a practical standpoint, the design may take the amount of money
available as the starting point. Various designs in the proper bracket are
then considered until the optimum is selected. The physical location may
also be a decisive factor. If the tunnel is to be located in a certain building,
Wind tunnel design or on a specific plot of ground, the designer must consider this factor in
the layout.
Additional problems arise if the tunnel is of special design. For instance,
the pressure-type tunnels may be initially tested by being filled with water
No one tunnel will be adequate for the complete testing program of a new under pressure to avoid the danger that would arise if they failed under a
type of airplane. Such a program demands not only the conventional compressed-air load. The weight of the water may indeed alter the normal
fixed-model tunnel but also facilities for testing spin, stability, and flutter foundation design. Tunnels with atmospheric return require additional
models. The design of these special tunnels, some of which are so rare studies of their physical surroundings.
as to be almost unique, is well beyond the scope of this book. Here the The general layout for a tunnel, supposing that no extraneous factors
subject is simply the general-utility tunnel. seriously enter into the design, has reached a form generally agreed upon
The requirements of general utility are perhaps most completely met by for reasons of construction economy and tunnel efficiency. This usually
the single-return tunnel. The ability to operate with open or closed throat embraces a diffuser of three or four test section lengths or more, and two
is advantageous too. The wind tunnel engineer would probably set as a sets of similar corners to save a little engineering and construction cost.
desirable minimum the ability to attain a testing Reynolds number of at The plane of the return passage is almost always horizontal, to save cost
least 1,500,000 to 2,500,000. Indeed, it may be seen from Chapter 7 that and make the return passage easier to get to. The vertical return is justified
there is little need to have more than 2,500,000 unless about 9,000,000 is only when space is at a premium. No rule or general procedure has been
attained. The 1,500,000 to 2,500,000 criterion requires roughly a 1-ft wing agreed upon for the optimum shape of the return passage, round or rec-
chord at 150 mph. Yet, with such conditions for the wing, the tail surfaces tangular. Factors governing the choice are given in the appropriate para-
of a complete model are at an undesirably low Reynolds number. This graphs.
consideration points to a larger, higher-speed tunnel, and so the circle goes. Factors influencing the design of the test section, corners, return passage,
l Somewhere, unless the cost of tunnel construction, tunnel operation, model
construction, and testing is of no consequence; a limit must be set. Many
and contraction cone are discussed on the following pages. The actual
power losses are covered in Section 2: 11. Further data on low-speed wind
tunnels with rectangular test sections 7 ft by 10 ft or 8 ft by 12 ft have been tunnel design may be found in Ref. 2:26.
constructed, usually having a tunnel speed of about 250 mph. This seems
to be a very satisfactory tunnel size for the determination of drag, stability, 2:1 The Test Section
and hinge moments. As we have noted, most wind-tunnel designs are started with two criteria
Ideally, at least, the wind-tunnel design engineer starts a new tunnel by in mind: (1) the type of testing to be performed, and (2) the tunnel
determining its purpose and hence the required jet shape and airspeed. necessary to do the job. The "tunnel necessary" includes considerations
From the testing requirements he also determines whether the tunnel shall of jet dimensions (size and shape), and the desired tunnel wind speed.
have an atmospheric or closed return. The estimated number of hours of These items in turn determine (within broad limits) the power that will be
operation and local power costs then dictate the optimum tunnel efficiency. needed and largely determine the entire design. In a way, the jet size and
This involves the principle frequently applicable in engineering that added wind speed could be interpreted as one criterion: desirable test Reynolds
first cost can result in high efficiency and lower operating costs. As will number. In theory, at least, a larger jet using a larger model could operate
be seen later, in wind-tunnel design added efficiencyis achieved by increased satisfactorily at a lower speed. But although the same Reynolds number
tunnel length and hence increased cost of construction. could be obtained in a tunnel of twice a given size at half the power, the
36
38 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Design I 39
original cost of the larger tunnel would be (roughly) four times that of the velocity. The velocity increase in turn produces a drop in local static
smaller. In practice the jet speeds in the larger tunnels are as high as, if pressure, tending to draw the model downstream. This added drag, called
not higher than, those in the smaller ones. "horizontal buoyancy," is discussed in Chapter 6, where corrections may
In the past engineers have used many different reasons for selecting test be found. .
section shapes. Round, elliptical, square, rectangular, duplex, octagonal, If the cross-sectional area of the jet is increased enough to allow for the
rectangular with tempered corners, round with flats on the sides and floor, thickening boundary layer, a constant value of the static pressure may be
elliptical with a floor flat, and many other shapes have been adopted. The maintained throughout the test section. Unfortunately no exact design
most fundamental consideration is the test section area, for it determines method is available that assures the development of a constant static
the tunnel power requirements directly, the difference in skin friction pressure. For a first approximation the walls of a closed jet should diver~e
between the various shapes being negligible. The second consideration is a about t deg each; finer adjustments may be necessary after the tunnel IS
combination of aerodynamics and utility. For a given test section area, the built and the longitudinal static pressure is measured. Some tunnels whose
greatest width section could test the largest span model, but beyond about test sections have corner fillets have these fillets altered until a constant
a 7 by 10 height-width ratio the tunnel wall effects vary so widely across the static pressure is obtained. The advantages of such a flow are enough to
model span that the accuracy of the data is questionable. It is also diffi- justify a moderate amount of work in obtaining it.
cult to turn a large model over for inverted tests* in a wide, flat tunnel. A practical detail in jet design is the installation of sufficient windows
Still further, a 7 by 10 test section preserves reasonable conditions for pro- for v.iewing the model, as shown in Fig. 2:1. In the course of testing it
peller testing should the need arise, and it does not grow ridiculously will become necessary to see all parts of the model: top, sides, bottom,
wide and flat when a wall-mounted panel model is tested. and as much of the front as is reasonably practical. If powered model
The curved test sections (round and elliptic) rarely end by being all
curved. For one thing a flat floor is a very handy thing to stand on during
model changes, and, for another, it is almost a must for a yawing three-
strut support system. Such a system also virtually dictates a flat ceiling.
The side walls come in for their flats, too, for better windows, for attaching
wingtip models and sometimes for attaching reflection plane models. With
flats involved, the accurate computation of wall effects becomes a very
difficult job. For all these reasons, plus the ease of installing a ground
board in a rectangular tunnel and the added cost of construction of com-
pound curves, the round and elliptical test sections are dropping out of
favor. Indeed a tunnel with an octagonal test section has been constructed
by a propeller manufacturer even though the research primarily required
a round one.
For general test work added impetus has been given to the 7 by 10
configuration since the NASA has prepared detailed wall correction charts
for that size.
The length of the test section in common practice varies from one to
two times the major dimension of the jet. Although the power losses in
the jet are sizable (see Section 2: 11) owing to the high speed, and a power
advantage would accrue from keeping the length down, special setups
inevitably arise that make a long jet very handy.
As the air proceeds along the test section the boundary layer thickens.
This action reduces the effective area of the jet and causes an increase of Fig. 2: 1 Testing the Convair 990 flutter model in the Convair wind tunnel. Rel~tively
few tunnels have this clear a view from the control console. (Courtesy Convair San
* See Chapter 4.
Diego.)
40 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Design / 41
tests are to be considered, bullet-proof glass is in order. It is a peculiar and well carry around the circuit and show up in the test section, further stalling
interesting fact that despite the hazards of testing, more windows have been the diffuser the "second time around." It may be very difficult to find the
broken by overheating with photographers' lights than by model failure. source of the trouble in such a closed loop. Sometimes, if windows are
Adequate lighting is also needed, and separate switches for lights below available, a tuft study is helpful, or an enterprising tunnel engineer may
eye level should be provided. Permanent floodlights to be used in photo- get into the tunnel with a tuft on the end of a fishpole and search around.
graphical work should also be installed. In spite of the fact that a lot of work has been done on diffusers, from
The above paragraphs have been written for the customary closed test the wind tunneler's standpoint it has been too little. It has been established
section because that type is most generally in use. For propeller and rotor that with smooth flow entering a typical wind tunnel diffuser, 5 deg
tests, however, the open jet offers considerable advantage, as can be seen between opposite walls will yield satisfactory flow as will 6 deg, possibly
by reference to Sections 6: 10 and 6: 11, where the corrections for propeller 7 deg, and probably not 8 deg. With a high-drag model in the tunnel,
and nacelles are seen to be much smaller if an open jet is employed. even 7 deg moves into the questionable category. The certainly satis-
The objections to an open jet are twofold: factory angles of 5 to 5t deg make for a much larger tunnel, which, of
1. The wind tunnel balance usually requires so much shielding for course, costs more. What is lacking are data we can use with confidence
operating with an open jet that approximately one. solid boundary is which describe artifices to keep the less expensive, wider-angle diffusers
simulated. This confuses the boundary corrections to be applied and working. These are of five types: screens, vortex generators, windmills,
raises doubt that the jet is truly open. splitter plates, and boundary layer control slots.
2. The power required for a given tunnel with an open jet may easily Screens. It may be categorically stated that the flow in any diffuser with
exceed three times the power required by the same tunnel at the same up to a 45-deg angle between opposite walls may be smoothed if enough
speed with a closed jet. Further data on this factor may be obtained by screens are spaced at intervals along it. Unfortunately, screens cost money
comparing energy ratios (see Section 3: 16) for tunnels with open and and produce a pressure loss. Indeed this pressure loss for an extreme case
closed test sections from Table 1: 1. can reach 100 per cent of the entering dynamic pressure, which is unthink-
If an open jet is employed, the -xit cone should be larger than the able for an efficient tunnel. For practical diffuser problems, the cure will
entrance cone. Darrius (Ref. 2: 12) suggests a 6-deg expansion, and indeed be only a small fraction of q. The possibility still remains in addition
10 deg would not be unreasonable. Some engineers keep the diffuser at that a model failure will tear out the screens.
constant diameter for about a half jet length to allow the flow to stabilize.
It will easily be seen that an open jet used with an open-circuit return Vortex Generators. Vortex generators are simply' stub wings that are
is a virtual impossibility unless the open jet is surrounded by a sealed-off set to produce a vortex which will add energy to the lower-energy flow
chamber, because air would flow into the jet as much as into the entrance near the walls and hopefully keep it from separating at the walls. In a
cone. Indeed, a sealed-off area around a closed jet is a beneficial item for wind tunnel application they are usuaI)y placed at the downstream end of
both open-circuit and closed-return tunnels, reducing leakage, the entry the test section. A span of 10 per cent of the test section height is reason-
of dust, and outside noise. able with say a Clark Y section and a 15-deg angle of attack. If a dozen
vortex generators do not cure the diffuser problem, one should probably
2:2 The Return Passage give up. Vortex generators come to mind for diffusers showing separation
Since the power losses in a wind tunnel vary with the cube of the air- with 7 to 10-deg included wall angles, or for rectangular diffusers where
speed, it is desirable to increase the cross-sectional area of the return . windmills (described below) cannot be installed. In some installations
passage and hence reduce the local tunnel speed as rapidly as possible. vortex operators have materially increased the energy ratios of tunnels
This is particularly important in the region before the first corner because with marginal flow. .
(as will be demonstrated) a large percentage of the total power loss occurs
therein. The rate of this area increase is limited by the amount of expan- Windmills. Windmills are free-spinning propellers arranged to pump
sion the air will stand without separating from the walls with accompanying energy from areas of high dynamic pressure to those with low dynamic
large losses. pressure. In some installations constant chord with zero twist and (3 =
If a diffuser develops separating flow, the non-uniform airstream may 45 deg has been used with good flow improvement. One can make a
theoretical case for highly tapered blades to make up for the variation of damaged most often by objects that slide down the return passage, and
area with radius, but tests are lacking. Counterrotating windmills are the leading edges, of course, bear the brunt of minor damage.
probably unnecessary, since they will normally be used ahead of the fan If the tests to be run include extensive smoke-flow studies or the opera-
and any rotation they add will be removed by the corner vanes and fan- tion of internal-combustion engines, an atmospheric return may be the
straightener system. It may just be that substantial wind tunnel construc- optimum design. Even so, a considerable diffusion passage is needed to
tion costs could be saved by using, say, a 12-deg diffuser and a windmill drop the local airspeed to such a value that the energy contained in the
or two. air "dumped" out the end is small. ....
Any return passage should have sufficient airtight doors and windows
Splitters. Splitters are plates which span the diffuser width and reduce
so that accessibility and visibility are well provided for, particularly near
the angles between opposite walls by making several small-angle passages
the propeller-power plant unit and the entrance cone. Special hatchways
out of one large-angle passage. Frequently the increased pressure recovery
for removing a propeller blade or even the drive motor should be provided
more than offsets the increased loss due to the added skin friction. (See
for. A drain at the lowest place in the tunnel is also a good idea. In
Ref. 2:28.)
particular, a survey one-half tunnel diameter ahead of the fan is needed
Boundary Layer Control Slots. Boundary layer control slots are easily to assure an even velocity front's entering the Jan, and the corner vanes
used only with open-circuit tunnels. Here the test section is below ambient in the first and second corners should be adjusted until this is obtained.
pressure and one need only build smooth entry slots at the beginning (An even velocity front reduces propeller vibration.)
of the diffuser to have a device which may materially improve the flow
in a wide-angle diffuser. Savage in Ref. 2: 29 used this method to re- 2:3 The Breather
duce the losses in a 17.6-deg diffuser to a value close to that for a 5-deg If the tunnel is to be operated with an open jet, due consideration must
diffuser. be given to the possibility of pulsations similar to the vibrations in an
One item in the return passage that deserves mention is a strong wire organ pipe. This phenomenon, believed to be a function of jet length, can
safety screen between the test section and the propeller to serve as a catch- be quite serious.
all in the event of a model failure. Though such failures can be reduced The simplest solution, usually successful, consists of putting a slot (about
by careful design of the model, and the leaving of tools, pieces of material, 0.05 diam wide) into the diffuser which connects it to the atmosphere.
and model parts in the test section can be reduced by an alert crew, some- Such an arrangement is called a "breather" (see Fig. I: 3). If the slot is
how, sooner or later, some objects will join the slipstream and go hurrying properly made and adjusted so that it is just large enough to prevent organ-
toward the propeller with calamitous intent. Whether the janitor then piping, the losses can be kept low. In some open-jet tunnels alterations
sweeps up the propeller along with the now fragmentary model parts is a to the exit cone proved sufficient to prevent the vibration, but in others
function of the grid efficiency only. Obviously, the power losses suffered no satisfactory exit cones or breathers have been found that would permit
from the addition of such an obstacle may be reduced by having the screen
in the lowest-velocity section possible. Additional power may be saved by
selecting the largest mesh compatible with the desired degree of protection,
and designing the screen to cover only the lower area of the tunnel where
( operation above 200 mph ..
Closed-jet tunnels usually require breathers too, because the entire
return passage is above atmospheric pressure, and some air may leak out.
In turn the loss of air would drop the jet pressure below atmospheric unless
any foreign objects are most likely to occur. Placing the screen at the it were replenished. The proper place for a closed-jet tunnel breather is
trailing edges of the second set of guide vanes is advantageous because the at the downstream end of the test section (see Fig. 1: 3), and like that for
vanes may act as buffers, and the drag of the screen is reduced by being an open-jet tunnel a slot about 0.05 diam wide usually suffices. It should
in the wake of the vanes. Still further, a screen has a smoothing effect on be covered with a fine screen to prevent papers and such from entering the
the airflow, and one close to the fan helps give it a smooth entry flow, tunnel.
which in turn decreases fan vibration. Since vibration of parts of the wind tunnel contributes to noise, dis-
The strength of a safety screen is greatly increased by brazing each wire comfort of the tunnel crew, and possible fatigue failures, and usually adds
crossing. On fans having metal blades it is helpful to have replaceable to the turbulence in the wind stream, it is good practice to have the natural
tips and leading edges. The tips will make it easy to replace the portion frequencies of all tunnel parts well above any exciting frequencies. Many
of these parts of the tunnel are directly amenable to basic vibration theory; air-stream. Also the increased fan-blade angle used with prerotating vanes
others must wait for treatment after the tunnel is built. At that time, for may increase the efficiency. They have the disadvantage that they cannot
the small tunnels at least, flat panels can be checked with a simple shaker impart the proper prerotation for different power conditions and hence
motor, and by means of a vibrometer or a similar device the natural fre- must be made adjustable or have straightener vanes added behind the fan.
quencies can be determined. Any below the maximum fan rpm should be For tunnels of moderate size and power a single fan is usually quite
increased by stiffening the part. A special effort should be made to keep satisfactory. If it is properly designed, a straightener system can be devised
vibration out of the test section and balance supports. that will remove the twist for all power inputs and speeds. Such straight-
eners are discussed in the following paragraphs.
2:4 The Fan-Flow Straightener System
A variable-pitch fan is of great value even when a variable-rpm drive
There is now general agreement that the wind tunnel fan should be is available, since it gives much quicker speed control than varying the
located downstream of the second corner; the fan position between the drive rpm. In tunnels with large contraction ratios the change in velocity
first and second corners is now rarely used. First, however, let us rule out distribution in the test section with change in fan-blade angle does not
the positions that we may say are definitely undesirable. The fan develops seem to be measurable. Also, when the drive motor is of the synchronous
its highest efficiency if it is located in a stream of a fairly high velocity, type the fan can be put in flat pitch for low pull-in torque and then opened
and its cost is at least partially proportional to its diameter squared. These out to develop the tunnel speed. This action may lead to greater power
two items rule out a fan in a very large part of the return passage or in the outputs from this type of motor, since the pull-in torque is often the
settling chamber. On the other hand, damage from a failing model and limiting factor. For those tunnels which may be operated with two-
poor flow distribution make a position in the diffuser. moderately risky. dimensional inserts, the variable-pitch fan is definitely advantageous in
The argument for a position just downstream of the second turn is that achieving optimum operation.
the flow has by then been in a section of constant area for a considerable
time and therefore should be relatively smooth when it meets the fan;
also, of course, at this location the velocity is desirably high.
The wind tunnel fan, seemingly similar to the propeller of an airplane,
operates under peculiar conditions that put it in a class by itself. For one
thing, unlike the airplane propeller, the wind tunnel fan is prevented by
the familiar law of continuity* from producing an increase of velocity in
the slipstream; and, for another, rotation imparted to the flow is of para-
mount importance instead. of being considered a loss to be removed by a
second propeller only when high torque is prohibited.
Three basic fan-straightener systems are in current use: (1) a fan with
straightener vanes behind it (see Fig. 2: 2); (2) a fan with prerotating vanes
ahead of it, probably also having straightener vanes behind it; (3) counter-
rotating fans in which the second fan removes the rotation imparted by
the first.
The counterrotating fan can remove all the twist for all tunnel speeds
and power inputs. Since two fans can obviously be designed to develop
more thrust than one, the counterrotating fans may become essential in
high-power installations. The drive is more complicated, however, as equal
torque should be applied to both fans.
Fans with prerotating vanes can develop more thrust for a given blade
I area because the initial rotation increases the total velocity of the Fig. 2: 2 Nacelle-fan installation. The anti-twist vanes are between us and the fan.
II * See p. 46. (Courtesy University of Maryland.)
There has been considerable discussion of the design of wind tunnel fans
(Ref. 2: 14), but a method proposed by Patterson (Ref. 2: 13) is presented
here because it considers the fan-straightener system as a unit and does
not concern itself merely with the fan. Because rotation must be kept low
if a fixed straightener system is to remove the twist for all conditions,
consideration of the vanes becomes important, and their design will fre-
quently necessitate a fan vastly different from what the ordinary criteria
indicate. The fact that each section of this type of fan operates at constant
efficiency, though of small merit as far as the fan is concerned, makes the
usual graphical integration of the thrust and torque loading curves un- Fig. 2: 3 The fan-straightener combination.
necessary, and hence the design is facilitated.
This theory, however, neglects the loss associated with the necessary tip It will be seen that the coefficient k compares with CD in wing-drag cal-
clearance at the tunnel wall and the radial flow at the fan encountered as culations.
a result of the centrifugal action. The large boss recommended for use Throughout the wind tunnel the losses that occur appear.as successive
with a wind tunnel fan tends to lessen the latter effect. The tip-clearance static-pressure drops to be balanced by the static-pressure rise through the
loss will result in efficiencies slightly lower than indicated by this theory. fan. The total pressure drop !:::..h must be known for the design of the fan.
The loss due to tip clearance adds to both the friction and the expansion If a model of the tunnel is available, the necessary pressure rise may be
losses that occur at the walls of a wind tunnel and indicates that instead measured across the fan and extrapolated to full-scale Reynolds number.
of constant thrust the wind tunnel fan should perhaps have a graded thrust An alternative method is to calculate the energy ratio (see Sections 2: 11
loading curve, greatest at the walls in order to best develop a uniform and 3: 16) and find the fan pressure rise coefficient k = !:::..h/(!pu2), where
velocity front. This refinement is beyond the scope of this presentation. u is the velocity through the propeller. It is now in order to consider
First let us consider the flow in a duct so that the terms and factors several design features of a fan-straightener system such as the one shown
encountered later in the fan theory may be understood when applied. in Fig. 2:3.
Flow in a Duct. When Bernoulli's equation Factors Influencing the General Layout. It will be seen from Fig. 2: 4
p + !pV 2
= constant that high fan efficiencies are largely determined by proper selection of the
advance ratio (see p. 50) and utilization of LID ratios of the order of 50.
is written between two locations in a duct, it applies only if the losses
lt remains to demonstrate the best methods for satisfying these criteria.
between the sections are zero. Naturally, in practice, they never are, and
one or the other of the two terms at the second section must show a 1.00
diminution corresponding to the loss in head. The law of continuity for i-ao
.-
an incompressible fluid, Al Vl = A2 V2, where A and Vare areas and veloc- 60 -.7..0
-
---- -
50 -
-40
ities at two stations, makes it impossible for the velocity to fail to follow r--
~ ~ 30
Bernoulli's rule, and hence the velocity head at the second location will be ~0.90 :--
as predicted. But there will be a drop in static head !:::..p corresponding to
i:)-
.,
t: ~ffj/. ~
the friction loss. This loss in pounds per square foot appears over the
'u
r---
area A2, so that the product of the two yields the drag of the section
~
~ 0.80
/ ...- -r-.
--.
between 1 and 2. Multiplying the drag by the velocity yields the power LL.
1/ I---. r--.......
lost. According to familiar experience, the drag of a surface varies with
the dynamic pressure q, and it is customary to express the loss of the section ~
0.70 / ['--....
in coefficient form, defining o 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
k = !:::..pA = !:::..p (2:1)

Local advance ratio, j = n~
2 Fig. 2: 4 Approximate fan efficiencies for various advance and L/ D ratios.
!pAV q
Large advance ratios imply lowered speeds of fan rotation, necessitating

a drive motor of low rpm or a geared driving system. The desire for E
higher rpm for the driving motor indicates that the higher-speed regions
of the wind tunnel are best suited for the location of the fan. Balancing
that against the increase of nacelle drag as the local speed is increased, the
best compromise usually locates the fan downstream of the second corner D
after the test section. If the fan is to be driven by a motor outside the
tunnel, the corner location offers a short shaft length. Fig. 2: 6 Satisfactory airfoils for fan sections.
Ratios of L/ D as high as 50 and higher are obtainable only with "in-
finite" aspect ratio and moderately thin airfoils (Fig. 2: 5). Infinite aspect tunnel wall becomes the tip endplate. The large nacelle is advantageous
ratio can be simulated by effectively endplating both the fan-blade root from other considerations, too. * By decreasing the tunnel cross-sectional
and the tip, endplating being accomplished by providing a large nacelle ) area at the propeller a higher velocity is achieved, and higher motor speeds
or "boss" for the root and maintaining a small tip clearance so that the are possible at the same advance ratio. The large boss also encloses. the
fan root sections that must be thicker for structural reasons, leaving only
90 the thin, highly efficient sections exposed to the airstream. Frequently it
Lift
L
D
is possible to use an airfoil of constant thickness in the exposed portion,
~ thus facilitating the design. Small gains are to be found from utilizing an
80 ,/,,\
I
.: ~ \ ~
L/ D greater than 50, so that the actual airfoil selected is of secondary
importance from an aerodynamic standpoint and structural considerations
1// 2\ 'x ~ \
1
I
I
I
t 70
/, 11/ --
r hi ~
can be entertained. Type E of the RAF propeller sections is satisfactory,
as is the slightly thicker Type D (see Fig. 2: 6). The ordinates of these
'" ~ ~ ~
.~ K \ '\\ <,
airfoils are shown in Table 2: 1.
60
II II /;l' \
\
-'"
1.2 0.12 Although the optimum boss diameter is from 0.6 to 0.7 Df, where Dr =
If// 1/ f!( 1\\ "'-" diameter of the tunnel at the fan, a smaller value ofO.3 to 0.5 is morepracti-
50
~i/j/ II 1\\\
J \\ 1.0 0.10
cal for wind tunnel use. The very large boss requires a large and long nacelle
for proper streamlining, which, in turn, involves costly construction diffi-
>41~
1;1//1 /i7 \ culties and greater power losses from the diffusing action as the area of
Iii II # \ the air passage is increased. It would be possible to prevent the diffusing
Illl / j/
40 0.8 0.08
losses by shaping the tunnel so that the area throughout the fan-nacelle
region remained constant. This is sometimes done despite the added
30
'/1/ I 'J
0.6 0.06
expense. Certainly the equivalent conical diffusion angle should be kept
!. ~fi J 1 to 7 deg or less.
I The number of blades on the fan is somewhat arbitrary, for the product
II 'f P R.N.,
1/ /I .
20 0.4 0.04 of the number of blades and their chord represents the total area and must
.31 X 106
Jll Drag »:
.., .80 X 106
be aligned with the thrust requirements. Several factors influence the
10 ~. rk,~ -- / ~ ;/ x 1.53 X 106 )

~.09 X106,- 0.2
selection of the number of blades. The minimum number probably is four;
at least that number is needed to assure little pulsation in the airstream.
JJ/~ k ~ V
...4.94 X 106, " The maximum number of blades will doubtless be limited by strength
If/ +6.50 x 106 considerations. The maximum value of the sum of the blade chords Nc
0 o must not exceed the local circumference at the root if excessive interference
-4 o +4 +8 +12 +16 +20
"0 is to be avoided. The Reynolds number of the blade chord should be above
Fig. 2: 5 Charactetistics of fan airfoilD, infinite aspect ratio. * See Section 2: 6.
Table 2:1 Ordinates of Fan Profiles D and E L

T
Distance from Height above Flat Undersurface
Leading Edge D E
0 0.0135 0.0115
0.0125 0.0370 0.0319
0.025 0.0538 0.0442
u
0.05 0.0780 0.0610
0.075 0.0925 0.0724

0.10 0.1030 0.0809
0.15 0.1174 0.0928
0.20 0.1250 0.0990 Fig. 2:7
0.30 0.1290 0.1030 The Rotation, e. It has already been demonstrated that in order to meet
0040 0.1269 0.1022 the requirements of the law of continuity there can be no increase of axial
0.50 0.1220 0.0980 velocity in a duct of constant area. However, the fan imparts twist or
0.60 0.1120 0.0898 rotation to the airstream and hence increases its absolute velocity. This
added speed is removed, not turned, by the straightener vanes, and its
0.70 0.0960 0.0770 energy appears as a rise in static pressure.
0.80 0.0740 0.0591
Increasing the diameter of the fan boss will decrease the amount of
0.90 0.0470 0.0379
rotation for a given installation, as will increasing the fan rpm.
0.95 0.0326 0.0258
The rotation e = wrju will be largest at the fan boss.
1.00 0.0100 0.0076 The Straightener Vanes. Experiments at the NPL have shown that
L.E. rad 0.0135 0.0115 satisfactory anti-twist or straightener vanes can be made by using the
T.E. rad 0.0100 0.0076
NASA symmetrical airfoils set with their chords parallel to the tunnel
centerline provided that the amount of twist to be removed is small com-
700,000 in order to keep the section drag low, and the tip speed should be pared with the axial velocity. The limiting twist is that required to stall
kept below 0.5 the speed of sound to avoid compressibility troubles. Since the vanes; i.e., e = corlu = tan T (where or= angle of twist in the slip-
the number of blades is not critical, a reasonable procedure is to estimate stream and co = angular velocity in the slipstream at radius r) must cor-
the number needed and examine the final design to see whether alterations respond to an angle less .than O(stall of a symmetrical section at infinite
are in order. aspect ratio including multiplane interference. The interference is an
advantage here as with the type of straighteners to be employed it decreases
The Fan Advance Ratio,j. In the simple blade element theory (Ref. 2: 15),
the lift curve slope by a factor of 0.75. That is, O(stall with interference is
the angle of attack of a local section of the blade is simply the local blade
33 per cent above the free-air stall angle. (See Fig. 2: 8.)
angle minus the advance angle tP = Vj(21Tnr), where V = forward speed,
The chord for the proposed straightener may be found from
n = rps, and r = section radius. This definition, which neglects both the
induced indraft and rotation, is permissible only because a second assump- c, = 21TrjNs (2:2)
tion (that the airfoil coefficients should be based on an aspect ratio of 6.0)
is made. With a wind tunnel fan, no indraft is possible, but rotation exists. where N, = number of straightener vanes; c, = chord of vane at radius r.
and the simple blade-element advance angle is seriously changed. Figure If a constant thickness ratio is assumed for the straightener vanes, the
2: 7 and eqs. (2: 24) and (2: 25) demonstrate the proper interpretation of actual thickness at the wall would be large owing to the large chord.
the advance angle for a fan in a duct. Hence it is advantageous to select a constant thickness (not thickness ratio).
20 Applying the definition of the energy ratio (p. 122) and the law of
continuity,
1.33 ct,tall
...- P-- (2:6)
v
lL The efficiency of the fan-straightener unit is derived from the basic
-
r--,...
L ct,tall
relation
!_ V Power out
'YJt= .
8 LL
o 2 4 6 8
Power In
Power in = 27TnQ
Effective Reynolds number x 10-
6
where Q = torque and n = revolutions per second.
Fig. 2: 8 Effect of interference. It will be convenient to consider the efficiency of a blade element in the
development later, so rewriting 'YJtfor an annulus of width dr at radius r
A reasonable value is that ts/cs = 0.15 at x = rlR = 0.8. (R = tunnel we have
radius at propeller section.) Hence from eq. (2:2). ll.h·27Tr·dr·u
'YJt = 27Tn dQ
(2: 3)
A value of 7 comes to mind for Ns, since in order to avoid periodic This procedure is possible since this method employs a constant effi-
interference with the fan the straightener should have a number of blades ciency over the entire cross section, as explained on p. 46.
The elemental torque is
that is no multiple of the even number of fan blades.
There will be a loss through the straightener, of course, and this loss dQ = 27Tr' dr - pu : wr2 (2:7)
will be greater than the skin friction of the vanes in free air, since the
straightener is a diffuser, changing the rotational velocity cor to static head.
and, as D.h = k· ipu 2 and .Q = 27Tn,
The pressure loss coefficient of a straightener composed of symmetrical 'YJt= ku2/2.Qr2w

NASA airfoil sections has been empirically determined as If the local advance ratio is defined as
k, = 0.045(ts/cJ + 0.003 (2:4) j = ujnd = u7T/27Tnr = u7T/.Qr (2:8)
Substituting from eq. (2: 2) we have and the rotation of the flow e is expressed as a fraction of the axial velocity,
k, = (0.045/27Tr)tsNs + 0.003 (2: 5) e = corlu (2:9)
Fan-Straightener Theory. The theory for the design of a wind tunnel and 'YJt = kj/27Te (2: 10)
fan-straightener system is as follows:
Writing the loss in head due to the straightener as D.Ps and proceeding
Letting the total cross-sectional area at the plane of the fan be At and
as in the derivation of eq. (2: 10), we find
the area of the fan boss be Ab, the power output becomes
Power out = D.h . (At - Ab) • U = 'YJtbhp . 550 'YJs= ksj/27Te (2:10a)
We may determine e from
where 'YJt = total efficiency of fan and straightener system. e = kjJ27T'YJt '1,
Hence ·'t
And hence 'YJfbecomes determined through
'YJtbhp . 550 'YJtbhp . 550 Vt2
k= .= 3 -;; Fan efficiency = Total efficiency + Straightener efficiency loss
!pu3(A, - Ab) !pVt At u" or, in symbols,
where At and Vt are the test section area and velocity, respectively .. 'YJt= 'YJt + 'YJs (2: 1Ob)
Wind Tunnel DeSign / 55
Writing the elemental thrust as the pressure rise times the elemental and
area, we have Power output = D.hf • 21Trdr . u
dT = D.p' 21Tr' dr (2: 11) = 21Trdr· u D.p + tpw2r2 , 21Trdr - u
Expressing the local radius as a fraction of the tip radius R by the rela- = u : dT+ !wdQ
The fan efficiency
tion x = r/R, and dividing the expression for the elemental thrust by
!pu2. 1TR2 to reduce it to coefficient form, we have 'rJf dT + tw__
= u---'----"- dQ O:::
21Tn dQ
dTe = D.p . 21Tr . R = 2 D.p . x
(2: 12) or, in coefficient form,
dx iPU21TR2 ipu2 u d'T, 1 w
The total pressure rise required of the fan and straightener is
n.> 21Tn . dQc . R
+--
221Tn
D.h = k , . tpu2 = !. dTc + !:i.
1Tso, 2 1T (2: 19)
= Fan rise + Rotation -, Straightener loss
Substituting from (2: 14) and (2: 16),
= D.p + ipw2r2 - k ; . lpu2
Solving, the necessary rise through the fan is j

n, = 2 1Te (k + ks)
D.p/tpu 2
= k + k, - e 2 (2: 13)
Exp~essing the elemental thrust in a form similar to conventional wing
And eq. (2: 12) becomes coefficients, we have
dTe/dx = (k + k, - e2) • 2x (2: 14) dT = tpW2. cdr' NCt (2:20)
The elemental torque in coefficient form becomes where W = u/sin <p (twist neglected), N = number of blades, and
Ct = thrust coefficient = Cl cos <p - C
dO
sin <p
dQ _ dQ (2: 15)
c - tpu2 . 1TR2. R and C'" = torque force coefficient = Cl sin <p + cao cos <p (2:21)
Reducing eq. (2:20) to the T, form, we have
dQe/dx = 4x2e (2: 16)
so that
dQc
f
LO
Qe = -dx
"'0 dx
2
and, finally, Qe = (kJ /1Tr}t)(1 - X0 ) (2:17) (2:21a)
dx sin'' <p
where Xo = radius ratio at the root section and J = advance ratio of fan where y = NC/1T R by definition.
tip. The corresponding elemental torque is
Equation (2: 17) determines the input torque necessary and hence the
power required to realize the total pressure rise Sh. dQ = NC",'!pW2'cdr'r'
By approaching the problem in a slightly different manner it is possible dQc yxC",
-=--
to get a relation between i. 'rJ" and e such that the local L/ D is determined. dx sin" <p (2:22)
We proceed as follows. The total pressure rise due to the fan is
Substituting in (2: 19), the fan efficiency
D.h, = Static rise + Rotational dynamic head
j c, 1 ej
(2: 18) 'Y}, = - - + -- (2:23)
1TC", 2 1T
From Fig. 2:7, The values of the advance angle cp may be determined from eq. (2: 25).
u The blade angle is determined from
tan cp = _---''---
27Tnr - lwr (2:31)
= ~u _
(2:24)
1 wr u 7T
Since dTc/dx is known for each value of x from eq. (2: 14), C, may be
nnd - - -- - - nd found from eq. (2:21), sin cp from eq. (2:25), and y from eq. (2:21a).
2 u nd 7T
From
Hence from eqs. (2:8) and (2:9) C = 7TRyIN
. 1
tan cp = L ----''--- (2:25) the local chord may be computed.
7T (1 - lej 17T)
Design Procedure
Therefore, from eqs. (2:21), (2:23), and (2:25), we have 1. Select a desired overall efficiency 'fJt and add to it the estimated
straightener loss (2 to 4 per cent) to get the required fan efficiency 'fJf.
2. From the plot of approximate fan efficiencies versus advance ratios
(2:26) (Fig. 2: 4) determine the required L/ D and j range to attain 'fJf. If the
L j 1ej available range is excessive, select the advance ratio for the tip speed as
--+1---
D7T - 27T low as possible, as this will yield maximum rpm and minimum rotation.
Determine n from
With 'Yjf and j known, eq. (2:26) can be employed to yield the LID
n = u/jd
desired at each corresponding radius, but the values of c!, Cao, and (Xo
cannot be determined accurately until the local Reynolds number is known. Check to see that a tip speed of 550 ft/sec is not exceeded so that com-
Hence it is necessary to determine an approximate Reynolds number as pressibility losses will not be encountered.
follows: 3. Calculate k from eq. (2:6), and e from eq. (2: 10). Check that e at
1. Using calculated LID, read approximate lift coefficient C! appr ox in the root is less than 1.33(Xstall from Fig. 2: 8.
4. Calculate ts/cs and ks from eqs. (2: 3) and (2: 4).
Fig. 2:5.
5. Calculate n, from eq. (2: lOa) and 'fJf from eq. (2: lOb).
2. From dTcldx = 2x(k + ks - e2) find dTcldx.
6. Determine LID from eq. (2 :(6).
3. Calculate yCt from
7. Calculate cp from eq. (2:25).
.n;
-=--
yCt (2:27) 8. Read approximate c , from Fig. 2:5.
9. Find d'I'[d» from eq. (2: 14).
4. Calculate Yapprox from 10. Calculate yCt, y, c, and RN from eqs. (2:27), (2:28), (2:29), and
yet (2:30).
y cs: _---'0--"--_ (2:28) 11. Using approximate RN, read accurate c.; CdO, and (Xo from Fig. 2: 5,
- clapprox cos cp
and get C, from eq. (2:21).
5. Get approximate C from
12. Calculate y from eq. (2:21a).
7TRYapprox
Capprox = (2:29) 13. Calculate C from eq. (2: 32).
N 14. Determine f3 from eq. (2:31).
6. RN = (plt-t)cW (2:30)
15. Determine Q from eq. (2:17).
where t-t = viscosity of the air. Having the Reynolds number, we n?w Example 2:1 A fan is required for a wind tunnel whose energy ratio
use the characteristic curves of the selected airfoil section to deternune is 5.0. The area of the test section is 56.4 ft2, and the testing velocity is
C!, Cao, and (Xo. 193 mph = 283 ft/sec. The wind tunnel diameter at the fan is l3 ft.
A boss diameter ofO.6D and 12 blades are values selected for preliminary. The remaining steps are indicated and tabulated below.
calculations. Hence At - Ab = 133 - 47.8 = 85.2 ft", and u~,=284 X
56.4/85.2 = 188. Let 1)t = 0.93, and p/"" = 5800. -'
J 1 x AS- qJT 0.6" 610.7 ?) 0.8 ?) 0.9 9/ 1.0
J j z_ 3.67v 3.14 2.75 2.44 2.20
Step 1. Estimating the straightener loss at 3 per cent, it is seen that the
II Y e 0.267\I 0.229 0.200 0.178 0.160
fan efficiency must therefore be 96 per cent.
V 4 tslcs 0.20 I) 0.171 0.15 0.133 0.12
Step 2. From Fig. 2: 4 it is seen that 1)t = 96 per cent may be reached
II .J ks 0.0120v 0.0107 0.0098 0.0090 0.0084
from j = 2.2 to j = 4.8, using L/ D = 50,0, which is a reasonable value.
ksJ
" r 'Y}s =- 0.0261} 0.023 0.021 0.020 0.Q18
.. 2rre
n = ...!!i = 188 = 6,58 "7 'l)t 0.930 oj0.930 0.930 0.930 0.930
J JD 2.2 X 13 oJ ,y 'l)t(eq.(2:10b» 0.956 oJ 0.955 0.951 0.950 0.948
Q = 27Tn = 41.4 tad/sec I] r j/rr 1.17 J 1.00 0.875 0.777 0.700
VtiP = 27TnR ~ 27T X 6.58 X 6.5 = 269 ft/sec
J
" II
'0 LID
tej!'Tr
(eq. (2:26»
0.156J
40.6 II
0.1145
38.8
0.0875
36.1
0.0692
36.5
0.056
37.0
\) IZ- tan </> 1.39 V 1.13 0.960 0.835 0.742
which is well below 550 ft/sec, the approximate limit to avoid compressi-
oJ 13 </>,deg 54.3 J 48.5 43.8 39.8 36.6
bility. _ _jl( c1 approx 0.53 ) 0.51 0.50 0.52 0.51
er
Step 3. J,'[k+ks-e2 0.366 V 0.384 0.395 0.402 0.406
k = !l!_(At - AgY = 93
0.
52
. = 0.425 v 16 dTcldx
V 1;" sin" </>
0.440 \} 0.538
0.660 V 0.560
0.633
0.475
0.724
0.410
0.812
0.360
ER At 5.00 56.4 .
1I f! yCt 0.290v 0.301 0.301 0.296 0.292
e = .s: = 27T(0.93)
0.425
}
. = 0.0729'
'J
J.f? cos</> ~~J
0.937 II
~~
0.890
~lli
0.755
~~
0.742
~~
0.715
2rr1)t J 10 Yapprox
oJ :u Capprox 1.5911 1.52 1.285 1.264 1.21
. u: u.s 188 2.20
.u
v
J=___;'=---'
nfDx
=
(6.58)(13.0)x
=-
x
J
V i4
W = ulsu:
RNapprox
</> 231 V 251 273 293 313
2.13 x 10sJ 2.22 x lOs 2.04 X lOs 2.08 X 106 2.21 X 106
- V{ c1 0.55 0.53 0.51 0.51 0.51
eroot = 2.20 X 0.0729 = 0.267 -v{ Cao
V 0.0140\} 0.0140 0.0150 0.0140 0.0130
0.6 _1 ~ 2f,O:o -0.2 -,0.2 -0.6 -0.5 -0.5
T = tan " 0.267 = 14.9° . tj?}r- p, deg 54.1'; 48.3 43.2 39.6 35.8
I} 'i( c, (eq. (2:21» 0.32 J 0.352 0.369 0.432 0.408
This is below 1.33astan from Fig. 2: 8, using an estimated RN = 3,000,000. .;'Zfiy o q 0 (. 0.873Il, 0.834 0.795 0.738 0.700
Step 4. The thickness of the straightener vanes (to be held constant) is V Ju c , 1.4831/'· 1.418 1.350 1.250 1.190
ts/cs = 0.15 at x = 0.8. From eq. (2:2) we have
The usual requirement that the propeller blade section be thin (especially
at the tips) does not rigidly hold in wind tunnel fans. The reasons are two:
c = 27TRx = 27T(6.5)(0.8) = 4.67 ft
the airspeed at the fan is rarely very high and compressibility effects are
8(x=0.81 N, 7.0
not serious, and high enough L/ D ratios are obtained so easily that
which makes ts = 0.15 X 4.67 = 0.70 ft. Hence from eq. (2:3) straining for small increments through the use of thin sections is unneces-
sary. The thicker sections are stronger, too, but peculiar high-frequency
t, Nst" 7 X 0.70 0.12 vibrations that occur in many wind tunnel fans and the possibility of the
-=-_.= -
c, 27TRx 27T(6.5)x x propeller's being struck by airborne objects make it advisable to incor-
(2:4) porate margins of safety of the order of 5.0 into their design. An advantage
k, = 0.045(ts/cs) + 0.003 accrues from having removable blades, since a damaged blade may then
= (O.0054/x) + 0.003 be replaced without rebuilding the entire fan.
l' I
Fan vibrations are often caused by an asymmetrical velocity front's 3. Variab~i£~qg_e..l!£Y.A setup similar to the model motors described
reaching the fan, as a result of improper turning in the corners and/or in ~hapter 5 also may be used as a tunnel drive, normally below 3000 hp.
flow detachment from the walls. Surveys ahead of the fan can determine ThIS setup embraces a synchronous motor driving a doc generator whose
whether this condition exists, and adjustments of the corner vanes or any output is used to run a doc motor which drives an alternator. The output
abrupt places in the tunnel can be made. For large installations a jacking of the alternator is used to drive the fan motor, which can be either a
gear which enables the fan to be slowly rotated for inspection purposes is synchronous or an induction motor. This is a good system but quite
good practice. expensive. .
Tests of fans designed by the above method indicate that actual effi- 4. Mag!!_~i£_c9.!!12EDg.,..A synchronous motor can be used to drive a
ciencies will be from 3 to 5 per cent less than theoretical, owing to tip fan through a variable-speed magnetic coupling. This is one of the least
clearance and boundary layer effects at boss and tip. expensive setups as far as first cost is concerned, and gives excellent speed
If changes are made to the tunnel after it has been built, it may be control from zero to maximum velocity, since it is virtually "stepless."
necessary to make a fan revision. Though an entirely new fan would be This type of setup is rarely over 5000 hp, but has been used for horse-
best, flaps have been installed in several tunnels with satisfactory results . powers as high as 18,000.
and, of course, at much less cost than a whole new fan. The procedure is 5. Multispeed squirrel cage. An induction motor arranged to have
. to rivet or screw flat sheet at the desired flap angle until the chord is several operating speeds may be used in conjunction with a variable-pitch
satisfactory to meet the new condition. fan to get a satisfactory drive. However, the upper power limit-around
It is interesting to note that modified aircraft propellers have been used 2500 hp-and the high starting loads reduce its appeal.
successfully in many tunnels. The remote-control variable-pitch feature 6. Wound-rotor inducti_on moto_r. In general one cannot expect wide
that most of these have is most desirable. rpm changes, good control, or high efficiency from a wound-rotor induc-
tion motor, although such a motor has been used with reasonable success
2:5 The Drive Motor in combination with a variable-pitch fan. It does offer a low first cost and
moderately small motor for tunnel installations.
Since the thrust of the fan and the drag of the various tunnel components
7. Do~blYJ~d.in9-E<;,tiQ!:t.IJl9..to..!.
This arrangement requires a variable-
vary with the square of the fan rpm it would appear that to maintain an
frequency power source which is fed into the rotor of an induction motor.
even velocity front in the test section speed adjustments should be made
Its first cost is high, but it is probably the most widely used drive for very
by varying fan rpm rather than fan pitch. Although this conclusion is
high power installations where efficiency is important.
justified in short tunnels of low contraction ratio, in the larger tunnels,
. 8. I.nt~rnal-combustion_.<_l!:i.~~. The use of an internal-combustion engine
particularly those with dust screens and internal coolers to act as flow
IS ~n~~Slrable because of both high operating cost and lack of long-time
dampers, it is certainly not true. Indeed, many of the larger tunnels which
:eha~lhty. In the few tunnels where they have been used the engineers
are equipped with both rpm and pitch change use the latter as quicker and
invariably look forward to the day when the gasoline engine can be re-
simpler. It does seem as though provision of both types of control is a
placed by an electric drive. For reasons almost unknown (but surmised
good design procedure.
to be connected with the lack of a cooling airstream over the stationary
Considering the drives capable of variable-speed control, we have the
engine and unskilled maintenance) reciprocating engines rarely deliver the
following: life in tunnel use that they do on aircraft, 300 hours being a fairly typical
1. Gener~tor and doc !!l_Q19s. A direct-current generator run by a syn- figure pe~ engine. When an aircraft engine must be used, special care
chronous motor and used to drive a direct-current motor in the tunnel should be taken that the exhaust manifold be water jacketed or otherwise
electrically is a satisfactory system below 200 hp, the cost becoming cooled. An annoying trouble with these engines (as if the above is not
excessive above that figure. It offers excellent speed control. sufficient) is that their spark plugs foul up under the low-load operation
2. Tandem d~. The combination of a doc motor for low powers and frequently needed in a tunnel.
I .
a single-speedi~duction motor for high powers is satisfactory for the range
2:6 The Nacelle
of 300 to 20,000 hp. With this arrangement the doc motor is used for
low-power operation and for bringing the induction motor up to running In a previous section it has been shown that the nacelle must be from
speed. 0.3 to 0.7 diam in order to give the best flow conditions for the fan. In
-
turn, however, this large nacelle makes a lot of trouble that must receive
special attention if the best flow is to result. Normally, the nacelle is
located in the return passage, which in all probability has a diffusion angle
of 5 or 6 deg. Nacelles that look excellent from free air standards are far
too short for use in a duct; a check of the effective duct areas over the I I
afterbody of most nacelles reveals that they raise the local diffusion angle
toaround 12 to 14 deg, and frequently separation takes place. The cure
I
is to use a very long nacelle (see Fig. 2:2), which reduces the expansion
II
angle to not over 7 deg, or to bulge the tunnel around the nacelle so that
there is no net change in passage area.
2:7 The Corners
It is not practical in wind tunnel design to make the corners of the return
passage so gradual that the air can follow the curve with but small loss.
Such corners would require more space than is usually allotted to a tunnel
and also would increase the costs of construction. Abrupt corners are
therefore usually in order, and their losses are kept to a minimum by
means of proper turning vanes.
The nature of losses in a straight duct have been discussed on p. 46,
and the corners of a duct behave in a similar manner: the law of con- Fig. 2: 9 Corner vane installation. (Courtesy University of Maryland.)
tinuity assures the same airstream velocity after the turn as before it if no
area change has occurred, while the drag of the corner due to both skin Several vane profiles are shown in Fig. 2: 10, and each is labeled with
I
friction and separation losses appears as a drop in static pressure Sp. the loss experienced under test conditions by the various experimenters
Again this loss is usually referred to the velocity in the duct by (Refs. 2:6, 2:7, 2:8, and 2:9) at Reynolds numbers of about 40,000.
I
Equation (2: 39) yields values slightly higher than Fig. 2: 10would indicate,
'YJ = flp/q
but it is felt that the increase is justified for the usual installations.
where » = corner loss coefficient and q = dynamic head in the corner. Reference 2: 27 reports that tests at RN = 500,000 90-deg circular arc
An abrupt corner without vanes may show a loss of 100 per cent of the vanes with a gap-chord ratio of 1:4, a leading edge angle of 4 to 5 deg
velocity head (11= 1.00). With carefully designed vanes an 11of 0.15 is and a trailing edge angle of zero resulted in a pressure loss coefficient of
reasonable. The basic idea is to divide the corner into many turns of high 0.06 (excluding root losses). This is certainly a good value.
aspect ratio. See Fig. 2: 9. Any of these guide vanes can be used in conjunction with horizontal
In this application one may take the rate of change of momentum vanes to form a honeycomb.
through a corner as ph V' V and equate it to the vane lift coefficient
E. C PC
v(r
L> where h is the vane gap and c the vane chord, to determine that
2
the vane lift coefficient is Zh]«. Accordingly to employ a reasonable CL
the gap-chord ratio should be 1: 3 or smaller. Although it could be argued
that a reduction in drag would be obtained by using the maximum vane
chord possible (and hence the largest Reynolds number), experience has
a b
shown that the wake effects from each vane die out more quickly if many c
short-chord vanes are used in preference to fewer of large chord. This is

1)=0.11 I) = 0.138 1)=0.20
especially true for the set of corner vanes just before the entrance cone. Fig. 2: 10 Corner vanes.
64 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Design / 65
Because the velocity is highest at the guide vanes just downstream of Screens are far more useful than honeycombs for adjusting flow, and a
the tunnel test section, they are the most critical and should receive the fairly large percentage of modern tunnels employ fine-mesh screens in the
most careful workmanship. Vanes should have adjustable trailing edges settling chamber to even the flow. A typical installation might have one
for minor corrections to the flow angle, particularly the set just upstream or two; low-turbulence tunnels might have six or more. The use of screens
of the test section. for improving the flow is discussed in Sections 3: 11 and 3: 14. Before
New information (Ref. 2: 25) indicates that type (b) in Fig. 2: 10 prob- discussing their installation, let us note two more ways that coarse mesh
ably has less loss than the value given and very probably is the most screens are used. One-half-inch mesh hardware cloth may be placed at
advantageous type to use. the entrance of the test section to increase the effective Reynolds number
in the test section (this procedure requires a lot of calibration to know
2:8 Honeycombs and Screens what one has), and when the tunnel engineer is faced with making a very
A number of the older tunnels have honeycombs (Fig. 2: 11) in the bad tunnel usable, patch screens in the high velocity in the 'settling
settling chamber in an attempt to improve the flow in the test section. chamber will result in amore even flow. Here again t- to i-inch hard-
Usually they are made with octagonal cells with their length 5 to 10 times ware cloth may be used.
their width. The honeycombs should be obtained commercially because The installation of screens is a vexacious problem. If the tunnel has
the effort of building one is enormous. Newer tunnels of high contraction already been constructed, the screens may be brazed to a circumferential
ratios rarely need or benefit from honeycombs, and in one case that has ring, which in turn has radial screws to permit tightening the screen.
come to our attention a honeycomb proved useless in reducing surge. Difficult as this sounds, it is simple compared to the actual installation.
Here part of the brazing may have to be done in the tunnel. This is
bad enough for the first screen, which can be reached from both sides,
but becomes murder thenceforth when only one side is reachable. Screens
of almost any size (and mesh) can be fabricated commercially from many
different materials.
If the tunnel can be opened up, or is designed with screens in mind, the
gauze may be mounted on a support frame outside the tunnel and slid
into place.with ease. Care should be taken to prevent exterior flow around
the screens, and to seal off the screen support zone.
The radial force per foot of perimeter due to the pressure drop will be
CTlqd2j8(}, where () is the screen sag in feet, and the wire tensile strength
may then be computed using the total wire cross-sectional area per foot
of perimeter. The fact that screens tear loose so frequently attests to the
criticality of the mounting. A supporting network of aircraft cable can
be used if necessary.
Screens serve a secondary purpose not patently obvious: while it is
not too difficult to design and build a tunnel with an even velocity front
in the test section, and while uneven velocity fronts caused by the model
tend to be compensated by the fan, a screen or two in the settling chamber
often become useful in assuring good flow in the test section when either
a high-thrust or a high-drag model is being tested.
2:9 The Entrance Cone

Ideally the entrance cone shape should be selected to give a contin-
Fig. 2: 11 The honeycomb installation in the Boeing 8 ft x 12 ft wind tunnel.
(Courtesy Boeing Corporation.)
uously increasing velocity from the settling chamber to the test section.
Practically this appears to be possible only along the tunnel centerline; Let us suppose that the variation of the velocity ahead of the contrac-
adverse gradients arise at the walls that frequently trip the boundary tion is Vn from the average velocity Vn, and in the test section it is Vo from
layer and sometimes cause separation. A solution used some years ago the mean value Yo. Writing Bernoulli's equation between the two sections,
in Germany consisted of a gap of perhaps 0.05 tunnel diam around the we have
start of the entrance cone. P« + tp(Vn + vn)2 = Po + tp(Vo + VO)2
The best compromise seems to be to employ an entrance cone gradual
Expanding, and making the good approximation that there is little loss
at both ends but more so near the test section. Possibly flat-walled tunnels
of head between the two stations so that
should always start the test section fillets along with the entrance cone
to reduce separation in the corners. P« + tpVn2 = Po + !pVo2
In view of the lack of theory, model tests' are sometimes used. When we have vn2 + 2vnVn = V02 + 2voVo
this is done a reasonable amount of upstream and downstream ducting
should be employed to duplicate the entrance cone flow. A starting point Dividing through by Vn2Vo2 and neglecting (v/V)2 as small, we have
might be the curves in Fig. 2: 12 from Ref. 2: 4, and a study of Refs.
Vo Vn2vn
2:22 and 2:23.
Vo = Vo2Vn
A settling chamber about 0.5 diam long ahead of the entrance cone
seems to aid materially in improving the flow in the test section, as 'well But Vn2/Vo2 = l/n2, where n = area contraction ratio. Hence
as to provide a location for turbulence screens.
Vo 1 Vn
The contraction ratio of the entrance cone determines. the overall size -=--
2
(2: 33)
and hence the cost. of a closed-circuit wind tunnel, so that consideration Vo n Vn
'of the cone entirely by itself is not rational. However, an important item or the variation in velocity varies inversely as the square of the contraction
to consider when selecting the contraction ratio is the effect that it has in ratio. It is seen that a large contraction ratio, say from 7 to 14, is a great
decreasing the velocity variation in the test section. help in obtaining good jet flow.
.2:10 Wind Tunnel Construction

2.0
r-.
The structural loadings on the various sections of a low-speed wind
--
tunnel are usually less critical than the strength needed to avoid vibration,
1.6
a significant exception being the assurance that the drive motor will stay
I
-
>< <, +-- F in place should it lose one-half of its blades. The rest of the tunnel may be
.,'"
c
0
u
1.2
r-, r--- t--. E
examined to withstand the maximum stagnation pressure with a safety
factor of perhaps 4.0, and each panel should be stiffened to have natural
c
0 t---l- D frequencies above the driving rpm times the number of fan blades, and
--
:e
~
c
I--- r-- C
Test
section
to have small deflections. The large flats of a two-dimensional test section
8 0.8
may be particularly hard to handle from this angle.
'0 t-- B All types of materials are used for tunnel construction: wood, plywood,
VI
" thin metal, heavy metal (for pressure tunnels), cast concrete, gunnite,
'6
'" 0.4
cr
r--- A and plastics. A substantial portion of the tunnel should be of well-
stiffened thin metal to improve heat transfer from inside the duct. Even
though there is "general agreement" that low-speed wind tunnels require
I I o no cooling, heavy running in the summertime will usually make the tunnel
I: 2.4 2.0 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 o operators wish they had some; in fact even 25 hp tunnels should be
it . Distance from upstream end of test section, X, feet cooled. Many tunnels have an opening where cooler outside air can be
I; blown into the tunnel during model changes.
Fig. 2: 12 Curves suitable for entrance cones.
Fan blades for low-speed tunnels are frequently of wood, although modi-
,fied aircraft propellers are sometimes used with trailing edge flaps to
provide a uniform pressure rise across the fan disk. A door in the floor
in the plane of the fan will be necessary so that blades may be taken out
of their hubs and replaced.
The immense cranes needed during the construction of a metal tunnel
are shown in Fig. 2: 13. The construction of a poured concrete tunnel is
shown in Fig. 2: 14. The tunnel joints on all tunnels must be sealed, both
to save pumping losses and to avoid poor flow. Adhesive or glued-on
tape coated with shellac works well.
2:11 Power Losses
Wattendorf (Ref. 2: 10) has pointed the way to a logical approach to
the losses in a return-type wind tunnel. The procedure is to break the
tunnel down into (1) cylindrical sections, (2) corners, (3) expanding sec-
tions, and (4) contracting sections, and to calculate the loss for each.
I
In each of the sections a loss of energy occurs, usually written as a
drop in static pressure, D.p, or as a coefficient of loss, K = D.p/q.
Il Wattendorf refers these local losses to the jet dynamic pressure, defining
Fig. 2: 13 Erection of the all-metal 12-ft pressure tunnel at the Ames Aeronautical the coefficient of loss as
Laboratory. (Official Photograph, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.) (2: 34)
or, since the dynamic head varies inversely as the fourth power of the
tunnel diameter,
(2: 34a)
where Do = jet diameter and D = local tunnel diameter.
With the above definitions, the section energy loss D.E = KtpA V3
may be referred to the jet energy by
D.E = KtpAV3 AoVo' Vo:

AoVo'Vo
, 3Do4
= KtpAoVo -4
D
and, finally,
where Ao = test section area and A = local area.

. Jet energy
Energy ratio = ",., = ERt
.4 CIrCUltlosses
(See Section 3: 16.)
Fig. 2: 14 Construction of a poured concrete. wind tunnel. Steel rings and wood (2: 35)
forms. (Courtesy United Aircraft Corp.).
70 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Design J 71
The above definition of the energy ratio excludes the fan and motor The combined loss of the two is summed up by
efficiency.
The magnitude of the losses in a circular wind tunnel may be computed • J.
K = ( + 0.6 tan a)
- ( 1 - -D14)Do4
- (2: 38)
as follows: o 8 tan (a/2) 2 D24 DI4
In the cylindrical sections the pressure drop in length L is I1p/L =
(J./D)(p/2)V2, and K = I1p/q = J.(L/D). Therefore where a = divergence between opposite walls (not over 7 degrees), DI =
smaller diameter, and D2 = larger diameter.
(2:36) It will be seen that the smaller expansions yield smaller losses up to
the point where the skin friction of the added area becomes excessive. This,
F or smooth pipes at high Reynolds numbers von Karman gives it will be seen by differentiating eq. (2: 38), occurs when
(Ref. 2: 11)
tan (a/2) = )),/4.8
(2:37)
For reasonable values of J. the most efficient divergence is therefore
where D = local tunnel diameter, ft, V =iIocal velocity, ft/sec, and about 5 deg. However, space limitations for the tunnel as well as the cost
RN = (p/",)VD. of construction usually dictate that a slightly larger divergence be employed
Since eq. (2: 37) is tedious of solution, a plot is shown in Fig. 2: 15. at a small increase in cost of operation.
For open cylindrical sections such as an open jet, a reasonable value It will be noted that the losses in a divergent section are two to three
for skin-friction coefficient is times greater than the corresponding losses in a cylindrical tube, although
J. = 0.08 the progressively decreasing velocity would seem to indicate losses between
a
that of cylindrical section with the diameter of the smaller section and
For an open jet of length/diameter = 1.5, the loss becomes 0.08 X 1.5 = that of one with the diameter of the larger section. The reason for the'
12 per cent as compared to about one-tenth that value for a closed jet. added loss is that the energy exchange near the walls is of such a nature
In the divergent sections, both wall friction and expansion losses occur. that the thrust expected from the walls is not fully realized. Effectively,.
a pressure force is thereby added to the skin-friction forces.
30.0 It should also be noted that the angle between opposite walls of a
20.0
[\ diffuser is a very poor diffuser parameter, the point being that the rate
r
s:x
10.0
8.0
'\ of pressure rise in two diffusers having equal wall angles but different
entrance diameters is quite different, and rate of pressure rise is prob-
ably a much better criterion. Following this logic a number of wind
tunnels have a wider wall angle in the return passage than in the diffuser.
t
..0
6.0
"~ An additional argument for this type of design is that the disturbance
~c: 4.0 '1"'.
<, .caused by a model in the test section may limit satisfactory diffuser
{g 3.0 angles below smooth flow values.
(5
c:
i. 2.0 "r-, In the corners, friction in the guide vanes accounts for about one-third
<, of the loss, and rotation losses for the other two-thirds. For corners of
~ the type shown in Fig. 2: 10 the following partly empirical relation is
1.0
0.8 reasonable, being based on a corner pressure drop of I1p/q = 0.15 at
0.6
........ RN = 500,000 .
<,
0.0070 0.0080 0.0090 0.0100 0.0110 0.0120 0.0130 K = (0.10 + 4.55 )D04 (2: 39)
I: Skin friction coefficient, A o (lOgiO RN)2.58 D4
1
I Fig. 2: 15 In the contraction cone the losses are friction only, and the pressure
72 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Design .
honeycombs with a length/diameter = 6.0, and equal tube areas. Rou

speaking, the loss in a honeycomb is usually less than 5 per cent oi
total tunnel loss.
The losses incurred in the single-return tunnel of Fig. 2: 17 based
tunnel temperature of lOO°F (p/", = 5560) and a test section velocit
100mph are as tabulated.
K=0.30
Section Ko % Total Loss
K=0.22 K=0.20
Fig. 2: 16 Some honeycombs and their losses. 1. The jet 0.0093 5.1
2. Divergence 0.0391 21.3
drop is 3. Corner 0.046 25.0
~p = (Le A. e. V2 dL 4. Cylinder 0.0026 1.4
f Jo 2 D 5. Corner 0.046 25.0
where L. = length of contraction cone. 6. Cylinder 0.002 1.1
7. Divergence 0.016 8.9
K = K D04 = ~Pf D04 = (LeA. dL D04 Do 8. Corner 0.0087 4.7
o D4 q D4 Jo D D4 Do 9. Corner 0.0087 4.7
10. Cylinder 0.0002 0.1
_ A. Lc (Le DoS dL
11. Cone 0.0048 2.7
- a.ve Do Jo DS L (2:40)
0.1834 100.0
Assuming a mean value for A,
s, = 0.32).Lc/ Do (2: 41) Energy ratio, ERt = 1/'ZKo = 1/0.1834 = 5.45
Since the total loss in the contraction cone usually runs below 3 per Probably this figure should be reduced about 10 per cent for leaks
cent of the total tunnel loss, any errors due to approximations in the cone joints.
losses become of small importance. The effect of varying the angle of divergence or the contraction I
Losses in honeycombs have been reported by Roberts (Ref. 2: 17).
(ffJues of K sUitabl(:::iQ)use
__ .
(beq. (~a) are ® in Fig. 2:16 f~
for a tunnel similar to the one of Fig. 2: 17 may be seen in Figs. 2: 18
2: 19.
The possibility of attaining higher energy ratios has several promi
7t: J
"r;~~~r; J
;, :,\' 9
~I/; .;.. 3' ~7.8' __ _ 5' 11.3~ -:v"
10: "0; r :\'~
"r; ~"
f+lO'
24.3'
~
'f
1
5~2'
6.57'-+
<,
-.
-.
~
..:::.~ 0.1
/.1 "-
~ 24.4' 4'.;;.- ~
=-'l~
~ ..:::.1 '.1.1
6
~I
\..~
48.5'
@ C0 2 4 6
Divergence angle
8 10
74 I Low-Speed- Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Design I 75
When figuring power requirements for a proposed design, consideration
must also be given to (a) the power required to overcome model drag -
Divergence angle
under the most extreme cases and (b) the power required to overcome the
increased tunnel losses due to stalling of parts of the diffuser from the
model effects.
For (a) the power required to fly a model whose span is 0.8 tunnel
diam, AR == 5, and CD = 0.5000 is probably sufficient.
Item (b) for conventional tests is covered in (a) above, but for wingtip
mounting or section tests as much as 150 per cent more power may be
needed if the diffuser is seriously stalled and large rotational and diffusion
losses are created.
Losses for a well-designed open circuit tunnel are given below. These
theoretical values were confirmed by model and full scale tests. (Ref. 2: 32).
3~ -L ~ _L ~
Section Ko % Total Loss
2 4 6 8 10
Contraction ratio 1. Inlet including six screens 0.021 14.0
Fig. 2: 19 Effect of contraction ratio on energy ratio for several divergence angles. 2. Entrance cone and test section 0.013 8.6
3. Diffusor 0.080 53.4
leads. One fundamental is the increase of efficiency that accompanies 4. Discharge at outlet 0.036 24.0
larger Reynolds numbers. That is, a large tunnel similar to a small tunnel 0.150- 100.0
will have the greater efficiency of the two. Energy ratio, ERt = 1/0.15 = 6.67
Reduction of the losses in the divergent passage is limited, as previously
stated, to a certain minimum angle between opposite walls. The use of 2:12 Cooling
this minimum angle would, however, yield smaller losses than are custom-
arily encountered. Corner losses may be reduced through the use of two All the energy supplied to the propeller driving a wind tunnel finally
relatively untried innovations. The first is to break the four 90-deg turns emerges as an increase of heat energy in the windstream. This increases
into several vaned turns of less than 90 deg (Ref. 2: 12). The second is the temperature of the tunnel air until the heat losses finally balance the
to employ potential elbows (Ref. 2: 3) for the turns. Increasing the con- input. For low-power tunnels (and particularly those with open jets) this
traction ratio through a longer return passage will also increase the balance is realized at reasonable temperatures, the heat transfer through
energy ratio but at an added cost in tunnel construction. Increased surface cooling and air exchange being sufficient. For tunnels with high
length before the first turn is particularly effective. power inputs and high jet velocities this low-temperature balance no
An entirely different approach, particularly useful for high-speed longer occurs. For example, the heat rise incurred by bringing air to
tunnels, is to reduce the power required for a given speed by reducing rest at 450 mph is about 36°F. With an energy ratio of 8.0, the heat rise
the air density through partly evacuating the entire tunnel. This pro- in the airstream would be 4.5°P per circuit, leading in a very short while
cedure greatly complicates model changes, since the tunnel pressure to prohibitive temperatures. Obviously, tunnels in this class require
must be relieved before the tunnel crew can enter. (Some of the newer cooling arrangements to augment the inherent heat losses.
tunnels overcome this difficulty by having pressure doors that seal off Additional cooling may be accomplished by four means: (1) an in-
the test section from the rest of the tunnel and greatly reduce the pumping crease of surface cooling by running water over the tunnel exterior, (2)
between runs.) Since the power required is a function of pVs, by reducing interior cooling, by the addition of water-cooled turning vanes, or (3) a
the pressure to one-fourth its former value the speed may be increased water-cooled radiator in the largest tunnel section, (4) a continual re-
by the ratio iY4" to 1 for the same power input. Stated differently, a 59 placement of the heated tunnel air with cool outside air by means of an
air exchanger.
per cent higher Mach number will be attained with the lower pressure.
Some high-speed tunnels use an air exchanger (Figs. 2: 20 and 2: 21) to
replace the lower-energy boundary layer with cool outside air, having
exchange towers to assure adequate dispersion of the heated air and fresh
air that is free from surface contamination. Assuming the previously
mentioned rise of 4.5°F per circuit, a 10 per cent exchange would limit
the rise to 45°F, excluding heat losses elsewhere. (Ten per cent is a lower
than average amount of exchange.)
One difficulty associated with an air exchanger is that it puts the
, highest-pressure section of the tunnel at atmospheric pressure, and hence
.the jet pressure is below atmospheric. This leads to troublesome but by
no means insoluble problems of sealing off the balance room. (The same
low jet static pressure is present in open-circuit tunnels.) Another diffi-
culty that must be considered is the possible effects of weather conditions
on a tunnel with a large amount of air exchanged.
It should be mentioned that a breather slot at the downstream end of
'the test section can be used in conjunction with the air exchanger to get
the jet up to atmospheric pressure and hence avoid balance sealing
troubles. However, this arrangement with the air going in the breather
and out the exchanger requires as much as 20 per cent of the total power
input.
The internal heat exchangers needed for high-powered wind tunnels
require an immense amount ofsurface, a great deal more than is offered
by all four sets of guide vanes. Accordingly, a special installation is Fig. 2:21 View of air exchangers from inside the return passage. (Courtesy United
Aircraft Corp.) .
needed, and there is almost no way around a very large amount of drag.
In a preliminary study reported by Steinle (Ref. 2: 20) pressure drops of the tunnel where the q is lowest; incidentally this helps because at this
8 to 18q were measured across exchangers; another design, unreported, point the temperature of the stream is highest and heat exchange conse-
,had 4q. Thus the heat exchanger must be placed in the largest section of quently simplest.
In view of its power cost a great deal of thought should go into the
Noise baffles 'VDust filter screen
design of a heat exchanger, and it should be remembered that normal
~
and screens -~~_~~ __ ,--_(~' =--.,' i ,tC Tunnel walls
streamlining should be used lrere as well as elsewhere. Unfortunately
no information is available as to the optimum design, although work is
being done on the problem at several laboratories. Engineers employing
ivscreen "--- dry air in low-pressure tunnels have found that rubber hose used in cooler
Return passage connections bad to be removed to keep dryness satisfactory.
I The unknowns of internal and external boundary layer thicknesses
,
I
II
Flow adjustment make the problem of cooling through the walls quite difficult. In dis-
vanes
cussing. internal cooling, Tifford (Ref. 2: 5) agrees that a radiator has
possible advantages over cooled turning vanes.
The obvious disadvantages of high temperatures in the wind tunnel
include added trouble cooling the drive motor (if it is in the tunnel and
Fig.2:20 An air exchanger. The screen provides an extra pressure drop for additional does not have separate cooling), the rapid softening of the model tem-
flow through the air exchanger. porary fillets, and increased personnel difficulties. Another deleterious
78 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing' Wind Tunnel Design / 79
tubes placed outside it. Variations can be made by remotely movable

trailing edge flaps on the endplates.
A second approach is to contract the whole tunnel test section by an
additional contraction section (Fig. 2: 24). This has the advantages of
greatly increasing the contraction ratio and making the installation of
turbulence screens easy, and of providing sure and positive two-dimen-
sional conditions. On the other hand, a much smaller quantity of air now
passes through the tunnel for a particular test speed, since the test section
area is reduced, and in many cases the performance of the tunnel fan is
. greatly impaired. * Still another source of trouble is the problem of
diffusing the overcontracted passage. Somewhere some extremely rapid
diffusion is going to have to take place, and the task is exceedingly diffi-
60L- ~ ~ ~ ~ cult to do with even passable efficiency. In one installation a two-dimen-
50 90 130 170 210 sional insert co.nverted a 9-ft-diameter tunnel to a 2t-ft by 9-ft test section;
Temperature, of
the problem of the separated diffuser arose, but vortex generators on ali
Fig. 2:22 Effect of temperature on test Reynolds number. four walls very nearly cured it (see Fig. 2: 25).
effect is the drop in Reynolds number that occurs with increasing tem-
peratures whether the tunnel is run at constant speed or at constant
dynamic pressure. Figure 2: 22 illustrates this effect.
Since most electric motors have high efficiencies, placing the motor
outside the tunnel is probably not justified by the small amount of tunnel
heating saved thereby, but the ease of motor repairs and tunnel repowering
without a nacelle change are strong arguments for the external drive motor.
2:13 Jet Inserts

Many tunnels have auxiliary two-dimensional test sections which fit
inside the normal test section in order to provide testing facilities for
shorter-span models at considerable savings in model cost. These jets
are usually either endplate or contraction types.
The endplate jet insert consists of two flat plates sealed at tunnel floor
or ceiling (Fig. 2: 23) with a space between them for mounting and testing
a constant-chord two-dimensional airfoil model. In some installations
the model supports come up inside the endplates, and the rear pitch strut
is used to hold and move the wake survey rake. Since the drag of the
model changes with many factors, and since drag changes can make more
air pass around instead of through the test section, special provision must Fig. 2:23 Endplate type of insert to form two-dimensional test section. (Courtesy
be made to control the test dynamic pressure. One procedure is to use Convair San Diego.)
the customary double piezometer to hold constant the quantity of air * A convenient way to think of the operation of the fan is to discuss the pressure
that enters the original test section, and ascertain that a constant fraction rise it can produce in the units of the dynamic pressure approaching it. The reduction
of that air passes through the new test section by reading pitot-static of quantity mentioned above will hence reduce the amount of power the fan can absorb.
Fig. 2:26 A three-dimensional double-venturi insert that yielded 5 Vo with the wall
bumps in place, and 4 Vo without them.
Fig. 2: 24 A contraction type of two-dimensional jet insert. An abrupt expansion is
often preferred over the vane type shown.
Several other items are of interest when inserts are under consideration.
One of these is the question whether to mount the insert horizontal so
that the model is vertical, or vice versa. The horizontal insert offers the
opportunity of using liquid seals around the model mounting endplates,
but on the other hand the model is somewhat more difficult to get to for
adjustments. In some instances a severe pressure differential will occur
with this type of insert, and great difficulty is experienced in keeping any
but the heaviest liquids in the seals. Additional breather slots will usually
alleviate this condition. Force measuring is also made more difficult by
the large and indeterminable tares of the model mounting endplates, so
much so that it is sometimes preferable to obtain the lift by pressure dis-
tributions on the model or on the floor and ceiling, and drag by a momen-
tum rake, or to leave a small gap between model and walls.
In conclusion, it does not appear possible to recommend one type of
two-dimensional jet insert as superior, with the final note that, aero-
dynamics aside for a moment, the endplate type of insert is far easier to
install and remove. A second type of insert employs a series of venturis
such that a very small "test section" is made by the throat of the first, as
shown in Fig. 2: 26. Using two venturis, it is possible to obtain at least
four times the normal test section top speed; perhaps even as much as six
times that. Of interest is the manner in which the downstream venturi
permits far larger-than-normal diffusor angles in the upstream venturi.
While experiments for both two- and three-dimensional double venturi
F' 2' 25 Rotor blade section mounted in a two-dimensional insert. Note vortex tunnels are briefly covered in Refs. 2: 30 and 2: 31, the subject has been
g;~~ra~ors on downstream wall. (Courtesy Georgia Institute of Technology.)
brought up more to encourage further research than to propose construe-
- tion of double-venturi tunnels.
2:14 Safety 2:3 In what sections of the tunnel do the largest losses occur?
2:4 Explain why there is no increase of axial speed across the propeller disk
Though it may seem strange to bring the question of safety into a if the air density remains constant.
discussion of wind tunnels, the long roster of injured indicates it is not 2:5 What are the objections to a double-return tunnel?
to be overlooked. Accidents in tunnel use include fires, falls, injuries 2:6 Discuss materials that could be used in the construction of a wind tunnel.
from sharp-edged models, and personnel being locked in a tunnel when 2:7 Check the loss calculations for the funnel of Fig. 2: 16.
it is started. 2:8 Which end of the test section is the largest? Why? What angle of diver-
Starting with the last, anybody who enters a part of a wind tunnel not gence is reasonable?
readily visible to the tunnel operators without firm understanding re- 2:9 Why is straightener vane loss greater than skin friction alone?
garding the restarting time is an idiot. But since it is not the practice to 2:10 About ho,: much po,:""erwould be.required for a 450-mph tunnel having
injure idiots, many tunnels preface a start with a blast on a horn, and a atmosphenc pressure III the 20-ft-dlameter test section? Assume a reason-
able energy ratio.
5-second wait for incumbents to punch stop switches installed in test
2:11 Name four different propulsion systems used for wind tunnels.
sections, return passages, and near the fan blades. When it is necessary 2:12 State reasonable amounts of air exchanged by an air exchanger.
for someone to be in the tunnel while it is running, very clear signals or 2:13 St~te advantages and. disadvantages incurred by using an air exchanger.
understanding must again be obtained. 2:14 AIr at 21171b/ft2 static pressure and 100 Ib/ft2 dynamic pressure enters a
Falls are unfortunately frequent in wind tunnels. Their rounded surface, 90-deg cascaded corner. State probable static and dynamic pressure
often coated with oil or ice, and the precipitous slope of entrance cones after the turn.
have resulted in bruises and even broken arms and legs. The authors speak 2:15 State two methods that enable a crew to work on a model in a pressure
feelingly at this point. In view of the danger associated with the entrance tunnel without blowing down the entire tunnel.
cone and settling chamber, pitot-static tubes, thermocouples, and the 2:16 Why are thin propeller blades necessary on an airplane but not in a
like should be wall mounted. wind tunnel?
Fires in wind tunnels seem to be almost the rule rather than the excep-
tion: a broken propeller can spark a dust screen into fire; a trouble light
can make plenty of trouble; or building forms can in some way become References and Bibliography
ignited. Since the tunnel is closed, special care should be taken in selecting
fire extinguishers. And special care should be taken also to see that fire 2:1 Felix Nagel, ~tatic and Dynamic Model Similarity, JAS, September, 1939.
extinguishers emitting poisonous vapors are not easily tripped. It may 2:2 Ivan A. Rubinsky, The Use of Heavy Gases or Vapors for High Speed Wind
well be that the world's record for the hundred-yard dash rightfully belongs Tunnels, JAS, September, 1939.
2:3 John J. Harper, Tests on Elbows of a Special Design, JAS, 13, 1946.
to a tunnel engineer who inadvertently activated the carbon dioxide system 2:4 Tsien, Hsue-Shen, On the Design of a Contraction Cone for a Wind Tunnel,
in one of the largest east-coast tunnels. JAS, February, 1943.
The advent of the sharp edges on metal models is a new and potent 2:5 Arthur N. Tilford, Wind Tunnel Cooling, JAS, March, 1943.
hazard; the authors do not know a tunnel engineer who has not suffered 2:6 G. Krober, Guide Vanes for Deflecting Fluid Currents with Small Loss of
from this source. It is only good sense to protect the tunnel crew from Energy, TM 722, 1932.
2:7 A. R. Collar, Some Experiments with Cascades of Airfoils, R & M 1768,1937.
these sharp edges, using either tape or wood slats. 2:8 G. N. Patterson, Note on the Design of Corners in Duct Systems, R & M 1773
Safety may seem like a puerile subject, but it loses that appearance 1937. '
afterwards. 2 :9 D. C. McPhail, Experiments on Turning Vanes at an Expansion, R & M 1876
1939.
2:10 F. L. Wattendorf, Factors Influencing the Energy Ratio of Return Flow Wind
Problems Tunnels, p. 526, 5th International Congress for Applied Mechanics, Cambridge,
1938.
2: 11 T. von Karman, Turbulence and Skin Friction, JAS, January, 1934.
2:1 What percentage of the power supplied to a wind-tunnel motor appears 2: 12 G. Darrius, Some Factors Influencing the Design of Wind Tunnels, Brown-
as heat energy in the air? (The motor itself is in the tunnel.) Boveri Review, July-August, 1943.
2:2 State four methods of cooling a tunnel. 2:13 G. N. Patterson, Ducted Fans: Design for High Efficiency, ACA 7, July, 1944.
2: 14 A. R. Collar, The Design of Wind Tunnel Fans, R & M 1889, August, 1940.
2: 15 W. C. Nelson, Airplane Propeller Principles, John Wiley and Sons, New York, p. 9.
2: 16 G. N. Patterson, Ducted Fans: High Efficiency with Contra-Rotation, ACA 10, Chapter three
October, 1944.
2: 17 H. E. Roberts, Considerations in the Design of a Low-Cost Wind Tunnel, Paper
presented at 14th Annual Meeting of the Institnte 1)f Aeronautical Sciences,
January, 1946.
2: 18 Paul A. Libby and Howard R. Reiss, The Design of Two-Dimensional Con-
traction Sections, QAM, IX, April, 1951.
2:19 W. A. Mair, The Design of Fans and Guide Vanes for High-Speed Wind Instrumentation and calibration
Tunnels, R & M 2435, 1951.
2:20 Warren C. Steinle, The Experimental Determination of Aerodynamic Total-
of the test section
Pressure Losses for Heat Exchanger Surfaces Considered for the 7 x 10 Foot
. Transonic Wind Tunnel, DTMB Aero Report, 1951.
2:21 G. T. Strailman, New Wind Tunnel Drive Control, Electrical Engineering, July,
1952. After a tunnel is constructed, the next step is to determine its flow
2:22 Paul A. Libby and Howard R. Reiss, The Design of Two-Dimensional Con- characteristics and, of course, to change any that are not satisfactory.
traction Sections, QAM, IX (1), April, 1951. First, however, it is necessary to discuss the quantities that we shall be
2:23 B. Thwaites, On the Design of Contractions for Wind Tunnels, R & M 2278
1946. measuring and the instruments that experience has shown are the best to
2:24 Hugh L. Dryden and Ira H. Abbott, The Design of Low-Turbulence Wind do the job. Besides those instruments needed for calibration we shall also
Tunnels, TR 940, 1949. discuss others needed for testing. The work of Volluz in Ref. 3: 19 may
2:25 K. G. Winters, Comparative Tests of Thin Turning Vanes in the RAE 4 x 3 be consulted on this subject.
Foot Wind Tunnel, R & M 2589, 1947. The low-speed airstream is defined when we know its distribution of
2:26 P. Bradshaw and R. C. Pankhurst, The Design of Low-Speed Wind Tunnels,
NPL ARC 24041,1962.
dynamic pressure, static pressure, and total pressure, and its temperature
2: 27 C. Salter, Experiments on Thin Turning Vanes, ARC R & M 2469, October, and turbulence. We may then compute its velocity and the Reynolds
1946. number for a particular model. Much of our interest, then, is centered
2:28 C. A. Moore and S. J. Kline, Some Effects of Vanes and Turbulence in Two- on determining pressures, and for this procedure it is hard to beat simple
Dimensional Wide-Angle Subsonic Diffusers, NACA TN 4080, 1958.
fluid columns. The device by which the height of the fluid is measured is
2:29 S. B. Savage, A Short Low-Speed Wind Tunnel with Wide-Angle Diffuser,
McGill University AE-2, 1960.. called a manometer, and we will first look into fluids that are suitable for
2: 30 Marvin S. Mixon, An Investigation of the Double Venturi Wind Tunnel, Masters manometer use.
Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1950.
2: 31 Alfred Ritter, A Study of the Double-Venturi Principle in its Application to High 3:1 Fluids and Manometers
Speed Wind Tunnels, Masters Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1947. The most commonly used fluid is alcohol. It is popular because it is
2:32 T. N. Krishnaswamy, Selection of the Electric Drive of the 14 x 9 Wind Tunnel,
cheap, is easy to obtain, and has low viscosity. Its low specific gravity is
Journal of the Aeronautical SOCiety of India, 7, No.2, 1955.
productive of a higher fluid column than is obtained with water.
The specific gravity of alcohol varies moderately with temperature.
Corrections for this effect may be found from Pig. 3: 1. It follows, for
example, that if alcohol is labeled either by its specific gravity at some
temperature ("sp. gr. = 0.801 at 80 P") or by its water content ("94.0 per
0
cent alcohol"), it will be completely defined and its proper curve for
temperature correction may be determined. It also follows that the
temperature of the manometer fluid should be read along with the various
fluid heights.
The method of correcting the specific gravity of alcohol for changes in
temperature is explained in the following example.
85
86 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Instrumentation and Calibration of the Test Section / 87
0.840 For photographic work it is usually necessary to color the fluid to
make the detail in the films easier to read. Ordinary ink or vegetable
-, coloring will work for water and alcohol, as will any of a great number of
('\,
0.830 textile dyes, but inasmuch as many dyes will fade if iron is present, it is
'" '\.~..o ~... usually advisable to make all metal parts of the manometer of brass.
<, <, '\~t Black is a very suitable color, and alcohol may be so dyed with a commer-
0.820 ~b cial dye called Nigrosine 12525, Buffalo Chrome Black, 2 BN, or Direct
<, -, '" ~ 1'\0/<2 Black, E concentration. Gentian violet works well for most light fluids.
.<, -, <, ~<%>~-
~ 0.810 0 Table 3:1 Properties and Discussion of Manometer Fluids
~
tlO
~ <, "'.9~.9 '\. r-,
.g SpecificGravity
U ~ ~,,~
.96"
-, -, I'. Liquid (approx) Remarks
~ 0.800
~ _,>~~ -, "'l\. Alcohol
SiliconeDC 200
0.80
0.902
All around the most satisfactory.
Has a very low boiling point.
~ ~I" <, Water 1.00* Makes a poor .meniscus owing to
0.790
-, -, -, , excessivesurface tension.t
0.780
-, -, Methylenechloride
Bromobenzene
1.30
1.50
Attacks rubber.
Quite volatile.
-, I" Ethyl bromide
Carbon tetrachloride
1.50
1.59
Too volatile to use.
Attacks rubber, but is cheap and
[\. otherwisegood. Hard to color. Also
0.770
40 60 80 100 toxic.
Temperature, OF Acetylenetetrachloride 1.59 Attacks rubber.
Ethylene dibromide 2.13 Quite volatile; low surface tension
Fig. 3: 1 Temperaturecorrectionsfor alcoholdensity. and meniscuspoor.
Tetrabrome-ethane 2.97 Attacks rubber, vinyl plastic.t Also
toxic.
Example 3:1. An alcohol-water mixture has a specific gravity of Mercury 13.56 Oil the mensicus for best results.
0.805 at 68°P. What is the percentage of alcohol, and what will be the Mercury attacks brass and solder.
specific gravity at nOp?
* 0.998at 70°F.
1. Locate the point (0.805, 68°F) in Fig. 3: 1, arid draw a line through
t The surface tension may be made acceptable by adding a wettingagent such
it parallel to the other lines of the figure. Estimate the distance between as those used in photographic processes.
the lines 94 and 96 per cent, and read 94.6 per cent alcohol. t Polyethelenemay be used.
2. Follow down the newly constructed 94.6 per cent line until it inter-
sects nOF. Read sp. gr. = 0.802. The heights of the fluid columns are measured in a great variety of ways,
depending on the accuracy desired. The simplest is to fasten a glass or
Sometimes the pressures to be measured require that fluids heavier clear plastic tube to .a meter stick, and read the fluid height directly;
than alcohol be utilized; several of these are listed in Table 3:1. Only readings to about 0.5 mm may be obtained thus. Precision manometers
pure liquids should be employed, for the heavy portions will settle out of a are better. Some of them entail a hairline to which the fluid meniscus
mixture. is made tangent by raising or lowering it on a lead screw; others have a
The liquids that attack rubber may sometimes be used with synthetic float on the fluid which has a tiny mirror on it for optical magnification;
rubber tubing or most plastic tubing now available. still others read remotely by means of an electrically driven pointer which
variable-height reservoir so that the system is null and no error is in-
curred by having a variation in reservoir level as the fluid column changes.
If fluid heights to be measured are large, it would be better to move
the reservoir and keep the indicator at eye level, rather than vice versa
as shown in Fig. 3: 2.
3:2 Multiple Manometers

Very frequently it is necessary to measure a large number of pressures
simultaneously. Normally the accuracy needed does not require precision
equipment, and it is sufficient to mount a large number of glass tubes
(25 to 30) on a lined plate, forming what is called a multiple manometer
(Fig. 3: 3). The tube readings are customarily recorded photographically,
and except for a few important tubes read visually the values are read
after the test;
There are two types of multiple manometers: those with the tubes in
front of a lined glass plate with rear illumination, and those having a
solid plate, and illumination from the front. By far the great majority of
multiple manometers are of the glass-plate type, but having built and
Fig. 3:2 A vernier manometer. (Courtesy Convair, San Diego.)
just maintains contact with the fluid. Any of the above instruments may
be built to yield accuracies of ±0.002 inches or better. The Betz-type
manometer has a glass scale suspended by a float; the numbers on the
scale are projected onto a ground glass screen, which has a fixed vernier
scale on it. This type requires no laborious cranking of the indicator,
but it can be read only to about one-tenth millimeter.
A simple manometer is shown in Fig. 3: 2. Its main features includ~:
(1) a rotatable indicator so that arbitrary slopes can be used ~n the ~wd Fig. 3: 3 An adjustable-angle multiple manometer. Sometimes a dial-type thermometer
meniscus to increase accuracy; (2) a vernier scale for preclse reading; is mounted directly on the manometer for fluid temperature data. (Courtesy Convair,
(3) a suitable damping arrangement; (4) a variable-height indicator or a San Diego.)
Instrumentation and Calibration of the Test Section I 91
us~d several, the authors feel constrained to go against the majority and
tunnel time. It is suggested that multiple manometers be designed with
pornt out the advantages, particularly for low-speed and class work of
the solid-plate type. ' 52 tubes to allow a static tube at each end and yet make full use of the
standard cluster connectors.
For low-speed work the manometer must be lowered until it is from Various complicated methods are used to read films made of ~ultiple
3~ to 4~ ~eg with the horizontal in order to get useful fluid heights. In manometer readings, but one of the simplest is to prepare a special scale
this pOSItIOnglass plates sag appreciably and let the tubes bend with a
for each program, as follows: .
s~rprising~y large' resulting error. (Additional bracing usually i~terferes Project the film onto a ground-glass screen and measure the ~anom-
WIth the lights.) The internally illuminated manometer is much heavier. eter inch markings to determine the film scale. Translate this scale,
~pecial in~ must be obtained to make good lines on glass. When the including fluid density, into /}.p/q, ending with, say, /}.p/q = 1.0 is 2.31
lights are III the back, darker dyes must be used with a resultant staining inches on the ground glass. Make a paper scale divided into tenths ~f
of the tubes. And, finally anything that must be moved about and is
/}.p/q, and glue it on a wood backing. Provide a red offs~t.tunnel static
largely glass always runs the risk of being broken.
pressure for negative pressures and a blue mark for positive pressures.
At any rate, some design hints that will tend toward getting a good Direct /}.p/q readings may then be made as fast as a person can read.
manometer are proffered herewith.
The quality of the film data will be improved if the camera used to
1. Avoid the use of iron anywhere that fluid can touch; iron causes take it holds the film flat against the plate by a vacuum arrangement, as
many dyes to "precipitate out. in an aerial camera.
2. U~e the commercially available brass sylphon tubing to connect the
3:3 The Pitot-Statlc Tube
reser~oIr to the manometer foot. This tubing is permanent, and far
superior to rubber or any of the plastic hoses with which the authors The most common device for determining the total head and the static
are acquainted. . pressure of a stream is the pitot-static tube, an instrument that yields both
3. Prov~de mano.meter tilting such that one man can do the job. the total head and the static pressure. A "standard" pitot-static tube is
4. Provide an adjustable reservoir so that the wind-off fluid heights may shown in Fig. 3: 4a. The orifice at A reads total head (p + ip P), and
be set anywhere on the manometer. the orifices at B read the static pressure', p. If the pressures from the two
5. Provide a straight-line path for cleaning the tubes. orifices are connected across a manometer, the pressure differential will,
6. The maximum fluid height (i.e., the tube length) should allow for a of course, be tpP, from which the velocity may be calculated. (For
maximum of 8q. determining p see Example 3: 4.) . .
7. Reference marks every 0.2 inches with heavy lines at the inches seems The pitot-static tube is easy to construct, but It has som~ inherent
to be satisfactory. errors. If due allowance is made for these errors, a true reading ·of the
dynamic pressure within about 0.1 per cent may be obtained.
The connections of the multiple manometer should be checked fre-
It has been amply demonstrated that a total-head tube with a hemis-
quently by letting a low pressure at the orifice raise a fluid column and
pherical tip will read the total head accurately independent of the size
hold it when the orifice is sealed. The simple "response" check is not
of the orifice opening as long as the yaw is less than 3 deg. A squared-off
sufficient, for leaking tubes respond readily to a sudden increase of pres-
pitot tube will go to higher angles without error, but both square- and
sure. Whenever possible it is advisable to have at least one atmospheric
round-tip pitot tubes suffer errors if they are used at too low Reynolds
reference tube to permit obtaining absolute pressure values.
numbers or too close to a wall. Corrections for squared-off pitot tubes
N_ot inf~eq~ently a manometer tube will fail to level properly owing under these conditions are in Figs. 3: 5 and 3: 6.
~o either dirt Ill. the glass t~be or a bubble in the line. Care is necessary The static holes suffer from two effects: (1) The crowding of the
If accurate readmgs are desired, If the reservoir is dropped down except
streamlines near the tip reduces the pressure along the shank of the
when the manometer is in active use, minimum glass stain will result.
pitot-static tube so that the static pressure at the static .orifices will be l~w.
The connection of the model tubes to the multiple manometers is most The amount of error is seen in Fig. 3: 5. (2) A high-pressure regIOn
easily made with commercially available cluster plugs. These 'connect exists ahead of the stem that tends to make the indicated static pressure
50 tubes in a leakproof trouble-free manner and save a great deal of
too high.
II
Instrumentation and Calibration of the Test Section I 93
C
~---- 16D ----40(---
B
8D =:u A
1.061-+--+--+---+---+--+----1
3D Eight holes equally

spaced on periphery
==== . =.=-===.
t
D
~I~ 1.03t---~i-----t----jr----+----t-----;
1.00 f---+--+-===t===+-+--1
O.97 .':::-_----:!::---:-:::::-----;:::-::---_--;:-!::::--~::::__::::::'
20 50 100 200 500 1000 2000
--E--- Reynolds number (log scale)
Velocity
Fig. 3: 5 Performance of pitot tube at low Reynolds number.
The two effects may block each other out if the static holes are properly
Static located. The "standard" pitot-static tube does not employ this principle
connection as it would require the static holes to be so close to the tip that small
deviations in tip construction or damage to the tip could make a relatively
Total-head connection (a) large error in the static reading.
Hence: (1) If a new pitot-static tube is to be built either it may be
O.lD Diam-8 holes
D equally spaced
0.016
0.3D 0.014
V(+~V)
I I J
-EZ~-
t--- 8-10D-..-.-...c~
0.012~
~w,,,-
D
0.010 \
II
II
~V
v-
0.008 \ \
II
II
II 0.006 1\
\
II
II
'111
Total-head connection 0.004
(b)
r-, <,
Fig. 3 :4a "Standard" pitot-static tube.
0.002
...__ r---
Fig. 3 :4b Prandtl design. o
0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.9
Z/D
Fig. 3: 6 Velocity correction for a circular pitot tube near a wall.

-2 3. The density is
~
'".:
Co
g
0
\:" The true airspeed is hence
p = 0.002378(518/572)
= 0.00215 slug/ft"
'"~ ~- P. Vt = .J0.002378/0.00215 . 157.8

:"ll +2 ~
~ If' = 166.2 mph
,//}
Q.
-_ Round tip- stem junction
~
.l!! --- Square tip- stem junction The accuracy of a standard pitot-static tube when inclined to an
en +4 I I
airstream is shown in Fig. 3: 8.
o 4 8 12 16 20
The pitot-static tube can be used only in free air. When the tube is
Fig. 3: 7 Static orifice distance from tip base or from stem centerline, diameters (AB close to a lifting surface, the pressure gradient will totally nullify the
and Be in Fig. 3 :4a); see Ex. 3 :2.
worth of the reading as an indication of freestream velocity. It is possible
to place the pitot-static tube in such a place relative to an airplane wing
designed as per Fig. 3 :4a and its static pressure readings corrected as per
that it makes the airspeed indicator read high at high speed and low at
Fig. 3: 7, or the Prandtl design may be used. The Prandtl design should
low speed, or vice versa.
require no correction but should be checked for accuracy. (2) Existing
pitot-static tubes should be examined for tip and stem errors so that their
+6
constants may be found.
Example 3:2 A pitot-static tube whose static orifices are 3.2D from
1/
the base of the tip and 8.0D from the centerline of the stem reads 12.05 +4 /
inches of water on a manometer for a particular setting of the tunnel. If
the test section is at standard pressure and 113°F, find (1) the dynamic
1/
pressure, (2) the indicated airspeed, and (3) the true airspeed. e +2
/ !,-Static h ad
1
First the pitot-static tube error must be found. '":ll
ec.
/V
(a) Tip error. From Fig. 3:5 it is seen that static orifices located 3.2D _ - --_ V
from the base of the tip will read 0.5 per cent q too low.
o
'E 0 V. -...... ~
r-Dyriamic head
(b) Stem error. From Fig. 3: 5 it is seen that static orifices located '"c ~ I-'""
<, ,,
~
8.0D from the stem will read 1.13 per cent q too high.
(e) Total error. The static pressure therefore will be 1.13 - 0.5 = 0.63
.s
g -2
<, \
\ \
Q)
per cent q too high, and hence the indicated dynamic pressure will be too ~c:
Q)
\
low. The data should be corrected as follows: u
Q;
a.. -4 ~
qtrue= 1.0063qindicated
~
Vtrue = 1.0032 Vindicated
-6
1. Accordingly the dynamic pressure will be 1.0063 x 12.05 inches of TOfal hefd- f.-\
water, or 12.13 inches of water. From the appendix this is 12.13 x 5.198
or 63.20 Ib/ft2.
4 8 12 16 20
2. The indicated airspeed is Degrees of yaw
Vi = .J63.20/0.00256 = 157.8 mph Fig. 3: 8 Performance of standard pitot tube in yaw.

96 J Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Instrumentation and Calibration of the Test Section / 97
Fig. 3: 9 Kiel tube.
0
r-,r-.... Fig. 3:11 A yawhead.
....c ~ smooth orifices usually 90 deg apart on the forward face of a sphere .
-4
Q)
(,,)
.... 1\ Obviously, if they are exactly placed, they will read equal pressure when
Q)
c. the flow is directed along the axis of the yawhead, or, alternatively, they
....-
g will read a fixed value of !:!p/q for each degree the flow is off center. The
Q) -8
"C calibration may be made by rotating the yawhead at a single location in
'"
Q)
the airstream and then plotting !:!p/q against angle of yaw. A second
-7
:§ and perhaps better method is to plot (Pa + Pb)/(Pa - Pb) against angle of
~ -12
yaw. The latter plot obviates the need for knowing the dynamic pressure
q in order to compute the flow direction.
-16 Theoretical and actual values of !:!p/q for a spherical yawhead are
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 compared in Fig. 3: 13. This calibration (for a l-inch-diameter yawhead)
Angle of yaw, degrees is independent of Reynolds number from at least 40 mph to 120 mph,
standard air.
Fig. 3: 10 Effect of yaw on Kiel tube.
3:4 Kiel Tubes

Kie1tubes (Fig. 3 :9) are total-head tubes so arranged that their accuracy
is unimpaired through wide variations in yaw angles (Fig. 3: 10). Inside
cowlings and in other places where the flow direction is uncertain, they
are useful in measuring the total head (Ref. 3: 14).
3:5 Stream Temperature
At low subsonic speeds the stream temperature may be read to close
enough limits simply by placing a thermometer in it at some place where
the disturbance it makes is of no consequence.
It is desirable to keep a record of the tunnel temperature on each run
since the Reynolds number varies widely with changes in temperature
(see Fig. 2: 22).
3:6 Flow Direction Fig. 3: 12 A typical yawhead, of the five-hole type. Such an installation is useful for
Flow-direction indicators of the weathervane type are in general not measuring yaw in both vertical and horizontal planes. (Courtesy Aerolab Development
Corp.)
as satisfactory as the sphere type (Figs. 3: 11 and 3: 12), which has two
-2.0 hard to miss reading total head. Normally is-inch brass tubing is em-
ployed with a lateral spacing of around t inch. It is particularly important
that the lateral spacing be exact, since when wake surveys (Section 4: 19)
are made a considerable error can arise from a small misplacement of a
tube. The total-head tubes should be cut off square, and their length is
immaterial. A typical rake is shown In Fig. 3: 14.
Wakes rapidly reach freestream static pressure, but frequently one
wants to make a few check points. Hence it is customary to find several
static tubes supplied along with the total-head tubes. These can be con-
veniently located out of the plane of the total-head tubes (by an inch or
so), but they very surely must be calibrated before their readings can be
accepted. Judicious filing on the hemispherical head with which they
must be equipped can reduce their error to zero. Rarely, a total-head
rake is provided with static-head tubes that slip over the total-head tubes
and convert the rake into a static rake. Though this is convenient, the
. 5
question of leaks is an uncertainty that
10 15 20 25
Angle of yaw, 1/1, deg
must be constantly checked .
Static-pressure rakes are seriously affected
Fig. 3: 13 Calibration of yawhead. by the rake body and require a considerable
amount of calibration and adjustment be-
From Fig. 3: 13 it may be rightly inferred that a total-head orifice at ~he fore they can be used. Usually the rake
front of the yawhead sphere will read true for only small flow deflection body makes the static readings high, and
angles. Indeed, at S-deg yaw the total-head reading is down 1.2 per cent. by shortening the tip-static-orifice distance
the error can be eliminated. Krause in
3:7 Rakes Ref. 3: 18 discusses rake design parameters
which yield the minimum static-pressure 5~"
A bank of total-head tubes is frequently employed to get many simul-
error.
taneous total-head readings in, say, a wake, and less frequently ~ ban~ ~f
static tubes is needed. The total-head rake is easy to make SInce It IS 3:8 Boundary Layer Mouse
The boundary layer mouse (Fig. 3: IS) is
a bank of flat total-head tubes arranged to
read the total head in several places very Static
close to a surface (Ref. 3: 13). It is used to orifice
locate the point of transition from laminar
to turbulent boundary layer and to investi-
l\!6 diamete~
gate boundary layer thickness. The opera-
Flat total
tion of the mouse is as follows:
The type of boundary layer flow existing
head tUbesh _t
at some point on an airfoil may be deter- I. g g gAdj~eJ1
mined from the velocity gradient in the tube height
Fig. 3: 14 A total-head rake. Note single static-pressure tube. (Courtesy Aerolab

boundary layer. Gradients for laminar and
Fig. 3: 15 A boundary layer
Development Corp.) turbulent boundary layers appear in Fig. mouse.
100 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Instrumentation and Calibration of the Test Section / 101
0.10 r------,------.-----.,------,,....---~
I
I I
I I
0.08 f------+----+------f----4-+-'--j-' , ___,t-l
0
Per cent chord
6
,,
I
0 11
21
'"
v 31
+ 36
x 46
--- Laminar flow
- - - - Turbulent flow
Per cent freestream velocity
Fig. 3: 16 Velocity distribution in laminar and turbulent boundary layers.
3: 16. The mouse is first attached to the wing (Scotch cellophane tape will
do) near the leading edge with the total-head tubes adjusted to be in the
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
boundary layer. Readings of the four total heads and one static head are
Local velocity in boundary layer
taken, and, since the static pressure is essentially constant across the Local velocity outside boundary layer
boundary layer, the four velocities may be calculated. The mouse is then
Fig. 3: 17
moved to points farther back on the wing and the process is repeated,
yielding a plot similar to Fig. 3: 17. A cross plot of Fig. 3: 17 yields
Fig. 3: 18, the velocity in the boundary layer at a constant height above ,
/
.1. 1
Transition region
the surface. The interpretation of Fig. 3: 18 is that as the flow progresses
.1
along the wing the boundary layer thickens, and points at constant height
become progressively deeper in the boundary layer and hence have slower \. :..L ...._
velocities. Finally the transition region is reached; the thickened bound-
ary layer is scrubbed off by the turbulent air, and the point returns to a -, /
higher velocity. Figure 3: 18 indicates that, in the example graphed
above, transition took place about the 18 per cent chord point. It will
be noticed that the change from laminar to turbulent flow occurs in a
region rather than at a point. The length of this region increases with
Reynolds number. 20 40 60 80
Many methods are in use to determine the location of the transition Distance from leading edge, per cent chord
region. They include: Fig. 3: 18 The velocity in the boundary layer at a constant small height above the
surface ..
1. Plotting the velocity gradient in the boundary layer and determining
whether the flow is laminar or turbulent by the slope of the gradient.
,
104- I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Instrumentation and Calibration of the Test Section I 105
j
cp ~
cp
II I I I I I I I I I II cp
41
4J
II I I I I I I I I I II cp cp
cp
II I I I I I I I I I II 41, cp
'I A B C
Fig. 3:20 Methods of attaching tufts. Only A is suitable for high-speed work.
is illustrated in Fig. 3 :21. This type of setup may not be photographed

with the usual high shutter speeds because the movement of the tufts that
results from unsteady flow would not be apparent. However, at 5\ sec the
moving tufts show up blurred, and the stall progress may be noted. Addi-
tional visual observations are usually in order to establish the advent of
unsteady flow, intermittent stall, and full stall.
A m~re detailed stall study than that shown in Fig. 3 :21, usually drawn Fig. 3: 22 A tuft grid installation. (Courtesy Wichita State University.)
for a single angle of attack, would show flow direction by arrows, rough
flow by wiggly arrows, intermittent stall by circled crosses, and full stall proximity of the investigator disturbing the flow. If this necessitates the
by crosses. operator's entering the tunnel, goggles are needed. Although his appear-
A. streamer may also be of use mounted at the end of a fishpole so that ance is a bit silly, a particle of dust in his eye at 60 to 100 mph is no
vortices and roughness may be traced about the model without the laughing matter.
Still another kind of tuft for flow visualization is the tufted wire grid
developed by Bird at the NACA. Its construction is illustrated in Fig.
3 :23. Much of its use has been concerned with checking the theories for
the roll-up of the vortices of various wing platforms (Figs. 3: 22 and 3: 23).
Several chemicals, for example titanium tetrachloride and tin tetra-
chloride, will produce smoke when brought into contact with damp air,
but both compounds are corrosive. Smoke bombs and candles may be
obtained from the Armed Services, but these are hard to control. Most
tunnel operators use the smoke from heated kerosene, rotten wood, or
smouldering paper. Reference 3: 22 warns of the necessity of providing
ample ventilation when smoke which produces carbon monoxide is used,
since a concentration of 0.4 per cent is fatal after less than one hour's
exposure.
Fig. 3 :21 Typical stall pattern. Note stall beginning at wing root so that ailerons The Fales method consists of mounting a half model (split through
remain effective.
the plane of symmetry) on a glass plate and lightly coating both plate and
model with a mixture of lampblack and kerosene. The air flow spreads
the mixture along the streamlines so that after the tunnel has been stopped
the flow pattern remains. Good pictures can then be made of the flow
pattern, and if the lampblack is spread sufficiently thin, only a minimum
will be blown into the tunnel. Another good method is to spray the model
with fluorescent oil before a run and then examine the flow pattern
afterwards under ultraviolet light, perhaps using color film.
A good oil mixture may be made as follows:
3 quarts of S.A.E. 30 wt. oil,
1 quart of S.A.E. 500 to 600 wt. gear oil,
4 tablespoons Dow Corning mold release,
3 tablespoons kerosene,
5 tablespoons CH. 185 per cent fluorescent green dye.
A further summary of flow visualization techniques is in Ref. 3: 20. An
oil flow photograph is shown in Fig. 3 :24.
Having discussed the instruments needed for flow measurements, we
now turn to the procedure followed when a new tunnel is put into use,
both to determine the excellence of the flow and to correct the flow if it
Fig. 3: 24 A flow study using the oil flow technique. (Courtesy Beech Aircraft Corp.)
is not up to standard. Finally the tunnel engineer measures the energy

ratio to compare with the assumptions made during the design for his
own satisfaction and for correlation with future designs. First, however,
we will look at the manner in which the speed is set in a low-velocity
wind tunnel. .
3 :10 Speed Setting

It is not practical to insert a pitot-static tube (see Section 3 :3) into the
tunnel jet when there is a model in place because (1) it would interfere
with the model, and (2) it would not read true owing to the effect of the
model on it.
The solution comes from a consideration of Bernoulli's equation
written between two points in the tunnel, preferably the large section, L,
and a small section, S. The small section Can be just ahead of the jet, far
enough upstream to avoid any effect; when the model is installed or moved
(Fig. 3 :25).
The total head at the two points will be nearly the same; the down-
stream head will be slightly smaller because of the pressure drop between
I Fig. 3: 23 Flow visualization by the grid-and-tuft method. (Official photograph
the two stations. Hence we have
National Aeronautics and Space Administration.) PL + qL = Ps - qSKl + qs
·1
r
'I
dynamic pressure used should be noted on the data sheet, or else the speed
that would produce that dynamic pressure at sea level, i.e., the "equivalent
airspeed," should be stated.
Each of the above-mentioned piezometer rings may conveniently have
four orifices teed together, as the disturbances caused by a lifting model
then tends to cancel out. The rings at the front of the test section may
be double, each independent of the other. One ring is needed as ex-
plained above for the speed setting; the second can be used as a static
reference for the manometers and a ready check on the first.
The calibration of a closed throat will not sufficeif the walls are removed
to make an open throat, since the airstream without boundary will expand
and develop a lower speed. Measurements of this effect indicate that a
Fig. 3:25 free jet expands almost exactly at a l O-deg cone angle in the low-speed
range. The expansion increases to about 15 deg with jet exhausts.
where Kl is the loss.coefficient of. the section between the static readings,
3:11 Velocity Variation in the Jet
and P and q are static and dynamic pressures. That is,
The variation of the dynamic pressure, q = (pj2) V2, may be measured
PL - Ps '7' qs - K1qs - qL across the test section by means of a pitot-static tube. The local velocities
Now, if A is the section area, may then be obtained from
I (3:2)
AsVs = ALVL
i. The following paragraphs will discuss the methods of making the survey
Squaring, and multiplying through by p/2, we have
and presenting the results. Suggestions are also made for improving a
(p/2)As2VS2 = (p/2)AL2VL2 poor velocity distribution. .
For the velocity survey the pitot-static tube is moved around the jet,
Letting q = (p/2)V2, and K2 = AS2/AL2, we get qL = K2qs. This leads to
and the dynamic pressure is measured at numerous stations. The velocities
PL - Ps =qs - K1qs - K2qs = (1 - Kl - K2)qs as calculated from the dynamic pressures or the pressures themselves are
Also, since then plotted, and the points are connected by "contour" lines of equal
values. The variation of q in the working range of the jet should be less
than 0.50 per cent from the mean, which is a 0.25 per cent variation in
velocity.
PL - Ps = (1 - Kl - K2)K3qJ (3:1)
A plot of the dynamic pressure distribution in a rectangular test section
The tunnel can be run at various speeds, and (PL - qs) can be read is shown in Fig. 3: 26. Of interest is the asymmetry usually found, and
a~ong wi~h the je.t dynamic pressure q J. (The last is read by means of a the maximum variation well above satisfactory limits. The survey should
Pltot-statl~ tube m the empty jet.) This evaluates (1 - Kl - K2)K3, and have been carried to the walls. '
future desired values of qJ can be set by running at the proper value of The correction of an excessive velocity variation is not as serious a
(PL - Ps)· The effect of the presence of a model on the clear jet calibration problem as the correction of excessive angular variation. There are more
may be found in Chapter 6. methods of attack, for one thing, and less probability that the variation
Since the model loads vary only slightly with small changes of Reynolds will change with tunnel speed, for another.
number, but directly with q, it is much preferable to run at constant It is not correct to think of the tunnel as having uniform flow. The
dyna~ic pressure rather than at constant velocity.. This is accomplished by same particles of air do not reappear in a plane of the testing section. '
operating at constant values of (PL - Ps) (see eq. (3: 1)). The constant Slowed by the wall friction, the particles closest to the walls are constantly
r
110 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Instrumentation and Calibration of the Test Section I 111
Tunnel wall 100
I
I
80 I\
lG
J:
U
.s
..: 60
8
;;:::
,\
I -,
~out
..
screens
20
I f- With screens
r. r-,
I) L)
/ L---
a
-1 o +1 +2 +3 +4
Dynamic- pressure variation, per cent
E22Z3 Less than 0.5% from mean. lSS'S3 1.0 to 1.5 % from mean.
c=:::J 0.5 to 1.0% from mean. ~ 1.5 to 2.0% from mean. Fig. 3: 27 Effect of screens on velocity distribution in the jet.
Fig. 3:26
in the lower part of the tunnel tended to make a high-velocity region
over the lower part of the jet; (2) the abrupt expansion at the exit cone
being overtaken and passed by the particles of the central air. The greater decreased the energy of the air in the lower part of the tunnel. Actually
loss near the walls would be expected to yield a lowered velocity near the the abrupt expansion resulted in severe turbulence and complete mixing,
perimeter of the test section, and doubtless this would occur if the con- instead of affecting only the lower half. The tunnel energy ratio dropped
traction cone did not tend to remove such irregularities. from 3.2 to 0.7. The velocity distribution showed a higher-speed region
If satisfactory velocity distribution is not obtained, there still remain
several minor adjustments for improving the situation, The guide vanes
may be adjusted * to move added air into theIow-velocity regions. If
the velocity variation is annular, a change of the propeller blade angle
accompanied by a change in propeller hub fairing diameter may be tried.
Screens may be added in the largest section of the tunnel, so located
radially that they cover the sections that correspond to high-velocity
regions in the jet. The improvement in velocity distribution by such
screens is shown in Fig. 3 :27. The loss in energy ratio they cause is quite
small and is far outweighed by the improvement in testing conditions.
Profound changes in flow near the walls can also be made by altering
the entrance cone; an interesting example is shown in Figs. 3: 28 and
3:29. For a special test a round jet was constricted into a semicircular
one. Two opposite effects then occurred: (1) the constriction of the air
* This method is very uncertain, unpredictable, and tedious. Fig. 3: 28 Alteration to a contraction cone.
70 near the jet floor. A change in with a variation greater than ±0.50 deg. The larger angles of flow distort
}, the shape of the entrance cone the span load distribution excessively. Unfortunately, the variation of
I (shown dotted in Fig. 3 :28) altered the flow angle across the jet may change with the tunnel speed. If such a
60 the velocity survey from the original change is noted, a testing speed must be selected and the guide and anti-
I (shown solid in Fig. 3: 29) to the twist vanes adjusted to give smooth flow at that speed.
~, dotted curve. The latter proved to be If it is not possible to correct the angularity to a satisfactorily small
li'l 50 satisfactory -. value, an average value for a given model may be found by measuring the
s: <
(.)
original_\
flow angle at numerous stations and multiplying it by the model chord at
.s
condition the proper station. If the above product is plotted against the wing span
i I 3: 12 Longitudinal Static-Pressure
,g 40 and the area under the curve is divided by the total area, the resultant
Qj /
I Gradient
c:
c:
will be a fair approximation of the average angle.
.a The static-pressure gradient along In conclusion, poor angularity shows up worse during pitching-moment
~ 30 the test section must be known in tests of large swept reflection plane models, since the area being subjected
OJ
(.) order to make the necessary buoyancy to twisted flow may be at a very great lever arm from the balance trunnion.
c:
~ corrections. (See Sections 6: 3 and Under such conditions it is easy to develop a Cm\.1 value of 0.05 at zero
o 20 6: 9.) It may be obtained by reading lift with only 0.5 deg angularity.
the local static pressure with a pitot-
With fairing-....
r\ static tube that is progressively moved
from entrance cone to exit cone.
3 :14 Turbulence
10 The disagreement between tests made in different wind tunnels at the
o
-6.---
I) Care must be taken that the pitot
tube is headed directly into the wind
and that no extraneous static pressure
same Reynolds number and between tests made in wind tunnels and in
flight indicated that some correction was needed for the effect of the
turbulence produced in the wind tunnel by the propeller, the guide vanes,
-8.0 -4.0 o is created by the bracket holding
Variation in .
+4.0 and the vibration of the tunnel walls. It developed that this turbulence
dynamic pressure, per cent the pitot tube. caused the flow pattern in the tunnel to be similar to the flow pattern in
Fig. 3:29 Velocity gradient due to Perhaps a more convenient method free air at a higher Reynolds number. Hence the tunnel test Reynolds
alteration. is to mount a static pipe along. number could be said to have a higher "effective Reynolds number." The
the tunnel center line. Static orifices increase ratio is called the "turbulence factor" and is defined by
evenly spaced and arranged spirally along the pipe can be connected
RNe = TF x RN (3: 3)
to a multiple manometer for easy readout.
The turbulence may be found with a "turbulence sphere" (Fig. 3: 30)
3:13 Angular Flow Variation in the Jet as follows:
The variation of flow angle in the jet of a wind tunnel may be measured The drag coefficient of a sphere is affected greatly by changes in
by a yawhead (Fig. 3: 9), either by holding the yawhead in a fixed plane velocity. Contrary to the layman's guess, CD for a sphere decreases with
and by measuring the pressures in opposite holes separately or by con-
necting the two orifices across a manometer and rotating the yawhead
until the pressure difference between the orifices is zero.
It is usually easiest to have the yawhead fixed in the tunnel and to
determine the flow angularity by reading the pressure difference between
the two orifices D.p and comparing with a previous calibration of the
instrument.
Though many wind tunnels exhibit an angular variation of ±0.75 deg
or even ± 1.0 deg, it is not believed that accurate testing can be done Fig. 3: 30 Turbulence sphere.
0.5 A second method of measuring the turbulence in a wind tunnel makes
,
, use ofa "pressure sphere." No force tests are necessary, and the difficulties
""" of finding the support drag are eliminated. The pressure sphere (an
0.4 ~ ordinary duckpin ball will do) has an orifice at the front stagnation point
Q"'l_
-s
c:
'"
~ 0.3
------- ------- 1\ and four more interconnected and equally spaced orifices at 22t deg from
the theoretical rear stagnation point. A lead from the front orifice is
connected across a manometer to the lead from the four rear orifices.
o
bO
~
!\t\ After the pressure difference due to. the static longitudinal pressure gradi-
ent is subtracted, the resultant pressure difference, t1p, for each Reynolds
0.2 number is divided by the dynamic pressure for the appropriate RN, and
<;
'C
'"
.~
.c: the quotient is plotted against RN (Fig. 3: 32). It has been found that
a.
,en the pressure difference t1p(q is 1.22 when the sphere drag coefficient CD
0.1 is 0.30, and hence this value of t1p(q determines the critical RN. The
Critical ReynOld~o~ turbulence factor may then be determined as before.
=
number 336,000 I
In all probability the turbulence factor will itself change slightly with
I I
tunnel speed. If information on this variation is needed, it may be ob-
3 X 105 4 X 105
tained by finding the turbulence factor with spheres of several different
Reynolds number of sphere
diameters.
Fig. 3 :.31 It is preferable to obtain the turbulence of a tunnel at the speed to be
used for testing. This means that the sphere used must be the proper
increasing airspeed since the result of the earlier transition to turbulent size so that the critical Reynolds number occurs at the right speed. If
flow is that the air sticks longer to the surface of the sphere. This action a rough estimate can be made of the expected turbulence, Fig. 3 :33 will
decreases the form or pressure drag, yielding a lower total drag coefficient. be of assistance in determining the proper size of the sphere. All turbulence
The decrease is so rapid in one range that both the drag coefficient and the spheres must be absolutely smooth to be successful.
drag go down. Obviously, the Reynolds number at which the transition The turbulence will".also vary slightly across the jet and probably
occurs at a given point on the sphere is a function of the turbulence diminish as the distance from the entrance cone is increased. Particularly
already present in the air, and hence the drag coefficient of a sphere can
be used to measure turbulence. The method is to measure the drag, D,
-
1.4
for a small sphere 5 or 6 inches in diameter, at many tunnel speeds. After
subtracting the buoyancy (see Section 6: 9) we may compute the drag
coefficient from 1.2
------- ------- -------
I'\~p = 1.22
b
c - D
D - (p(2)7T(d2(4)V2
(3:4)
1\
where d = sphere diameter. Q
The sphere drag coefficient is then plotted against the calculated

Reynolds number, RN (Fig. 3: 31), and the Reynolds number at which
the drag coefficient equals 0.30 is noted and termed the "critical Reynolds
1.0
o.s
I
I
I
I
I
I
-,
number," RNc• The above particular value of the drag coefficient occurs Critical ReYnolds)\
number = 299,000
in free air at an RN = 385,000, so _9: follows that the turbulence factor I I
0.6
TF = 385,000(RNc (3:5) 1x 105 z x 105
Reynolds number
The effective Reynolds number, RN., may then be found from eq. (3: 3). Fig. 3:32
8~~--r---~-----,-----, 2.4
~
10
II
~::s.
6 2.0 L
en
Q)
.s:
(,)
.5 4
..:
.2!
1.6
v
/
/
Q)
E
.!!!
-c
~ 2
V
Q)
x:
CI.
C/)
0.8
/
V
90 130 170 210
Testing velocity, mph (true)
Fig. 3:33 /
high turbulence is usually noted at the center of the jet of double-return

tunnels because this air has scraped over the walls in the return
passage.
0.4
D.
o
,V
1.0 I,I 1.4 1.8 2.2 2.6 3.0
Turbulence factor
Turbulence factors vary from 1.0 to about 3.0. A value of 1.1 is not
Fig. 3: 34 The variation of the turbulence factor with turbulence.
difficult to obtain, and values above 1.4 probably indicate that the tunnel
has too much turbulence for reliable testing. Alth~ugh it appears ~rom If, after a tunnel has been built, the turbulence is still above a satis-
the above discussion on turbulence factors that high turbulence YIelds factory level (TF = 1.7 for small student tunnels and 1.4 for 7 by 10 ft
high effective Reynolds numbers, the truth is that the correction is not low-speed tunnels) damping screens will reduce the intensity of turbulence
exact and that excessive turbulence makes the test data difficult to according to the relation
interpret. Certainly very low turbulence is necessary for research on low- Ua'/U1' = 1/(1 + k)n/2 (3:6)
drag airfoils. The relation of the turbulence factor to the degree of turbu-
lence present is shown' in Fig. 3: 34. . V )
where 1 and 3 refer to stations ahead of and behind the damping screens;
U' is the root mean square of the velocity fluctuations u, V, and w; n .is
Low turbulence may be designed into a tunnel by using the maximum .
number of fan blades and anti-swirl vanes with a very long, gradual the number of screens; and k is the pressure drop through one screen In
units of dynamic pressure (see Fig. 3: 35). Equation (3: 6) is from the
nacelle, and by providing the maximum distance between propeller and
test section. work of Dryden and Schllbau~r.~s reported in Ref. 3: 8. It should also be
stated that station 3 is sufficiently far downstream (several feet) so that
A large contraction ratio does not (as previously believed) in itself
the turbulence caused by the screens themselves has time to da~p out.
reduce the turbulence. Usually it reduces the longitudinal component
The spacing between screens, incidentally, seems to make no difference
and increases the lateral components so that the net reduction, if any, is
small. But a large, contraction ratio inherently means a longer path from as long as they do not.touch, Also see Ref. 3: 21. . .
The cost of screen drag is appreciable in almost all installations,
fan to test section, as well as from the last set of corner vanes, so that the
rurining from 5 to 20 per cent of the total tunne~ power, and ~heir.use
large contraction ratio and low turbulence are associated through the
greater time for turbulence to damp out. As will be seen, a large con- should be avoided when cleaning up the tunnel WIlldo the required Job.
traction ratio does provide a low-velocity location in which damping Example 3:3 A wind tunnel with a contraction ratio of 5.0 has a
screens may be installed with the smallest loss. turbulence factor of 1.7. What turbulence would be expected if two
G.O tunnel is given in Table 3: 2. Although indicated turbulence factors above

5.0 may be obtained, the more general practice is to use artifices that
GO-mesh lcreen, 0.oh7-in wire
raise the turbulence factors only to about 2.5. These arrangements are
5.0
-, used solely for maximum lift measurements. (For methods of using the tur-
<,
<,<, bulence factor and effective Reynolds number in extrapolating wind

tunnel results, see Chapter 7.)
~
..,;- 4.0
c
Q)
'0
:E
o
Q)
. - The explanation of how the addition of screens may either increase or
decrease the turbulence lies in the manner in which the screens act. Fine
screens break the existing turbulence into smaller vortices. If a sufficient
--- ---
~ 3.0 distance is provided, these small disturbances die out before they reach
e
'0
20-mesh screen, 0.017-in. wire the model. Screens or grids to increase turbulence must both create
I
~ turbulence and be close enough to the model so that the turbulence

" t---
~'" 2.0 created does not have time to die out.
ct
Below the degree of turbulence that corresponds to a turbulence factor
18-mesh screen, O.Oll-in. wire of about 1.05 and above Mach numbers of 0.35, it is indicated that the
1.0 I .~_
24-mesh screen, 0.OO75-in.wire - turbulence sphere is not sufficiently accurate to get good results. Recourse
is then to more complicated devices. Though the design and operation of
these devices are beyond the scope of this book, their principles are of
o I I I interest. Further information is available in the references listed.
o 4 8 12 16 20
Velocity in settling chamber, ft per sec
1. The hot-wire anemometer (Refs. 3: 2, 3: 3, 3: 4). The hot-wire ane-
mometer consists of a small-diameter platinum wire (about 0.015 mm)
'Fig. 3: 35 Pressure-drop coefficients for several screen sizes. of short length (about 10 mm) which is placed in the airstream so that
its length is perpendicular to the mean airflow direction. It is heated to a
house screens (I8-mesh O.Oll-inch wire) are installed in the settling suitable temperature by an electric current. Fluctuations in the airstream
chamber, and what will be the loss of power? Assume an atmospheric produce fluctuations -in the temperature of the wire and hence in its
test section at 100 ft per sec. resistance. The ensuing voltage drops across the wire may be amplified
1. From Fig. 3 :34 a turbulence factor of 1.7 corresponds to 0.85 per by vacuum-tube amplifiers, and mean values of the current changes may
cent turbulence. From Fig. 3: 35, k for an 18-mesh screen at 20 ft per sec be read by sensitive milliammeters. Sometimes the wave patterns are
is 0.842. examined with cathode-ray oscillographs.
2. From eq. (3: 6) Fundamentally, the hot-wire anemometer is supposed to indicate the
rapidity of the fluctuations by an identical frequency of current changes,
U3' JUI' = 1j(1 + 0.842)%'= 0.533 and the amplitude of the fluctuations by the amount of current change.
3. Us' = 0.0085 x 0.533 = 0.00453. From Fig. 3 :35 the new turbu- Actually, neither is directly accomplished, the fluctuating voltage of the
lence factor will be 1.37.
4. The drag per square foot of screen will be 0.842q, or 0.400 1b/ft2 for Table 3: 2 Effect of Grids 8 Inches Ahead
20 ftjsec, and the power loss will be 0.400 X 20 = 8 ft-lb/ft" for one of Model on Turbulence
screen, 16 ft/lb/ft2 for two. In a 7 by 10 ft tunnel with a contraction ratio Tunnel Condition Turbulence Factor
of 5.0 this corresponds to 16 x 350/550 = 10.4 hp at the low speed of
100 ft/sec. This loss would increase with the cube of the speed. Clear jet 1.60
Sometimes, particularly for measurements of maximum lift, it is desir- i-inch hardware cloth 2.24
able to increase the turbulence, and for this purpose hardware cloth is t-inch hardware cloth 2.46
probably the most satisfactory. The amount of turbulence change in one i-inch hardware cloth 3.00
Instrumentation and Calibration of the Test Section / 121
anemometer being neither proportional to the amplitude nor in phase
with the fluctuations in the airstream. Most of the difficulties are trace-
able to the heat-storing qualities of the wire, which make it impossible for
the temperature changes of the wire to follow the small high-frequency
variations in the air. As would be expected, smaller wires exhibit less lag
than large ones. Special compensating circuits further improve the
accuracy of the anemometer. A rough idea of the size of the equipment
needed to operate a hot-wire anemometer may be obtained from Fig.
3: 36, and a typical installation is shown in Fig. 3: 37.
2. The ultramicroscope (Ref. 3: 5). A second device for determining
the amount of variation of velocity in an airstream is called the ultra-
microscope. Its principle of operation is as follows:
When viewed by an observer traveling at the speed of an airstream,
particles of dust appear as specks of light. If the observer's speed is less
or greater than that of the airstream, the particles become invisible. The
ultramicroscope possesses a rotating objective so designed that the speed
of rotation may be varied in small increments both above and below the
Fig. 3: 37 A hot-wire anemometer is shown measuring the boundary layer flow on a

tail surface. (Courtesy Polymetron, Zurich.)
III
mean tunnel airspeed. The limiting speeds at which particles appear

define the maximum and minimum speeds present.
3 :15 Surging
One of the most vexatious problems a. tunnel engineer may have to
face is tunnel surging, a random low-frequency variation in velocity that
may run as high as 5 per cent of q. A surprisingly large number of tunnels
suffer from this defect at one time or another; some engineers live with
it; some find a cure.
Surging is ordinarily associated with separation and re-attachment in
the diffuser, and usually it can be cured (with a considerable loss of power)
by substantial tripper strips in the diffuser. One may, after a cure has
been found, successively cut back on tripper numbers and size to save
power. Better yet is some sort of boundary layer control which corrects
Fig. 3: 36 The operating equipment for a hot-wire anemometer. (Courtesy Georgia the difficulty rather than hides its effect. In one tunnel one of us had to
Institute of Technology.) resort to 2 by 4's on edge in order to stop a serious surge. In another,
122 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Instrumentation and Calibration of the Test Section f 123
a breather enlargement cured the trouble. Observations made by means this operation is not easy. Complete motor-performance curves make
of tufts on tunnel walls and floor in both tunnels easily showed where the possible the determination of ERI.
'flow was periodically detaching.
Example 3:4 A wind tunnel with a test section 7 ft by 10 ft has an
Surging makes trouble for all measurements. It makes the balances
indicated airspeed of 100 mph at a pressure of 740 mm Hg and a tem-
run wildly trying to keep up, confuses the pressure reference for pressure
perature of 85°F. If input power is 25 amperes at 2300 volts, three-phase
measurements, raises doubts as to the validity of assigning a Reynolds
alternating current at an electrical power factor of 1.0, find (1) the true
number to the test, and usually makes dynamic testing impossible.
airspeed; (2) the Reynolds number of a l-ft chord wing; (3) the input
Obviously, little surge is acceptable for high-grade work.
energy ratio (ERI) of the tunnel, assuming the drag of the wing to be
3:16. Energy Ratio negligible.
Answer. 1. We first determine the air density p.
The ratio of the energy of the air at the jet to the input energy is a
measure of the efficiency of a wind tunnel, though by no means a measure = 0.002378
518 740
of the value of the tunnel for research. It is nearly always greater than p (459 + 85) 760
unity, indicating that the amount of stored. energy in the windstream is = 0.002204 slug/ft3
capable of doing work at a high rate before being brought to rest. The (See p. 451 for standard conditions.) Hence
energy ratio, ER, is from 3 to 7 for most closed-throat tunnels. (1 = p/ Po = 0.927
It is unfortunate that an exact agreement on the definition of energy
ratio has not been reached. Some engineers use the motor and propeller and Vtrue = Vij-/-; = 100/0.962 = 103.9 mph
efficiency, 'fJ, in their calculations; some do not. This disagreement 2. From p. 451 the viscosity of the air
results in three definitions, as follows: /)-= [340.8 + 0.548CF)]10- 9
1. The tunnel energy ratio, based-on the tunnel losses

L
= [340.8 + 0.548(85)]10-9
= 387.4 X 10-9
ER = (qAV)t (3 :7)
t 550rJ bhp and hence RN = !!. Vl = 0.002204 x 103.9 x 1.467 x 1.0
fl 387.4 X 10-9
where q = dynamic pressure in the jet, Ib/ft2; A = jet area, ft2; V = = 868,000
jet velocity, ft/sec; 'Yf = fan efficiency; and the SUbscript t refers to the 3
test section. 3. ER = qAV = ipAV
2. The input energy ratio (for doc motors) f 550 hp 550 ../3 EI
746
ER = (qAV)t (3 8)
t(0.002204)(7 x 10)(1.467)3(103.9)3
I , 550EI/746 : =
550 X (1.732)(25)(2300)
where E = input voltage, I = input amperage.
746
3. The fan energy ratio
= 3.721
ER = (qAV)t (3:9)
I 550 bhp
Problems
The value of ERt is always greater than ERI, which is always greater
than ERI. From a practical standpoint ERI is by far the easiest to meas- 3':1 An alcohol-water mixture has a specific gravity of 0.802 at 23°C. Find
ure, since it entails only reading input meters. It sheds little light on the (a) the water content and (b) the specific gravity at 26°C.
efficiency of the tunnel design, however. Although theoretically one 3:2 Sketch a pitot-static tube, locating the orifice to read (a) total head, (b)
could measure the pressure rise through the fan to obtain ERt, in practice static head; (c) show the connections for reading dynamic pressure.
124 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Instrumentation and Calibration of the Test Section J 125
3:3 Assuming the critical Reynolds number of a sphere to be 235,000, find the 3: 19 R. J. Volluz, Wind Tunnel Instrumentation and Operation, NA VORD Report
turbulence factor of the tunnel. 1488, Volume 6, January, 1961.
3:20 R. L. Maltby and R. F. A. Keating, Flow Visualization in Low-Speed Wind
3:4 A tunnel using 200 hp has a 10-ft-diameter round jet which is at standard
Tunnels: Current British Practice, RAE TN Aero 2715,1960.
atmospheric conditions. Find the energy ratio ER, if a speed of 100 mph
3 :21 P. Bradshaw and D. H. Ferris, Measurements of Free-Stream Turbulence in
is attained. Some Low-Speed Wind Tunnels at NPL, NPL Aero Report 1001, January, 1962.
3:5 Does a turbulence sphere measure turbulence or the effect of turbulence? 3: 22 R. L. Maltby and G. Whitmore, Smoke for Flow Visualization-A Warning,
3:6 If the pressure head being measured during a test at 100 mph is too great JRAS 66,326, 1962.
for the manometer, which is inclined at 30 degrees, suggest three cures.
3:7 A 6-inch-diameter turbulence sphere has a drag coefficient of 0.3 at 75 mph
(true) in a wind tunnel with the jet at standard pressure and 100°F. Find
the turbulence factor.
References and Bibliography
3: 1 E. R. Spaulding and Kenneth G. Merriam, Comparative Tests of Pitot-Static

Tubes, TN 546, 1935.
3: 2 H. L. Dryden and A. M. Kuethe, Effect of Turbulence in Wind Tunnel Measure-
ments, TR 342, 1930.
3: 3 Robert C. Platt, Turbulence Factors of NACA Wind Tunnels as Determined
by Sphere Tests, TR 558, 1936.
3:4 F. L. Wattendorf and A. M. Kuethe, Investigations of Turbulent Flow by
Means of the Hot-Wire Anemometer, Physics, January-June, 1934.
3:5 L. F. G. Simmons, A. Fage, and H. C. H. Towend, Comparative Measurements
of Turbulence by Three Methods, R & M 1651, 1935.
3 :6 H. L. Dryden and A. M. Kuethe, The Measurement of Fluctuations of Air
Speed by the Hot-Wire Anemometer, TR 320, 1929.
3: 7 W. C. Mock, Jr. and H. L. Dryden, Improved Apparatus for the Measurement
of Fluctuations of Airspeed in Turbulent Flow, TR 448, 1932.
3: 8 H. L. Dryden and G. B. Schubauer, The Use of Damping Screens for the Reduc-
tion of Wind Tunnel Turbulence, JAS, April, 1947.
3:9 J. E. Allen and K. V. Diprose, Calibration of the Royal Aircraft Establishment
24-Foot Wind Tunnel, R & M 2566, 1951.
3:10 G. B. Schubauer, W. C. Spangenburg, and P. S. Klebanoff, Aerodynamic
Characteristics of Damping Screens, TN 2001, 1950.
3:11 Hugh L. Dryden and Ira H. Abbott, The Design of Low-Turbulence Wind
[ I
Tunnels, TR 940, 1949.
3: 12../"'William Gracey, Investigation of a Number of Total Pressure Tubes at High
Angles of Attack, TN 2331, 1950.
3: 13 Abe Silverstein, Determination of Boundary-Layer Transition on Three Sym-
metrical Airfoils in the NACA Full-Scale Wind Tunnel, TR 637,1.939.
3: 14 G. Kiel, A Total-Head Meter with Small Sensitivity to Yaw, TM 775, 1935.
3: 15 Sir Roy Fedden, German Laboratory Equipment for Aircraft and Power Plant
Development, Aeroplane, Feb. 15, 1946, p. 195.
3: 16 W. E. Gray, A Simple Method of Recording Boundary-Layer Transition, RAE
TN Aero 1816, 1946.
3: 17 J. H. Preston, Visualization of Boundary-Layer Flow, R & M2267, 1946.
3: 18 Lloyd N. Krause, Effects of Pressure Rake Design Parameters on Static Pressure
Measurements for Rakes Used in Subsonic Free Jets, TN 2520, 1951.
Model Force, Moment, and Pressure Measurements / 127
Chapter four
Model force, moment, and

pressure measurements
B
The purpose of the load measurements of the model is to make available
the forces; moments, and pressures so that they may be corrected for
tunnel boundary and scale effects (Chapters 6 and 7), and utilized in
predicting the performance of the full-scale airplane.
The loads may be obtained by any of three methods: (1) measuring
the actual forces and moments with a wind tunnel balance; (2) measuring Fig. 4: 1 Diagrammatic wind tunnel balance.
the effect that the model has on the airstream by wake surveys and tunnel-
wall pressures; or (3) measuring the pressure distribution over the model 1. Since the horizontal wires A, B, and F cannot transmit bending, the
by means of orifices connected to pressure gages. vertical force (the lift) - L = C + D + E.
These methods are considered in detail in the following sections. 2. The drag D = A +B.
3. The side force Y = F.
4:1 Balances 4. If there is no rolling moment, scales C and D will have equal readings.
A rolling moment will appear as RM = (C - D) x b/2.
Besides lift, drag, and pitching moment, the airplane is subjected to 5. Similarly, the yawing moment YM = (A - B) x bj2.
rolling moment, yawing moment, and side force. This makes a total of 6. The pitching moment M = E x c.
six measurements in all: three forces, mutually perpendicular, and three
moments about mutually perpendicular axes. The wind tunnel balance Exact perpendicularity between the components must be maintained.
must separate these forces and moments and accurately present the small F or instance, if the wire to scale F (Fig. 4: I) is not exactly perpendicular
differences in large forces, all without appreciable model deflection. Fur- to wires A and B, a component of the drag will appear (improperly, of
ther, the forces and moments vary widely in size. It is seen that the course) as side force. A similar situation exists in regard to lift and drag
I I halance becomes a problem that should not be deprecated; in fact, it might and lift and side force. Since the lift is the largest force by far in con-
I truthfully be said that the balance design is among the most trying ventional wind-tunnel work, extreme care should be taken to assure its
problems in the field. The cost of a balance reflects these difficulties, perpendicularity to the other components.
ranging from $60,000 for a simple balance for a 7 by 10 ft, I50-mph Before we proceed to more complicated balances, Fig. 4:1 should be
tunnel to $200,000 for a more complex apparatus for a larger tunnel. studied until a clear picture is obtained of the forces and moments to
In order to picture the situation most clearly, an impractical wire be measured.
balance based on readings made with spring scales is shown in Fig. 4: 1. Two fundamental types of balances are l~ general use: external bal-
The model, supposedly too heavy to be raised by the lift, is held by six ances, which carry the loads outside the tunnel before they are measured,
wires, and six forces are read by the scales A, B, C, D, E, and F. and internal balances, which fit into the models and are arranged to send
126
data out through electrical wires. * Both types have their advantages, and
few tunnels can get along with either one alone. D Lw
Four types of external balances are in general use, each possessing
certain advantages over the others. These balances are named from their
main load-carrying members-wire, platform, yoke, and pyramidal-and
are discussed in the following paragraphs.
4:2 Wire Balances
One approach to the problem of the wind tunnel balance is to support c
the model by wires whose loads are in turn measured by as many scales+
as necessary. The whole system is usually preloaded to assure adequate
tension in all members. Such an arrangement is called a wire balance.
An elementary one is outlined in Fig. 4: 2.
With wire balances, models are tested inverted so that their "lift" adds
to the weight. This precludes the chance of unloading the wires, which
could lead to large shock loads. As shown, the forces are brought up to
simple laboratory beam balances equipped with dashpots which must be
brought into equilibrium by individual operators, using weights. The 45·
balancing arrangement described above is satisfactory for student in-
struction, but the manpower cost would be prohibitive for commercial
work.
The wire balance shown in Fig. 4: 2 is called a six-component balance Tare weight
because it measures the three forces (lift, drag, and side force) and the
Fig.4:2 A six-component wire balance.
three moments (yaw, pitch, and roll). If C, E, and F were locked off,
this would become a three-component balance measuring lift, drag, and
pitching moment only. in existence has at one time or another broken a wire. Breakage of a wire
The mounting bracket shown in Fig. 4: 2 is by no means standard, can lead to loss of the model and other disastrous results.
Such arrangements are used only in the smallest tunnels, where very The particular balance shown in Fig. 4:2 mounts the models at the
small models preclude a satisfactory internal mount. Larger tunnels quarter chord. The results are read as follows:
usually mount to locations about halfway out the wing span. The 45-deg Lift = Lw + MF,
wire is used by some to get the drag force vertically into a beam balance.
Wire balances are probably the simplest and easiest to build, but they
Drag = D,
have several serious disadvantages. They have large tare drags that Side force = C + E + F,
cannot be accurately determined. The wires usually have a tendency Pitching moment = - M F X l,
toward crystallization and corrosion, and probably every wire balance Rolling moment = (C - F)(hj2),
'" Perhaps the amount of space given to the "old" type of external balance will seem Yawing moment = -Ex I,
odd to those wind tunnel engineers who rarely use theirs, especially in view of the fact
that to the authors' knowledge no company in the country is presently engaged in 4:3 Strut-Type Balances
building them. The fact remains that many engineers do use their external balances
daily, and somebody is going to have to build the balances needed for the new tunnels The simple balances discussed above are rarely used in the larger
currently projected. . tunnels because of the objections already mentioned. Instead they are
t Spring scales are not satisfactory because any deflection in the system may change replaced by many-ton strut-type balances which support the model, pro-
the model's angle of-attack or the location of the moment center of the balance.
vide for changing its angle of attack and angle of yaw, and transmit the
Model Force, Moment, and Pressure Measurements I 131
Lift, roll, and

pitch links
Model compensating weight
Fig .: 4: 3 Diagrammatic sketch (greatly simplified) of some balance components.
Fig. 4: 5 The massiveness of a wind tunnel balance is well illustrated by this photograph
of a balance designed for a I50-mph wind tunnel with a 9-ft-diameter test section.
During this early setup in the factory the load members have been dropped in place
without going through their respective windshield support bases. As shown, the balance
has approximately 45 deg negative yaw. (Courtesy Taller and Cooper Co.)
model loads down into a system of linkages that separate them into their
proper components. Such an apparatus is shown diagrammatically in
Fig. 4:3, and a linkage system is-shown in Fig. 4:4. The general massive-
ness of a balance structure may be seen in Fig. 4:5.
Tracing the pathway followed by the loads from model to measuring
unit (Fig. 4: 3), we see first the model is supported on two front load
members of "struts," and a tail strut. * The struts, in turn, connect to the
inner part of a floating ring frame that is free to turn (model yaw), and a
mechanism is provided to raise or lower the tail strut to' produce model
pitch. The outer part of the floating frame is held in place by a system of
struts that are specially designed to be strong in tension and compression
but very weak in bending. These struts separate the components of the
load by means of a linkage system and feed them into the measuring units.
Above the floating frame is a fairing turnable on which the windshields
1'1 * This is the most frequently used arrangement. Others are discussed in later pages.
Fig. 4: 4 A balance linkage. The lift linkage (not shown) is beneath the roll table.
130
132 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Model Force, Moment, and Pressure Measurements / 133
for the load members are mounted. The load turnable operates the fairing
turnable by dosing microswitches, and, as the fairing turnable rotates,
the windshields are gear-driven to remain parallel to the airstream -. In
some balances the tail-strut fairing is moved up and down to keep the
exposed length of tail strut always constant. The windshields are in
Flexure pivots
addition insulated, and upon contact with the load members they activate
fouling lights so that the trouble may be noted and corrected.
,
Thus a balance has three main identification features; the manner
(number of struts) by which the model is fastened to the floating frame,
I i the type of linkage system that separates the components, and the type of
I'
measuring unit. Normally the accuracy of a balance is a function of the
deflections permitted and the number of measuring units needed. to read
one component. Thus, if three lift readings must be added to get lift, the
error from measuring units alone may be three times that which Will
.occur if the three readings are added in the linkage system and fed into
one measuring unit. Linkages have no relative motion and are hence F
virtually frictionless.
The linkage system by which the force and moments are separated have
gradually worked into three* different fundamental types, each possessing c
some advantages over the others. These are named platform, yoke, and
..pyramidal, according to.the manner in which the main system is assembled.
They will be discussed further in the following paragraphs. In addition to
the above types of balances, there is also an internal type, which fits
into the model and is widely used in high-speed applications. (See Section B
4: 14.)
Fig. 4: 6 Platform balance
4:4 Platform Balance
The platform balance (Fig. 4: 6) utilizes either three or four legs to. also. have disadvantages: (1) the moments appear as small differences in
support the I?ain frame. For the three-legged type, the forces and moments large forces, an inherently poor arrangement; (2) the balance resolving
are: center is not at the model, and the pitching moments must be transferred;
Lift = -(A + B + C), and (3) the drag and side force loads put pitching and rolling moments
Drag = D + E, on the load ring. These interactions must be removed from the final data.
Side force = - F, 4:5 Yoke Balance
Rolling moment = (A - B)(1/2),
The yoke balance (Fig. 4: 7) offers an advantage over the platform
Yawing moment = (E - D)(1/2), balance in that moments are read about the model. However, the inherent
Pitching moment = C X m. design of the yoke leads to bigger deflections than the platform balance,
particularly in pitch and side force. Because the balance frame must span
Platform balances are widely used. Rugged and orthogonal, they the test section in order to get the two upper drag arms in their proper
may be constructed and aligned with a minimum of difficulty. But they positions, the yaw lever arm is exceptionally long. The high supporting
pillars are subject to large deflections. Once again the final forces must
* There are many others. be summed up: the drag is the addition of three forces, and the lift is the
134 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Model Force, Moment, and Pressure Measurements I 135
D These are the advantages: the pyramidal balance reads the moments
Resolving
center
about the resolving center, and the six components are inherently sepa-
rated and read directly by six measuring units. No components need be
Windstream
added, subtracted, or multiplied. The difficulties involved in reading the
small differences in large forces are eliminated, and direct reading of the
forces and moments simplifies the calculating equipment.
Several criticisms of the pyramidal balance are warranted. The align-
ment of the inclined struts is so critical that both the construction and the
calibration of the balance are greatly complicated. Further (and this
appears quite serious), deflections of the inclined struts. may so change
E their alignment that the moments are not accurate. This effect must be
thoroughly investigated during the calibration of the balance.
The manner in which the pyramidal balance separates the 'moments is
not simple, and it behooves the student to approach the setup using an
elementary truss system. Consider a truss in which two legs are jointed
(Fig. 4: 8). The force D, acting through the pin joint 0, produces only
tension in OE and compression in OF. No force is registered at A. How-
ever, the force G, not acting through 0, produces bending in OE, and
DE would collapse unless the force A = aG/b were present. If G and b
are known, the size of the force A determines the point of action of G.
In this manner, if G were a known drag force, its pitching moments about
the resolving center 0 would be determined by the force' A;
Fig.4:7 Yoke balance
.sum of two. The yoke balance brings out the pitching moment in the
drag/system instead of in the lift. For the yoke balance, the forces and
moments are:
Lift = + B),
-(A b
Drag =. C + D + E,
Side force ~ - F,
Rolling moment ee (13- A)(1/2),
Pitching moment = -Ex m,
Yawing moment = (D - C)(1/2).
4:6 Pyramidal Balance

The complaints usually heard against the platform and yoke balances
are largely-overcome by the ingenious engineering of the pyramidal type.
However, as usually happens, additional difficulties are added. Fig. 4:8
Table 4:1 Probable Maximum Coefficients
Developed by Complete or Partial Models"
CL +3.0, -1.4 Cn ±0.02

Cn +1.0, -0.1 Cl ±0.05
\ ' Cmcg -1.0, +0.4 ell ±O.3
\\
\
\
,,
I I
/ I/ \ '\ * Based on lifting area.
/
\
\ ,,
/ I/ \
\ ,, ,
/ A wind tunnel balance is an immensely complicated piece of apparatus,
/
/
I \
\ ,,
/
/
I \
\
f ,
,-, and its design and construction are much better left to balance engineers
/ I \ ,, than to tunnel engineers. Scarcely a wind tunnel exists that has not been
/ I
/
/
/
I \
\
\
,,, held back from use by exorbitant delays resulting from balance calibration,
/ ~---~ and sad indeed have been many many tunnel engineers who found that
/ they were saddled with research on balances rather than on airplanes.
/
/ Buy the balance, then, if it is at all possible, and insist that it be set up
/
and calibrated at the factory. If delays occur there, the tunnel is free for
additional calibration, pressure tests, tuft studies, and a host of other
problems particularly besetting a new tunnel.
D
Balance design starts with a demonstration of the maximum loads the
balance must measure, and the accuracy that is needed for the minimum
loads. These are not simple to determine. The loads and accuracies must
make allowance for every type of model ever to be tested in the tunnel,
and overestimation of maximum loads leads to less accuracy for minimum
Fig. 4: 9 Pyramidal or virtual center balance.
ones.
Table 4: I lists the maximum values of the coefficients that probably
Though the above example illustrates the principle of the pyramidal will be reached. If the values given in this table are used with wings or
balance, in actual practice a considerable revision is required. In order complete models having a span of 0.8 tunnel diameter, or panels having
to prevent the legs of the pyramid from being in the airstream, they are 0.7 tunnel height, and with the maximum dynamic pressure likely ever
cut off at what would be c in Fig. 4: 8. The truncated legs are then care- to be available in the tunnel, a group of design loads will result for the
fully aligned so that their extensions pass through a common point. The measuring (or "metrical") system. However, it should be noted that the
complete setup is illustrated in Fig. 4:9. The forces and moments are: loads as determined from Table 4: I are for forces and moments about
(
Lift = total weight on lowest table. the balance trunnion or resolving center. One must also consider the
activating load in respect to the whole balance system. Thus if a panel
Drag = b, 'has a 1000-lb sideload, which produces a 2000-ft-Ib rolling moment about
Side force = - C, the balance resolving center, the total applied moment tending to overturn
Pitching moment = - P x f, the balance could be (depending on the balance design) 1000lb times the
Rolling moment = R x f, distance to the floor.
The results of the maximum load and permissible accuracy are then
Yawing moment = Y X a.
combined into a loading table as shown in Table 4: 2.
4:7 Balance Design In addition to the loading table, ranges for the pitch and yaw angle
must be given. Pitch angle range will vary with the rearward distance of
We cannot begin a discussion of wind tunnel balance design without a
pitch strut from front struts but should in any event provide for ±40 deg.
note of warning to those who might undertake the job with little experience.
Table 4:2 Balance Design Loads and Accuracies for a 150-mph 9-ft-Diameter with the model to yield stability-axes data. (For this system the yaw axis
Test Section Wind Tunnel is not pitched with the model.) For transferring data from one set of axes
Accuracy to another, see Sections 4: 14 and 5: 11.
Total (Low Loads),
The desired accuracies are similarly attacked by first preparing a per-
Component -l-Load -Load Range lb or ft-Ib
missible error list from the aerodynamicist's viewpoint (Table 4: 3).
Lift,lb 1600 1600 3200 ±O.IO A critical maximum error condition may arise during power testing
Drag,lb 400 100 500 ±0.05 of complete models because the dynamic pressure of the tunnel may
Pitching moment, ft-lb 500 500 1000 ±0.20 then be unusually low.
Rolling moment, ft-lb 1200 1200 2400 ±0.125 Depending on the amount of money available, a number of accessories
Yawing moment, ft-lb 1200 1200 2400 ±0.125 may be incorporated that can materially reduce both the operating time
Side force, lb 800 800 1600 ±0.10
and the work-up. A number of balances, for instance, read six loads
For high loads an acuracy of 0.1 per cent will be requested. (The high side directly that must be worked into the desired three forces and three mo-
load is a provision for panel testing, not a complete-model load.) ments. Obviously, a linkage system that presents final loads is far pref-
erable, and usually more accurate. Many balances incorporate printers
Usually yaw from -40 d'eg to + 190 deg is allowed for. Two degrees so that all data are simultaneously printed when-the tunnel operator presses
per second is a good rate of change for both pitch and yaw. a button. This too is a great time-saver, although, since the printer might
Having the design loads, the balance engineer next selects a strut system, catch varying loads at the end of their swing instead of reading a mean,
a linkage system, and a type of measuring unit, and proceeds with the it is sometimes necessary to take several prints of each point, or else the
balance design. The very. subject would justify a book in itself: the size tunnel operator must monitor the visual indicators and then lock them
of drive motors, types of microswitches, optimum flexures-all these and out before printout. Since most low-speed, moderate-cost tunnels do
dozens more questions must be answered. not have "on-line" computing facilities, the use of a Flexowriter provides
Answered also must be the question what system of axes are to be the convenient automatic printout and tape punch at the same time. The
primary references. There are three choices: wind, body, or "stability." tape can later be converted to cards for use in computers (Fig. 4: 10).
Wind axes in wind tunnel parlance mean that the forces and moments are
measured about axes parallel and perpendicular to the wind tunnel
centerline, and almost all external balances use wind axes. Body axes
move with the airplane, and all internal balances (see Section 4: 14) have
body-axes references. A few external balances yaw the roll-reading linkage
Table 4:3 Permissible Measuring Errors in the Various Aerodynamic

Coefficients
The lafger of the two values giveo is in each case the acceptable one, but for ,
balance design requirements the actual loads should be figured using the
smallest model expected to be tested and the lowest dynamic pressure. In some
cases the tolerances can be relaxed somewhat.
Low Angle of Attack High Angle of Attack
Lift CL = ±0.001, or 0.1 % CL = ±0.002, or 0.25 %

Drag CD = ±0.0005, or 0.1 % CD = ±0.0020, or 0.25 %
Pitching moment Cm = ±0.001, or 0.1 % Cm = ±0.002, or 0.25 %
Yawing moment c, = ±0.0®11, or 0.1 % en = ±0.0010, or 0.25% Fig. 4: 10 Compact tunnel and balance console. The angle of attack, angle of yaw,
Rolling moment c, = ±0.001, or 0.1 % c, = ±0.002, or 0.25 % and force and moment counters are in the center panel for visual display. Data are
printed out on the Flexowriter shown at right. (Courtesy Georgia Institute of Tech-
Side force> Cy = ±0,001, or 0.1 % Cy = ±0.002, or 0.25%
nology.)
A remotely controlled weight that can be adjusted to make the model
center of gravity coincide with the balance trunnion is also convenient,
relieving the need for numerous gravity runs and the resultant extra
work-up. The cost of the model compensating weight may frequently be
made up in one program through elimination of this extra work. To give
an idea of the size of the gravity pitching moment for a typical uncom-
pensated model (7 by 10 ft tunnel size), it may be mentioned that an
increase of 10 to 20 ft-Ib may develop as the model is pitched from -8
to +20 deg. The above argument is almost negated if the data are to
be machine computed, since a large pitching moment may be subtracted
as easily as a small one.
D
4:8 Balance Installation
Fig. 4: 11 Balance loading tee. Weights added at A, B, or C should produce no drag
The balance installation is started by assuming a test section centerline or crosswind force, and a weight moved from E to F should produce no indicated change
and constructing a lateral axis perpendicular to it. Punch marks or a in drag.
wire mounting in floor or ceiling plus a recorded distance to the centerline
will suffice for the first, and the second, which later becomes a horizontal encountered, and applying fluctuating loads so that it can be determined
line through the eyes of the balance bayonets, will require wire guide holes. that the balance reads the mean.
Two more references are needed, since, when the loading device (called a All the above require considerable added equipment, and it is a good
tee) is installed, it will block wires along the basic references. These idea to make as much of it as possible permanent, since calibration checks
additional references are a lateral axis 6 or 8 inches ahead of the balance will be needed many times during the life of the balance. First in this
lateral axis, and another lateral axis 1 ft above the balance lateral axis. list comes a loading tee (Fig. 4: 11).
All these axes may be located. with a transit in the exit cone, and they This tee* provides knife-edge hooks such that cables may be attached
should be so marked and located that a single swing of the transit will to load yaw, .drag, and side force, and weights may be hung to simulate
pick them all up. Their locations must be accurate to 6~ inch. lift, roll, and pitch. The balance calibration can be no better than the
The balance is then brought in and installed, its orientation being such disposition of these hooks, a reasonable tolerance for their location
that a taut wire along the lateral balance axis goes exactly through the being 0.005 inch.
center of the eyes of the load members, and the 'If! = 0 axis is directly under The cables mentioned above must have accurately located pulleys
the test section centerline. Once this orientation is obtained, a permanent (usually about 16 inches in diameter) over which the load may be applied.
setting is employed. • The pulleys must be virtually free from deflection for the maximum loads.
r They should be set on pads so that they can be adjusted a small amount
4:9 Calibrating the Balance in all directions. The distance from the tee to the pulleys should be
II
I
Let us start by making clear the immensity of a wind tunnel balance enough to give good angular adjustment to the tunnel centerline, but not
calibration: with a competent crew the first calibration of a new balance enough to give appreciable dip to the loading cables: 8 to 12 ft is reason-
will take 3 months at least. This figure supposes that adequate shop able. It is of course desirable to load all six components in both their
facilities for all sorts of changes are available. positive and negative directions, but the difficulties of a scaffolding in the
Calibration embraces loading the elements of the balance to see whether entrance cone for applying negative drag and pulleys in the ceiling for
they read what they should, ascertaining the deflections of the setup, positive lift are such that they are sometimes neglected, the assumptions
loading the balance in combined cases that simulate the conglomeration being that the missing loads have the same characteristics as their missing
of loads {he model will put on it, loading with the balance yawed, meas- counterparts.
uring the natural frequency of the balance so that resonance will not be * Some "tees" are crosses, the extra leg being for loading negative pitch.
A set of calibrated weights will be needed; if it is decided not to buy
I
a full set, they may usually be borrowed from the local state highway o
Side force
department. A half dozen dial gages for measuring deflections will also Drag
be needed.
I-+---j
+
~
i---f- 1.61---+--+-+-+--1--+--+--1
Lift
The first step in the actual running of the balance is to check out the Pitching moment Z
f----::: 1.2I---+--+-+-+--t- --::;
./1.--"
_/...t£-H
Yawing moment I
measuring units to see whether they are operating properly. Next, x Rolling moment ~ 0.1%error line-\ /1-"'"' x
the dead weight of the balance must be balanced. Usually the beams I-I--I--.--.---.--+-- 9- O.S1----11--+--+ -';oJo<:::.._-t---:x=-+-"---t-_j
have lead containers built in, and the balancing takes only a few hours of ~ ./ V r
lead pouring. The pitch arm and the floating frame should also have 0.4 V x x
weights added until their centers of gravity are at the center of the balance. -1200 -SOO -400 ~~t~~~ x
When this occurs, no pitch reading arises when the arm is moved up or x+ i x xX+ "u. * ~ fl>y 400 SOO 1200
down, and no rolling or pitching moment reading is created by yawing r---i---; x
c
1 "'.......-0.4 1---+---, Applied force, Ib or ft-lb
lL._ r-
--+-1
the balance. + x x": +./V
After the check-out of the measuring units and the completion of the 1--I1--l---+-~.,j£C-l----+--1-0.S 1---+--+-+-+--1--+--+--1
dead-weight balancing, each component of the balance should be loaded [/V
to its maximum in fairly large increments to make certain that deflections ~--~~~--r--+---r--i-1.21---+--~--+---l~-+--~--r-I
are not excessive. Reasonable deflections in drag or side force for maxi- )-/
mum load are 0.05 inch for a 7 by 10 ft tunnel installation. If excessive --t-·--f---+---I--t--+-_j-1.61--J--+--f--+-+--t---H
1
deflections are present, they should be carefully located with the dial gages
and reduced to satisfactory limits. During this preliminary loading, sen- Fig. 4: 12 Plot of actual error versus applied load for the six force systems when each
component is loaded separately. The straight line indicates the maximum permissible
sitivity loads of O.llb may be added from time to time to make sure the error of 0.1 per cent of the applied load.
balance is not becoming sluggish with load. (Usually this is not a problem.)
Then comes single loading 'of each compound and adjusting of the
some yaw, and perhaps some negative roll. Gradually, as the weeks roll
balance "slopes." This operation is simple, consisting of loadings of each
by, a "feel" for the linkage will arise (actual calculations of how far
component separately, and checking linearity of reading, sensitivity, and
specific linkages should be moved on their adjustable pads will also be
failure to return to zero ("drift"). A chart with a 0.1 per cent error line
performed) as will a final feeling that the limit of accuracy of the balance
may be prepared to present the single load errors. (See Fig. 4: 12.)
is being approached. During this procedure the tunnel engineer will be
.We next come to the extremely arduous task of determining and elim-
everlastingly grateful if the balance design engineer has equipped each link
inating (as much as possible) the extraneous reading produced by mis-
with pads that are separately adjustable in each direction without dis-
alignment. By this we mean adjusting the balance linkages until the
turbing the other adjustments. Toward the end of the battle, adjustments
~ application of anyone particular load produces negligible readings in the
of 0.003 or 0.004 inch are considered large. *
other five components. * Sometimes braces are added to the mounting
Possibly a good procedure in determining when to give up trying to
struts to prevent deflections so that alignment can be more accurately
improve the alignment is to continue until the various extraneous readings
accomplished. When the interactions are minimized the braces are
change sign as the primary load is increased. This action indicates de-
removed and final calibration is made. Interactions still present are then
flections which, if they cannot be reduced, finally determine the limit of
due to deflections.
accuracy of the balance.
It is during this stage that the tunnel engineer usually learns that he
Complete freedom from interaction is probably not possible, especially
knows about one-tenth as much about taking moments as he thought he
since it is desirable to have interactions very small not only when the
knew. At first, 1000lb of, say, lift, will produce a few pounds of drag,
.r >I< It is a good idea to store the loading weights in a basket hung from the model
* There should be a pitch reading under pure drag load, since the deflection of the loading crane. This serves the double purpose of reducing the distance weights must
mounting struts allows the tee to produce a gravity moment about the trunnion. be moved during the loading process and of keeping the rather large total load off the
Similarly, side force will produce a roll reading. . balance platform, where it could cause extraneous deflections.
balance is subjected to one load but also when it has all the loads applied clear the impossibility of evaluating the total tare by the simple expedient
simultaneously. Thus a certain amount of combined loading is necessary. * of measuring the drag of the struts with the model out.
Here, to avoid an infinity of permutations, we may calculate reasonable The earliest attachments were by means of wires or streamline struts.
loads for a number of model types and flight conditions and see whether The ruling criterion was to add the smallest possible drag and then either
under each of these interactions are still small. Usually about six con- estimate it or neglect it. With the advent of the image system of evalu-
ditions are enough to examine for satisfactory assurance of accuracy. ating the tare and interference (Section 4: 18), wires became obsolescent;
When the alignment' procedure is finally stopped, all linkages should they were rarely adaptable for image tests and had the added hazard of
be pinned in place and a careful record made of the degree of misalignment occasionally failing as the result of crystallization.
remaining. Sooner or later a special test will come along when the accu- The mounting struts employed at first still tended toward the minimum
racies thought sufficient earlier prove to be inadequate, and the remaining drag criterion and were airfoil shape. Later, however, many mounting
extraneous components must be taken out in the work-up. struts of polygonal cross section were made. The idea behind this trend
was that the Reynolds number of the mounting struts would always be very
Table 4:4 Tabulations of Interactions for a Three-Component Balance low and they might therefore have not only a large drag but also a drag
that varied widely under minute changes (see Fig. 4: 13). Roughening the
Lift contains l.OOlL O.OOOD O.OOOPM leading edges of all struts is an excellent idea.
Drag contains O.OOOIL O.9990D O.00026PM Only a minimum of strut is exposed to the airstream, the remainder
Pitching moment contains -O.0018L O.OOOD l.016PM being shielded by fairings not attached to the balance. In this way the
tare drag of the mounting is decreased, sometimes being only 50 per cent
of the minimum drag of an average wing. It is not advisable to try to
A good way to record the interactions is in the form of table (as in
decrease the tare drag of the "bayonets" by continuing the windshields
Table 4: 4) so that a rapid check may be made at any time to see whether
up close to the model because a fairing close to the model can increase the
special work-up is required. With most balances, interaction attention
interference effects more than it decreases the tare. The proper balance
is very rarely needed. Estimated values of L, D, and PM may be sub-
between amount of exposed strut and proximity of the windshield to the
stituted and summed to get the total error produced by interactions.
model may be found by having adjustable sleeves at the windshield top.
The tee may now be removed, and possibly the removal of its great
The sleeve location at which CdO min for model plus tare and interference
weight will change the stability characteristics of the balance so that the
is a minimum is the best, since this indicates that the tare plus interference
response and damping may need changes.
is a minimum too .
.4:10 Mounting the Model
Any strut or wire. connecting the model to the balance will add three 1.5
Circular Cylinder\
quantities to the forces read. The first is the obvious drag of the exposed
strut or wire; the second is the effect of the strut's presence on the free
Q"'l .....
1:"' 1.0 b 1"\
air flow about the model; and the third is the effect of the model on the Q)
free air flow about the strut. The last two items are usually lumped ~
Q) ~
o ~SPhere
together under the term "interference," and their existence should make u
bD 0.5
co
. * L?ading w~th the balance ya~ed may be considered part of the interaction procedure,
(5 1\ j...--
'smce It.determmes ~hether yawmg the balance puts extraneous loads into the system. r-..
The pomt about which the balance takes moments is the balance resolving center; the
point about .which the model is yawed and pitched is called the trunnion. Obviously 105
these two pomts should be one and the same, but unfortunately sometimes they are not. Reynolds number
When they do differ, the amount of error introduced should be carefully studied, and
if of consequence, it must be incorporated in the work-up of the data or otherwise Fig. 4: 13 The variation of the drag coefficient of circular cylinders and spheres with
Jremoved. Reynolds number.
Some balances yaw the model support struts oppositely to the model,
so that the struts always remain parallel to the airstream and hence con-
tribute the smallest possible effect when the model is yawed. Another
useful arrangement is to have several sets of supports of varying size
from which the smallest can be selected according to the load range.
One feature sometimes considered necessary for the ordinary support
system is a cloth diaphragm seal that prevents flow from around the bal-
ance up between the supports and shields into the tunnel. There are two
types of pressures that may cause this flow. The first is due to the basic
tunnel design, which not infrequently results in a jet static pressure below
the atmospheric pressure, and hence in a pressure differential, sometimes
quite large, between the balance chamber and the jet.
The second pressure is that resulting from the attitude of the model.
This is much smaller than the first and can be eliminated simply by a
light diaphragm seal. Closing off the balance room in no way changes the
necessity for the support column seal.
The attachment fittings usually come into the wing at about the 30 to
50 per cent chord point. In complete airplanes, the most rearward center
of gravity location is used to give maximum room for the fittings. If a
Fig.4:15 Banshee model on fork-type mounting strut. Note simple flap attachment
brackets. (Courtesy McDonnell Aircraft Corp.)
model of a multrengined airplane is to be tested, the mounting strut

interference will be smallest if the struts do not attach at a nacelle, point.
The various arrangements of mounting are discussed below.
Single-Strut Mounting. This arrangement is by far the simplest. Only
a single windshield is needed, and it need not move as the model is rotated
in yaw. The single strut is satisfactory for small models and nacelles
(see Fig. 4:14) and may be used in conjunction with wingtip supports to
evaluate tare and. interference. Unfortunately, the usual model is such
that one strut is not rigid' enough, particularly in torsion. In a typical
installation the deflection of a single strut in yaw is about 0.003 deg per
foot-pound of torque.
Single Strut with Fork. An increase in resistance to roll deflections may
be gained by splitting the single strut into a fork at the top (Fig. 4: 15).
However, this method does not appreciably increase the torsional rigidity
of the mounting. The fork has increased interference as compared with
the straight strut and does not lend itself to inverted mounting for image
( Fig. 4: 14 Boeing 727 model on single-strut support. (Courtesy Boeing Co.) tests.
148 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Model Force, Moment, and Pressure Measurements / 149
Two-Strut Mounting. The two-strut mounting surpasses a single strut

for rigidity (particularly torsional), but adds the complication that the
windshields must be moved and rotated as the model is yawed. Figure
4: 16 shows a setup with the mounting struts side by side; in Fig. 4: 17
they are employed in tandem.
Th/ikPoint Mounting. The conditions of rigidity, tare, and inter-

ference evaluation and ease of varying the angle of attack are all met
satisfactorily by the three-point supporting system. This system is the
most complex and requires that two and sometimes three windshields be
arranged to yaw with the model (Fig. 4: 18). The rear strut introduces
side forces that complicate the yawing moment measurements of a yawed
model.
Wingtip Mounting. When it becomes necessary to determine the pres-

sure distribution of regions close to the mounting struts, the models are
sometimes mounted from the wingtips, leaving the fuselage and nacelles in
air unobstructed by support fittings. Models of larger scale may be
Fig.4:16 F-86D on two-strut support. (Courtesy North American Aircraft Corp.) tested with wingtip mounting, and valid comparisons can be obtained
of the effect of component parts.
Fig.4:17 Bomb model on tandem support system. (Courtesy Sandia Corp.)
Fig. 4: 18 Convair 880 on three-point support. (Courtesy Convair San Diego.)

be taken that the horizontal tail does not approach the tunnel wall too
closely or stability at the stall will appear much too optimistic.
Note that any device that increases the model size also increases the
size of the tunnel-wall corrections, sometimes extending them into a range
where their accuracy is most doubtful.
Mounting from the Tunnel Roof A few balances mounted above the
tunnel support the model in an inverted position for "normal" running.
(See Fig. 4:20.) This arrangement seems to be a holdover from early wire
balances that supported the model similarly so that the lift forces would put
tension in the wires. No particular advantage seems to accrue from inverted
testing. On the contrary, such a balance position hinders the use of a crane
to install models, and the terminology of testing "normal" and "inverted"
becomes obscure.
. '¥.'
Mounting from a Tail Sting. Engineers using small supers'bnic tunnels
found that struts normal to the flow such as those used in low-speed
Fig. 4: 19 A combination of a ground board and reflection model test. (Courtesy

Convair San Diego.)
Split Models. The largest scale models may be tested by having them
split down the plane of symmetry, only one-half of the model being present.
Asymm~ric flow is prevented by a large plate at the plane of symmetry,
or by mounting the model on the tunnel floor. See Fig. 4: 19. Such an
arrangement, though obviously unsuited for yaw tests, yields accurate pitch, Fig. 4: 20 Viscount model on ceiling-support system. Inverted testing is quite common
lift, and downwash data at the maximum Reynolds number, but care should in Europe. (Courtesy Vickers-Armstrong Ltd.)
absolute value of the drag is not needed, and the effect of the endplate
on lift is negligible.
Mounting on a Short Strut. Mounting the panel model on a short strut

(see Fig. 4: 23) has the advantage of decreasing the tare drag of the setup,
but it is hard to evaluate the effect of the slot. Thoeretical considerations
indicate that a slot of 0.001 span * will decrease the effective aspect ratio
enough to increase the induced drag by 31 per cent; a slot of 0.01 span
will cause an increase of 47 per cent. The effect of viscosity (not included
in the above figures) will tend to decrease the error listed above, but the.
degree of viscous effect has not been clearly established. If the slot can be
held to less than 0.005 span, its effect will probably be negligible; few~"
engineers believe that 0.02 span is acceptable.
Mounting as a Wing With an Endplate. Mounting the panel as a wing

with a small endplate to assist in keeping the spanwise lift distribution
as it should be is shown in Fig. 4:24. No endplate of reasonable size will
Clearance for maximum

angle of attack
Tunnel wall
Fig. 4:21 B-58 model on sting support using half-arc drive. (Courtesy Convair San
Diego.)
i I
tunnels caused excessive blocking in supersonic tunnels, and now al-
most invariably use a sting mount (Fig. 4:21). In order to use the same
models in low-speed tunnels (which are cheaper) the sting mount is again Model center
of gravity .
employed. Sting mounts are fine for those airplanes having jet engine (fixed point)
exits at the fuselage tail, since this furnishes a place for a sting. For
installations where the fuselage shape must be modified to permit a sting
mount, there is always the question of what has happened to the data.
A drive system for a sting support for a small tunnel is shown in Fig. 4:22 ..
The use of large-scale panel models for investigation of control surfaces

is discussed in Sections 5: 7 through 5: 10. These panels require mounting
arrangements different from those for wings and complete models. Several Drive motor with
mountings are discussed below. magnetic brake
( Mounting on a Turntable (see Fig. 5: 17). When the model is mounted

Fig. 4: 22 Parallelogram linkage for angle of attack control used in a 40 in. x 40 in.
on a turntable flush with the tunnel wall, the forces and moments on the low-speed tunnel.
turntable are included in the data and are difficult to separate. Fortu-
nately, for the type of tests usually sought with this arrangement, the * This span is, of course, the complete wing span, not the panel span.
4:11 Deflections
One of the most troublesome problems of wind tunnel balances is
rigidity. Deflections in the balance may move the model from the resolv-
ing center and invalidate the moment data or nullify the balance alignment
so that part of the lift appears as drag or side force.
The answer to the problem is obvious: either the deflections must be
kept down to where they are negligible, or they must be evaluated and
accounted for in the work-up. Of course, keeping them down is preferable.
The largest source of deflection is the mounting system. This must
be long to reach out of the test section and thin to avoid excessive inter-
ference. Both these requirements are in direct antithesis to the criterion
of minimum deflection. The only way the wind tunnel engineer can meet
this problem is to utilize materials of high modulus of elasticity for the
Small clearance strut. The desire for the shortest mounting strut possible is a strong
argument for the selection of a rectangular or elliptic jet shape. Deflec-
Fig. 4:23
tions in the balance frame may be diminished by having a deep and rigid
framework. None of the common measuring units have deflections large
prevent tip flow; hence the spanwise load distribution with thiJ mounting enough to be serious, and so they rarely cause this type of trouble.
, , will be greatly in error. The effects of deflections are evaluated during the process of calibrating
The last paragraphs draw attention to the advantage of having a yoke-
the balance, and corrections, if necessary, are either incorporated into
type balance frame, whether or not the balance is a yoke balance. The
the calculating machinery or given to the computing staff for inclusion
presence of lateral brace members to which bracing wires may be att~ch~d in the work-up.
is a great convenience. Such members are obviously necessary for wingtip
mounting. 4 :12 Balance Measuring Units and Linkages
Some balances have a ring that completely encircles the tunnel jet. So far, except for stating the impossibility of directly using deflecting
Though the ring offers a number of brace points, the part of the ring scales for the measuring units of the wind tunnel balance, no mention has
above the test section interferes with the installation of the image system. been made of the types of units that are employed. These are usually
either mechanical beam balances, hydraulic cells, or electric devices.
First let us consider how the forces are brought to the measuring units.
Most measuring units operate best with loads that are brought to them
vertically. Hence horizontal forces must be led through linkages that
rotate them 90 deg, and usually the vertical forces must also be brought
out to a more convenient location. Each link in the system, particularly
each joint, represents a potential source of friction and deflection. Obvi-
ously the number of joints must be kept to a minimum, and those abso-
lutely unavoidable must be designed with the utmost care. Friction also
must be kept to a minimum. Surprisingly, ball bearings are almost never
used. Their type of construction is better suited to apparatus having
large motion between the parts. Instead, the joints of a wind tunnel
balance are either knife-edges or flexure plates (Fig. 4: 25).
Knife-edges are poorly named, for they are not sharp. They are actu-
ally wedges whose working edges have a very small radius. They are
Fig.4:24 Panel mounted as a wing with endplate.
of hardened steel, and their seats are hardened, too. Trouble with knife- A
edges is more likely to result from too sharp a "knife" than too dull a one.
The flexure plates are steel plates that have been milled down very thin
D
at one section, so that they have very small resistance to bending in one
direction while good rigidity is maintained in the other. Flexure plates
(or pivots) have the added advantage that they can take tension as well
as compression and are not subject to the troubles of
corrosion and dirt like the kriife-edges.
Besides the ability to measure small variations in H
large forces, the measuring unit should have two
added qualities: it should maintain an invariable Fig.4:26 Beam balance. A.Drivingmotor. B. Threaded rod. C.Rider. D.Reversing
contacts. E. Dashpot. F. Flexure pivot. G. Applied load. H. Pendulum weight.
slope of the curve of applied load versus indicated I. Counter.
load, and it should return to zero when the load is
removed very gradually. Of the two, occasional fail- read the force weighed. The pendulum H (see Fig. 4:26) can be adjusted
ure to return to zero is the lesser evil. Such action to balance out the destabilizing component due to the weight of the beam.
is instantly spotted by an alert tunnel crew, and To avoid the troubles usually associated with mechanical contacts it is
runs are repeated or corrected as the evidence de- preferable to use a linear variable differential transformer on the end of the
mands. A change of the balance constant is far more weigh beams. The output signal may be fed into an amplifier, which
difficult to catch. Almost the only simple methods activates the poise motor. The poise motor may drive a selsyn whose
are to repeat a basic run occasionally or to calibrate "slave" at the console actuates a counter. Counter outputs may be fed
the balance. It goes without saying that no measuring into an automatic typewriter.
system is supposed to "slip calibration," but probably Hydraulic Capsules. The hydraulic capsule is a device that measures
every wind tunnel engineer has had that very thing forces through the pressures they exert on pistons of known area. They
occur at one time or another. are not exactly null, but the amount of deflection of the piston is so small
It is a fundamental fact of measuring that a device as to be negligible.
Fig. 4:25 Typical can be made to read more accurately if it is subjected
flexure. Hard steel The operating principle of the hydraulic capsule is as follows (see
milled to a work-
only to loads up to 100lb than if it must accommodate Fig. 4:27).
ing stress of 10,000 loads up to 1000lb. In order to maintain the greatest
Oil from a pressure source enters the cylinde~ part of the capsule through
to 30,000 psi is cus- accuracy, most measuring units have small capacities, an inlet tube and leaks out through a gate directly behind the piston. A
tomarily used. and large loads are measured by balancing out the
preponderance of the load with "unit" weights. Thus
a load of 457 lb might be read by adding unit weights of 400 lb and
reading 57 lb with the measuring unit. Depending on the balance design,
t Load
the unit weights may be added either manually or automatically.

A short discussion of the four most popular types of measuring units
follows.
{Oil inlet
The Automatic Beam Balance. The automatic beam balance is shown
in Fig. 4: 26. It consists of a weighing beam that has an electrically driven
rider. When the beam drops down, a contact is made that causes the
~~~========~::F=======~--
Restriction :
I..--Oil outlet
driving motor to move the rider in the direction that will balance the beam.
A counter on the motor shaft locates the rider and may be calibrated to Fig.4:27 Hydraulic capsule.
load on the piston deflects the diaphragm so that the exit area is decreased,
allowing the pressure in the cylinder to build up until the piston location
and the pressure balance. The resulting pressure is a function of the size
of the load and is measured through accurate pressure gages.
Electric Measuring Devices. Electric strain gages of the wire gage type
(see Sections 4: 13 and 4: 14) have been tried as measuring devices in
several external balances with a satisfactory degree of success. The F.ig.4:28
electromagnetic arrangement that measures the forces by the amount of
current needed to maintain zero deflection in the unit has also been suc-
cessful. These systems often have a unit weight addition setup in order to indicating an extraneous "load". Temperature compensation is accom-
extend their range with maximum accuracy. plished by gluing a second gage on the opposite side from the one shown
Any measuring system must be checked under vibratory load to obtain in Fig. 4:28, and connecting it to a Wheatstone bridge circuit as shown
the damping and balance that yield the greatest accuracy. in Fig. 4: 29. It will be seen that, as long as both resistances (marked 1
and 2 in Fig. 4: 29 are equally increased or decreased, there will be no
change in the potential measured by the potentiometer. Thus the flexure-
4:13 Electric Measuring Devices
gage combination is insensitive to heat.
There are several methods for measuring forces or pressures electrically, The many types of commercial gages that are available make manual
most of them depending on amplifying the effect that tiny deflections winding of gages virtually unnecessary. The gages are affixed to the
have on the capacitance, inductance, or resistance of the unit. For exam- flexures with a variety of bonding agents ranging from simple cellulose
ple, the resistance of a carbon pack varies as the pressure on it, and the cement to bakelite bond, which must be heat cured. Gages normally
current it passes for a fixed voltage may be used as an index of the load. require 4 to 12 volts applied voltage. Current practice is to design the
The amount of current needed to keep the core of a solenoid in a fixed beams for a working stress of 6000 to 12,000 psi, although very much
location is an index of the load on it. The change in capacitance of a higher values, up to as much as 65,000 psi, have been used with success.
plate condenser with small deflections of the plates may again indicate a Some engineers prefer to taper the flexure to get a uniform stress over
load. The resistance of a wire changes with the tension of the wire, and the gage; others find this unnecessary.
the current passes for a fixed voltage may indicate the tension. And so Brief experience with strain gages has indicated that before they are
ad infinitum. A hundred different setups may be possible. It should be put into service their amplifiers should be left on all night to obtain
borne in mind that through amplification the most minute changes may maximum stability. Minimum gage voltage should always be employed,
be noted and that remarkable accuracy is possible. with scale range coming from the ampli-
By far the most widely used of the electric measuring devices is the fication rather than beam deflection.
electric wire strain gage, of which an elementary unit is shown in Fig. Excessive amplification may, however,
4:28. Basically, the wire strain gage consists of a resistance made of very result in too much drift. Gage output
fine wire cemented to a flexure. The load F, by deflecting the beam by a is proportional to applied voltage, and so
minute amount, stretches the wires glued to the beam and changes their a variable source of 2.5 to 10 volts will
resistance and the amount of current that will flow through them for a supply a 4-to-l scale expansion for the
fixed applied voltage. The current, being proportional to the load F, usual readout.
thus becomes the indicator of the size of F. It will be necessary to bring out strain
The foWovecircuit, elementary as it is, serves to illustrate the principle gage leads from rotating machinery on
of the gage itself, but many refinements are needed before a useful electric some occasions, and change of the re- '----~ G l--_---J
strain gage can be realized. F'or instance, for the above circuit, a change sistance due to poor contact on slip rings Fig. 4: 29 Simple electric strain
in temperature would cause the flexure to expand, stretching the gage and can make much trouble. One of the most gage circuit.
satisfactory solutions is to use a copper-silver ring ("coin" silver) and a
silver graphite brush with about 30 psi brush pressure. Results with
ring tangential speeds up to 100 ft per sec have been good with this
arrangement.
4:14 Strain Gage Balances

Although strain gage balances have been most useful in transonic and
supersonic tunnels, they are by no means excluded from low-speed work. Typical 4-arm bridge
The strain gage balance may be either the external or the internal sting-
Normal force (also on bottom)
mounted type. The external type has the usual model strut support, but
Pitching moment (also on bottom)
the measuring units are strain gages rather than beam scales. The three-
component external balance shown in Fig. 4: 30, while not necessarily
typical, illustrates one type;. ;hternal balance. Each of the three com-
ponents (lift, drag, and pitching-moment) is measured by gages mounted
on opposite sides of flexure beams.
The internal sting-type balance pictured in Fig. 4: 31 is a NASA design, Model mounting surface
and measures three components (six-component types are also made) Fig. 4:31 Three-component internal strain gage balance (NASA design).
about fixed body axes. This particular balance is equipped with dual-lead,
I bakelite gages arranged as shown in the figure. The use of these dual-lead
gages is suggested because the chance of lead failure under vibratory loads
is greatly reduced. Since the internal balance moves with the model, it
reads all loads with respect to model axes and not wind axes. Body axes
data may be transferred* to the more frequently used wind axes by the
following relations:
Lw = - C sin IX + N cos IX
Dw = C cos IX cos 1p + S sin 1p + N sin IX cos 1p
yw = - C cos IX sin 1p + S cos 1p - N sin IX sin 1p (4: 1)

RM w = RM cos .IX cos 1p - PM sin 1p + YM sin IX sin 1p
PM w = PM cos 1p + RM cos IX sin 1p + YM sin IX sin 1p
YMw = YM cos IX - RM sin IX
•.,, In the above relations N, C, S are body normal, chord, and side forces
positive up, back, and to the right wing. The terms RM, PM, and YM
are the rolling, pitching, and yawing moments about body axes positive
when the moment tends to put the right wing down, the nose up, or the
nose right.
Although there are many different electric strain gage balances, no
particularly superior design has evolved. Some engineers use the beam
Fig. 4: 30 Three-component external strain' gage balance shown with associated
readout equipment. (Courtesy Georgia Institute of Technology.) * See Tables 5: 9a and 5: 9b for other axis transferrals.
flexure, others an eccentric column. Some prefer electric addition of As far as internal balances go, there are two basic types: force balances
components, others prefer external addition. In general, preference is and moment balances. In any six-component system there will be three
given to the four-arm bridge for each component because of greater force units and three moment units. The axial, normal, and side force
sensitivity and accuracy. Separate power sources for each circuit instead systems will be similar as far as gage arrangements are concerned; moment
of a common lead are used by some, and variable amplification in the circuits will be similarly wired.
potentiometer circuit is convenient to change the calibration slopes and Force-measuring elements employ either a cantilever beam or a column
spread the estimated load over the meter range for greatest accuracy. arrangement. An eccentric column provides greater sensitivity but also
Drift may become excessive if too much amplification is used. allows more deflection as does a single cantilever. The choice might well
The load ranges of internal strain gage balances can vary widely from depend upon the particular balance size and arrangement needed for a
a normal force of 5 or 6 pounds to several hundred pounds. The same is specific model. The axial force "cage" shown in Fig. 4 :32a is one of the
true of other components. Needless to say, the balance can be, and most common types. This unit can be made very sensitive by sizing the
usually is, tailored to fit both the model and the expected loads. flexures, but, since the model is attached to the cage, it is subjected to
Strain gage readout can be accomplished in several ways: the relatively large normal forces. One might thus expect (see Fig. 4:33)
an obvious interaction to occur because of the deflection of the cage
1. By using a recording oscillograph, flexures. A unit designed at DTMB, shown in Fig. 4:32c, has reduced
2. By using a pen recorder, this kind of interaction to a minimum. All forces except axial load are
3. By using a standard strain indicator, carried by the webs as shear or direct tension or compression. A rod
4. By using an oscilloscope (probably more useful for monitoring transmits the axial force to a cantilever beam mounting the gages.
purposes), The arrangement for normal force readout is shown typically in Fig.
5. By using analog-to-digital converter. 4: 34. In this case, the wiring is arranged so that the difference between
This last device, which may be either electro-mechanical or electronic, two moments is read electrically. Since the normal force is equal to the
has probably contributed more to the automation of wind tunnels than difference of the two moments divided by the distance between gages, the
any other piece of instrumentation. The converter serves as the bridge unit may be calibrated directly in terms of applied normal force. It is
between the voltage output of the gages and some form of digital data important that both gage stations have the same section properties, fly,
storage such as punched tape, magnetic tape, or punched cards. The cards and matched gages. The greater the gage spacing the more accurate the
or tape, may be used in high-speed computers for on-line data reduction. normal force readout. If M, and MT are the front and rear moments then
It has been the junior author's experience that for one not too well the normal force, N, is given by (M T - Mf)/d, where d is the spacing
versed in strain gage arrangements the time required to search for and between gages. It is noted that the same arrangement may be used to
interpret available information is great indeed. Some general facts measure side force.
concerning selection and mounting of gages are: Pitching ,oryawing moments may be measured by the same gage arrange-
1. Adequate strain must be provided in the measuring elements under ment discussed above except, as shown in Fig. 4: 34, the bridge is connected
the design loads (approximately 600 to 700 microinches per inch). as a summing circuit. The differential circuit employed for normal force
2. Match gages for gage factor and resistance. will also yield moment if the moment reference point is between the two
3. Use the longest gage possible. gage stations for then,
4. Follow recommended mounting procedures (surface cleaning, baking
time, etc.).
5. Use extreme care in locating gage and in applying curing pressure. A
gage that has slipped will introduce errors. where xref is measured from the front gage station. Another way is
6. Good solder joints are a must. A "cold" solder joint will not indicated in Fig. 4: 31 where the pitch gages are "stacked" and located
between the normal force gages. For rolling moment a torque tube or a
function properly.
7. For a long life, all gages should be waterproofed. double beam type with gages mounted on the side faces of the beams can
be utilized. There are many mechanical variations in internal balance
8. All mounting surfaces must be carefully machined.
--
Axial force
r Normal force
Fig. 4: 33 Normal force interaction on axial force.
design but the basic arrangement of strain gages attached to flexures is

common to all. See Refs. 4: 4 through 4: 6 for specific types of balances.
As far as balance construction materials are concerned, both aluminum
and steel may be used. The most common steel is AISI 4340, but this may
£Model mounting surface \ i distort on heat treating and it is best to machine after heat treatment.
Axial
force I/) }i Armco 17-4PH is one of the few stainless steels that can be heat treated
satisfactorily; in fact this steel can be hardened at 875°F without liquid
': 1112 3J~4 ~ 1·
- --_.- - - -.---- 'JxJ
---~!
Normal force
r
,_,.-I--.,. Pitching
Beam r I ~moment
~2 ~1 ___._,,/
------------------------------
~-_=.74 ~:ut'--73 /
(b)
'--- ..Y ~-----------------------------~---~--_y
I
To indicator
(c)
(a) Differential circuit (b) Sur,nming circuit for
Fig. 4: 32 Axial force gages. for normal force pitching moment
Fig,4:34 Normal force and pitching moment gage arrangement.

quenching. The balance should be heat treated to avoid fatigue failure
and hysteresis. Ref. 4:4 suggests that only those steels that can be heat
treated. to a Rockwell C35 hardness or better should be used; it is
interesting to note that a balance designed by the junior author using the
17-4PH steel had a Rockwell hardness of 33 in the "as received" condition.
For steel, fiber stresses under the gages should be about 20,000 psi or even
higher.
If balance loads are small and the balance use is only intermittent,
aluminum beams will work quite well; fiber stresses should be from
6,000 to 10,000 psi. Since aluminum has only about one-third the modulus
of elasticity of steel the deflections at 10,000 psi will be the same as steel
stressed to 30,000 psi.
A final word of warning-if balance parts are to be fastened together,
great care must be used to avoid slippage and to. maintain alignment.
Taper fits and fine threads should be considered for assembly.
4:15 Calibration of the Internal Strain Gage Balance

The internal strain gage balance, like its external counterpart, must be
calibrated. However, in contrast to a large external balance, the internal
balance is seldom free of interactions. Force data obtained from any
balance are no better than the calibration; hence extreme care should be
exercised during calibration.
The calibration procedure serves several purposes, such as Fig. 4: 35 Rig for calibrating internal strain gage balances. As shown, the balance is
being subjected to a rolling moment and a normal force. Pulleys near the ba~e of the
1. To proof load the balance, sting are for applying drag and yawing moment. The cross bar at the balance IS moved
2. To determine calibration slopes for each component, to meet various moment conditions. (Courtesy Sandia Corp.)
3. To determine component sensitivity,
4. To determine balance interactions,
5. To determine deflections under load,
6. To check repeatability of load data.
Model
The model and balance should be placed on the sting-and strut system
that will support the system in the tunnel (a type of mount is shown in
Fig. 4:22). Loading then proceeds through the positive and negative
ranges of the design loads. If it is not practical to calibrate with the
actual model, a fixture (Fig. 4: 35) that permits loading the balance in the
same manner as the model should be constructed. This fixture should +L -M
be provided with a reference leveling surface, so that it can be kept level
as the balance deflects. This is necessary because the loads are usually
applied normal to the calibration fixture surface. It is, of course, impor-
tant that deflections should be determined for the complete model-
balance-sting-and-strut combination (see Fig. 4: 36). A plot of angular Fig. 4: 36 Setup for calibrating internal balances.
deflection versus normal force, applied at different stations, may be
.,,-.
168 / Low-Speed. Wind Tunnel Testing Model Force, Moment, and Pressure Measurements / 169
30 4:16 Balance Interactions
20 The balance interactions are determined during the calibration pro-
10 ::0- cedure. The calibration of a six-component balanc~ may produce a set
j
of equations, such as,
05
-10 ~
- NF = KIRNF + K2RAF + K3R,,, + K4~ + KsKY'M + K6RRM
o
-20 :;;: AF = K7RNF + K8RAF + KgRpM + KlORsF + KllRYM + K12RRM
-30 PM = KISRNF + K14RAF + KISRpM + KI6RSF + KI7RYM + KISRRM (4:2)
-40 SF = CIRNF + C2RAF + C3RpM'+ C4RsF + CSRYM + CSRRM
400
YM = C7RNF + C8RAF + C9RpM + CloRsF + CllRYM + CI2RRM
RM = CI3RNF + CI4RAF + C1sRpM + ClsRsF + C17Rnr + C18RRM
where the R's represent net balance readout and KI, K8, K15, C4, Cu,
and CIS represent slopes of the calibration curves ,for normal force, axial
force, pitching moment, side force, yawing moment, and rolling moment,
respectively. All other K and C values represent interaction constants.
In the case of a three component balance, consider the one pictured in
Fig. 4: 37 Angle of attack correction grid for use with an internal strain gage balance. Fig. 4: 31. The balance constants are not obtained. directly by calibration
but by inversion of the balance matrix. Write the equations as follows:
I prepared, as shown in Fig. 4:37. Moving the normal force to different
.stations also results i~ a .noment change. . NF = NF" - (dNF/dAF)AF - (dNF/dPM)PM:
In many cases the chord, or drag, component is the most difficult to AF = AF" - (dAF/dNF)NF - (dAFldPM)PM
measure accurately. Part of the reason for this is that the drag cage,
designed to measure the smallest force, is subjected to both the normal
PM == PM" - (dPM/dAF)AF - (dPM/dNF)NF
force and the pitching moment, since the model is attached to the drag The example below illustrates how this inversion is done.
cage proper. It is here that the most obvious interaction is encountered,
for if the drag link deflects, as shown in Fig. 4: 33, then the application Example 4:1 Compute the balance constants for a .three-component
of a normal force will cause extraneous readings. balance if the slopes are:
Although wide temperature variations are not usually encountered in dNF/dAF = 0.00622 dAFldNF == 0.0221
low-speed tunnel testing, it may be wise to allow the tunnel and balance
system to warm up. Even though the gage circuits are 'compensated, dNF/dPM '= -0.330 dAF/dPM =~
minor thermal deflections in the balance rig may cause readings to change dPM/dAF = -:-0.00338 dPM/dNF = 0.162
or zeros to shift.
Rearrariging the matrix gives:
The balance stability (variation with time) is important, and if such a
shift occurs it may well be due to poor gage bond. The sensitivity, or NF + 0.00622AF - 0.330PM = NF u
minimum load response, should be checked by observing the minimum
load that will produce a response. The hysteresis is the degree of repeat-
O.0221NF + AF + 0 = AF"
ability; linearity is the variation of the reading-load curve from a straight 0.162NF - O.00338AF + PM = PM"
line. * Now expressed in matrix form
* See R. J. Volluz, Handbook of Supersonic Aerodynamics, Section 20, Wind Tunnel
Instrumentation and Operation, NAVORD Report 1488, Vol. 6, January 1961. [B]{F} = {F,,}
{
170 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Model Force, Moment, and Pressure Measurements I 171
where /
1.000 0.00662
-0.~30]
[B] = 0.0221 1.000
[
0.162 -0.00338 1.000
{F) ~ (:E) and {F,J

NFu)
= ( AF"
PM"
The solution is obtained by inversion of the square matrix ~o that
{F} = [B]-l{F,,}
Inversion of matrix [B] yields
0.949 -0.00482 0.313]
-0.0212 1.000 -0.00692
[ -0.1536 0.00416 0.948
/
Finally taking the product of the square matrix [Btl and the column
matrix {F,J gives the solution Fig. 4: 38 Arrangement for determining tare and interference simultaneously.
NF = O.949NF" - 0.00482AFu + 0.313PM"

One thing simplifies the alignment: the lift for most tests is from 5 to
AF = -0.0212NF" + 1.000AF" - 0.OO692PMu (4:3)
25 times larger than the drag, and it is usually sufficient to align so that
PM = -0.1536NF" + 0.00416AFu + 0.948PM"
no lift appears in the drag-reading apparatus without checking to see
Depending on the particular balance involved, nonlinear interaction terms whether any drag appears in the lift-reading mechanism beyond ascertain-
due to deflection could be present. It must be remembered that the ing that the drag system is perpendicular to the lift.
interactions have interactions, and so on, requiring great care during The balance alignment is generally accomplished by running a wing
calibration. "both normal and inverted from zero lift to stall. To assure equal support
strut interference for both normal and inverted runs, dummy supports,
~ 4:17 Balance Alignment identical to the conventional ones, are installed downward from the tunnel
For the drag scales to read pure drag without including any component roof. They are then as shown in Fig. 4: 38. The data from both normal
of lift, the wind tunnel balance must be properly aligned with the air- and downward lift are plotted as lift curves (CL versus a), polars (C L
stream: lift perpendicular to it and drag parallel with it. versus CD), and moment curves (C L versus Cm). The negative lifts and
The difficulties are of four types: moments are plotted as though they were positive. (See Fig. 4: 39.) The
1. The air flow will have some variation of angularity, and hence an angular variation between the lift curves is twice the error in setting the
average perpendicular must be assumed. It will be the true average for angle of attack and, as shown, indicates that the a is set too high. That
one wing planform only. is, when the balance angle indicator reads" + 1 deg, the model is really at
2. The variation of q will cause the change in angularity to have more o deg to the average wind. The polar shows that the lift is not perpen-
effect at some places than at others. Again, an average must be assumed; dicular to the relative wind, part of it appearing as drag. Here the balance
and again it can be the average for one planform only. is tipped forward in reference to the relative wind, for a component of the
3. The mean air flow will in all probability not be horizontal or parallel lift is increasing the drag when the lift is positive and decreasing it when
to the tunnel centerline, and alignment to these criteria is not sufficient. the lift is negative (Figs. 4:40 and 4:41).
4. Variation in q and angle may change with airspeed, and hence the The same procedure outlined above for a wing must be followed for
alignment will too. each complete model: runs with the image system in; model both normal
\.
ID
a
o
~ :\ G>
e
::::l
'-'
~
~ 8.
~'\
>
.s
0
G>
"tJ
::E
M ~
co
E
5
<::
~0
~ ~
~
~
- .....
q
a
Fig. 4:41
a
q IX! ID N a
..... a 0 o and inverted. These runs yield the true angle of zero lift and alignment
'1:J 'lU9!~!U90~ un correction. The additional runs needed for tare and interference are
a
('oJ
discussed in the next section.
If angular and velocity variations in the airstream are large, the above
alignment would apply only to wings whose span and chord approximate
~ the test wing. In the section on angularity (Section 3: 13), a compromise
'$ method is outlined.
" G>
2:. . It is impracticable to align the balance for each model, and hence the
~ ::::l
o
~ fuJ,salignmentcorrection is applied in the data workup as follows:
~ ., ('oJ
..... C/)
G> §
G>
Q) Suppose that the polars of the normal and inverted runs appear as in
~ ::::l bo
0
<:: Q)
"tJ
Fig. 4 :40. With the wing in the normal position the balance reads
Qj
~ ~ i ~ CDjndicated = CD true + CLindicated (tan 01) (4:4)
"tJ CX)
-b ' ...
~
G>
'~ where 01 = angle of misalignment (Fig. 4:41). Hence
>
.s
Qj
~ r-, CDind'- CDtrue = CLind tan 01 (4:5)
"tJ
<,
0
::E The correct CD(CDtrue) lies halfway between the CDnorma.l and CDinverted
~ curves. Let the difference between the curves at some CL be t1CD' Then
~ a
<, CDind _ CDtrue = t1CD/2 (4:6)
and, if the difference between the curves is read at CL = 1.0, the angle of
misalignment, 01, may be found from
.C'! q IX! OJ:! ('oJ a
..... ..... a a o
'1:J 'lU9!3!Uaoo. ij!1
tan 01 = (t1CD/2)c L=1.0 (4:7)
Working up the data, we may then find the correct drag from 4:18 Tare and Interference Measurements
CD true = CD ind - (CL inJ tan 81 (4: 8) Any conventional wind tunnel setup requires that the model supported
in some manner, and, in turn, the supports will both affect the free air flow
A second and simple ~ethod is to plot D.CDI2 against CL and pick
off the proper values dunng the data work-up. True CL is close enough about the model and have some drag themselves. The effect on the free
to CLind so that usually no correction to CL is needed. air flow is called interference; the drag of the supports, tare. Although
tare drags could be eliminated entirely by shielding the supports all the
Two .more im~orta~t p~ints in regard to the evaluation of the alignment
correction remain. First, in order to have the tare and interference effects way into the model (with adequate clearances, of course), the added size
identical. for both the model normal and inverted runs, the image system thus necessitated would probably increase the interference so that no
net gain would be achieved.
must ~e I~stalled and the ?ummy struts arranged as in Fig. 4: 38. Second,
the misalignment corrections found necessary for a certain model will The evaluation of the tare and interference is a complex job, requiring
thought as well as time for proper completion. The student invariably
not suffice if the sa~e model is to be tested at a later date, for expansion
of the tunnel resulting from weather conditions may cause variations of suggests removing the model to measure the forces on the model supports.
the mean flow angle in the jet. This procedure would expose parts of the model support not ordinarily
The engineer who upon finding a change in the data for a second series in the airstream (although the extra length could be made removable)
test of a certain model proclaimed that aZ.L. was "not where he left it" and would fail to record either the effect of the model on the supports or
was not entirely without scientific backing. the effect of the supports on the model.
The error in setting the angle of attack, t:.a', is found from the normal First let us consider a rarely used method that evaluates the interference
and inverted lift curves as in Fig. 4: 39, the corrected angle in this case and tare drag separately. Actually the value of the sum of the two will
being nearly always suffice without our determining the contribution of each,
(4:9) but, besides being fundamental, this long method may offer suggestions
. for determining interference for certain radical setups. The procedure is
where «» = angles of attack read with model in mormal position; t:.a' =
half the angular difference between lift curves for normal and inverted as follows:
The model is first tested in the normal manner, the data as taken in-
~ositions. The angular correction for misalignment is usually incorporated
into the work-up of the data. cluding both the tare and the interference. In symbolic form we have:
In order to correct for misalignment of the side-force balance, two runs (4:10)
must be made, with both the tare and the interference dummies in. The
model in normal position should be yawed in one direction and then where DN = drag of model in normal position, ILBIM = interference of
inverted and yawed in the same direction relative to the tunnel. The lower surface bayonets on model,IMILB = interference of model on lower
correct side-force curve will be halfway between the curves made by surface bayonets, hsw = interference of lower support windshield, and
model normal and model inverted. The inversion is necessary to nullify TL = free air tare drag of lower bayonet.
effects of the model's irregularities. Next the model is supported from the tunnel roof by the "image" or
Side-force corrections as outlined are rarely made, since they entail "mirror" system. The normal supports extend into the model, but a
~ se~of dum~y supports that can be yawed; moreover extreme accuracy small clearance is provided (Fig. 4: 42a). The balance then reads the drag
m Side force IS not usually required. The principles of the correction of the exposed portions of the supports in the presence of the model.
however, are important. ' That is,
It should be recalled that changes in the shape of a polar curve may be (4:11)'
due to scale effects and, that comparisons of various tests of similar air-
For the interference run the model is inverted and run with the mirror
foils must be made from readings at the same effective Reynolds number. supports just clearing their attachment points (Fig. 4:42b). We then get
(It has been shrewdly" noted that, if the section selected is one of the
mor~ "popular" types that have been frequently tested, it is nearly always Dmeas = Dinverted + Tu + IUBIM + Iusw + IM/UB + ILBIM +hsw
possible to find some results that will "agree" with yours.) (4:12)
where Dinverted = drag of model inverted (should equal the drag of the
model normal, except for misalignment) (see Section 4: 17) and the symbol
U refers to the upper surface.
Then the mirror system is removed and a second inverted run is made.
This yields
Dmeas = Dinverted + Tu + IUBIM + TM/UB + Iusw (4:13)
The difference between the two inverted runs is the interference of
supports on the lower surface. That is, eq. (4: 12) minus eq. (4: 13) yields
ILBIM + hsw (4:14)
By subtracting eqs. (4: 11) and (4: 14) from the first run (eq. 4: 10), the
actual model drag is determined if the balance is aligned. As explained
more fully in Section 4: 17, the difference between runs made in the normal
and inverted position with the mirror system in can be used to find the
proper corrections for alignment.
(a) The support tare and interference effects can be found in three runs
instead of four by using slightly different procedure. In this case the normal
run is made, yielding
(4: 15)
where h= IM/LB + hElM + ILSW• Next the model is inverted and we

get
Dmeas = Dinverted + Tu + I u (4: 16)
Then the dummy supports are installed. Instead of the clearance being
between the dummy supports and the model, the exposed length of the
JetP-t~& support strut is attached to the model, and the clearance is in the dummy
Clearance - ~
supports (Fig. 4: 38). This configuration yields
(4: 17)
The difference between eq. (4: 16) and eq. (4: 17) yields the sum of the
tare and interference TL + Iv One actual setup is shown in Fig. 4:43,
another in Figs. 4: 17 and 5: 71.
The. second procedure has the advantage that the dummy supports do
(b) not have to be heavy enough to hold the model, nor do they require any
mechanism for changing the angle of attack.
A third method of evaluating the tare and interference, sometimes
Fig. 4:42 -Mirror (or "image") method of determining the effect of the supports on employed where an image system is impracticable, consists of adding extra
the model.
dummy supports on the lower surface and assuming their effect to be
identical with the actual supports. Sometimes there is danger of mutual
interference between the dummies and the real supports.
Doubtless the increase of runs necessary to determine the small tare
178 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Model Force, Moment, and Pressure Measurements I 179
The image-system method of tare and interference evaluation assumes
that there is no mutual interference between the real and image supports.
Also, unless added struts are placed on the lower surface to evaluate the
lower strut effect, it must be assumed that CL max is unaffected by the
lower surface mounting struts.
As the model's angle of attack is changed, its center of gravity will
probably change, producing a pitching moment. This moment must be
evaluated by pitching the model with the tunnel wind off and by sub-
tracting the pitching-moment tare from the wind-en runs. Or it must be
balanced by weights hung on the pitch-measuring system to bring the
. total ship-plus-weights center of gravity on to the balance resolving center.
The tare and interference evaluations for the tail support have been
omitted from the above discussion because they are usually treated in a
slightly different manner. The reason for this new treatment is that the
length of the tail support varies as the angle of attack is changed. This
factor so complicates the dummy arrangements that a system is usually
employed which does not require a complete dummy tail support.
The procedure is as follows: Consider the second method of evaluating
the tare and interference. When the image system is brought down to the
inverted model, a short support is added to the then upper surface of the
model where the tail support would attach in a normal run. The piece
attached corresponds in length to the minimum exposed portion of the tail
support and increases the drag of the' model by the interference and tare
drag of a tail support on the model's lower surface. For angles of attack
other than that corresponding to minimum length of exposed tail support,
the drag of the extra exposed tail support length must be evaluated and
subtracted.
A rear support windshield that moves with the rear support to keep a
constant amount of strut in the airstream could be employed as long as
Fig.4:43 Two tare and interference runs for an airliner. (Courtesy Douglas Aircraft the added interference' of the moving shield is evaluated by a moving
Co.) shield dummy setup.
The evaluation of the tare, interference, and alignment of a wing-alone
and interference effects and the concern expressed about the difference test follows the procedure outlined above, except that further complica-
between those effects on the upper and lower surfaces seem picayune. tion is introduced by the presence of a sting that must be added to the
Yet their combined effect represents from 10 to 50 per cent of the minimum wing to connect it to the rear strut of the support system. The tare and
drag of the whole airplane-clearly not a negligible error. interference caused by the sting may be found by adding a second sting
It should be noted that the tare and interference forces vary with angle during the image tests. As may be noted in Fig. 4:44, the attachment of
of attack and with model changes. They must be repeatedly checked the sting to the rear support includes a portion of the strut above the
and evaluated, particularly for major changes of wing flaps; cowling flaps, connection, and the dummy sting has a section of support strut added
and nacelle alterations close to the support attachment. With many both above and below its connection point. This complication is needed
( models every configuration must have its own support interference evalu- to account for the interference of the strut on the sting, as follows.
ated, a long and tiresome test procedure. When the wing is held at a-high angle of attack, there will be an obtuse
angle below the sting. When the wing is inverted and held at a high angle
relative to the wind, there will be an acute angle below the sting, for the
rear strut will then be extended to its full length. To eliminate this dif-
ference between the normal and inverted tests the support strut is extended
above the sting attachment point, so that the
sum of the angles between the sting and the
support is always 180 degrees. The image
sting has the same arrangement. Note that
although the angles between the sting and the
rear support vary with the angle of attack,
the image sting is always at right angles to
its short rear support strut. Further, the
image rear support strut does not remain
vertical but changes its angle with the wing.
The error incurred by failing to have the sting
image system simulate the exact interference
and rear strut angle is believed to be negligible.
Tare and interference for the tail strut alone
may be evaluated as shown in Fig. 4: 45, or
for a sting mount as shown in Fig. 4:46.
The setup for determining the tare and inter-
ference for a fork support is shown in Fig.
4:47. Here the model is supported externally
and a small clearance left where the struts
come into the wing. This measures the drag
"0 of the fork plus the effect of the wing on the
:::
c<S fork, but not the effect of the fork on the Fig. 4:46 Yoke method of
~ wing, which experience has shown to be . evaluating sting interference.
5
01)
small.
:::
·S Figure 4:48 shows the results of a wind-alone test for an NACA 0015
.~ wing of AR = 6.0. The wing in this particular test was small, and the
.,
"0
corrections for tare, interference, and alignment are correspondingly large,
...o but the variation of the corrections is typical. The following points are
.
...
c, .
01)
.§ of interest.
...,
..,
;:l ...
'"
1. The correction for tare and interference decreases as CL (and ex)
<Zl ..,
0
u increases.
..it :::
"<t e 2. The incidence strut drag decreases with increasing ex. (The amount
~~
._~'U.-:::
01)...,
of strut exposed decreases with «.)
3. The alignment correction increases with CL.
J
A large amount of interference may arise from air that bleeds through
the windshields that surround the support struts to protect them from
Stalled area
Fig.4:49 Effect of bleeding.
the windstream. These struts frequently attach at points of low pressure

on the model, and, if the shield is brought close to the model, a considerable
flow may be induced that will run along the model. This flow may stall
the entire underside of the model and produce results not only wrong
but also unsteady and difficult to evaluate. It is, therefore, frequently
advantageous to terminate the windshields well below the model and let
the test be subjected to added but well-defined tare drag, (see Fig. 4: 49)
Fig. 4:47 Tare and interference determination for a fork-type support. (Courtesy
and to provide cloth seals to stop the flow.
University of Washington.)
+1.0 ~
vr-- 4:19 Profile Drag by the Momentum Method
t7 It should be noted that a balance is not always required in a wind tunnel.

1 I
~ ~ The drag may be obtained by comparing the momentum in the air ahead
Final value of the model with the momentum behind the model, and the lift may be
+0.8 ~ ~ ~
found by integration of the pressures on the tunnel walls. These artifices
~ ~ are most generally employed in airfoil section research in a two-dimen-
~ v sional tunneL Spanwise integration is unnecessary then, and section
~ L
+0.6
/; rc/ r- Data 'as read
coefficients may be directly obtained.
The basic theory of the wake survey measurement is the following.
Q'4 +0.4
-l
VfI Consider the flow past an airfoil (Fig. 4: 50). It may be seen that the part
of the air that passes over the model suffers a loss of momentum, and
ih II '(..cb
+0.2 II/f a ..
A B
rj
/1
o I
c
Wake
-0.2 1\
o 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12
CD
Fig. 4:48 Corrections for a wing-alone test. a. Sting and support tare and interference. Fig. 4:50
b. Drag of exposed incidence strut. c. Alignment.
184 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Model Force, Moment, and Pressure. Measurements / 185
Reservo' rr helg
. ht'''\
this loss is shown by and equal to the profile drag of the airfoil, or
D = Mass
-- X Ch ange In
. veloci
ocity - ._ - -t- ._ - .1t- - --
Sec tq
-
D = ff pV da{Vo - V)
I
/
\t
\
__ I ,
where D = drag, Vo = initial airspeed (at A), V = final airspeed in the -----
/
..- "
wake (at B), and da
= small area of the wake perpendicular to airstream.
Hence
Fig. 4: 51 The wake as it appears on the multiple manometer.
and
ahead of the rake body. The tubes are individually connected in order
to the tubes of a multiple manometer; and, since only the ratio q/qo is
Also Vo = .j2Qo/ p needed, the readings are independent of the specific gravity of the fluid
in the manometer and its angle.
and V = .j2q/p The manometer will appear as in Fig. 4: 51. In actual practice many
more readings will be available through shimming up the rake in small
Therefore Cao = 2ff (fi: qo - !1_qo)daS (4:18)
increments. A small amount of "splash" outside the wake proper may
also appear, caused probably by the lateral static-pressure gradient pres-
ent in the tunnel. The engineer must fair the curve according to his
For a unit section of the airfoil, S = c x 1, and the area is equal to da experience.
dy x 1, where y is measured perpendicular to the plane of the wing.
The constant readings of the outside tubes indicate that they are out
Finally,
of the wake and hence may be used to determine qo. Note that qo should
CdO = 2f(fi: qo
- !l)dY
qo c
(4: 19) be used from the manometer reading, not from the tunnel q at the model
location, because the longitudinal velocity gradient in the tunnel invali-
From Bernoulli's equation dates q calibrations made upstream. The other tubes read the values of q
corresponding to their position on the rake.
Ho - Po = tpvo2 = qo
It will be seen that the proper values of q can be obtained only if the
and H - P = tp V2 =.q rake is situated far enough behind the wing so that the wake has returned
where Hand Ho = total head in wake and free stream respectively, and to tunnel static pressure, since a difference in static pressure across the
p and Po = static head in wake and free stream respectively. Hence we wake will void the values for q. A solution to this problem is to locate
have the rake at least 0.7 chord behind the trailing edge of the wing, for by the
time it reaches the wake will be approximately at tunnel static pressure.
C - 2f(J H- P_ H- P )dY (4:20) A second solution .is to equip the rake with static orifices, the usual
dO - H0 - Po H0 - Po C
practice being to employ three, one at each end and one in the middle,
The ordinary pitot-static tube reads (H - p) directly, but practical which are averaged. Since the measurement of freestream static pressure
difficulties usually prevent the construction of a bank of them. The close to a body is a difficult thing at best, extreme caution must be
customary method of obtaining values for eq. (4:19) is to use a wake exercised in locating the static holes. A satisfactory procedure is to locate
survey rake (Fig. 3: 14). This is simply a bank of total head tubes spaced them out of the plane of the rake body as in Fig. 3: 14 and calibrate them
about a tube diameter apart with the total head orifice about one chord with a standard pitot-static tube, adjusting the tip length of each static
Model Force., Moment, and Pressure Measurements I 187
tube until true static is read. If the tunnel is not at atmospheric static pres-
sure normally, reference tubes on the multiple manometer should be
connected to tunnel static pressure.
It is a tedious job to measure the pressure in each tube, divide it by qo,
take the square root, and perform the other measures necessary for the
calculation of eq. (4: 19). Since the ratio q/qo is close to 1.0 if the rake
is fairly well downstream, the assumption that ,Jq/qo = 0.5 + q/(2qo) is
valid. Substituted into eq. (4: 19) it yields
cao = -Yw - -1
c qoc
J q dy (4:21)
where Yw = wake width. -5.0

Equation (4: 21) makes possible the direct integration of the wake survey
-4.0
data as received, greatly reducing the time necessary for calculation.
The wake survey cannot be used to measure the drag of stalled airfoils -3.0
or of airfoils with flaps down. Under these conditions a large part of the ~I'" -2.0
drag is caused by rotational losses and does not appear as a drop in linear
momentum. -1.0
If practical reasons prohibit the location of the rake far enough down-
stream so that the wake has not yet reached tunnel static pressure,
+1.0 I B
additional corrections are necessary (Ref. 4: 1), and if tests are made at
large Mach numbers, still further changes are required. I
I
It has been found that a round total head tube will not read the true I
pressure at its centerline if it is located in a region where the pressure is I
varying from one side of the tube to the other. An allowance may be I
made for this (Ref. 4: 1), or. the total head tubes may each be flattened J
~I' at the tip. The latter procedure is recommended, although the usual
correction for the lateral pressure variation is quite small.
-5.0 -3.0 -1.0 + 1.0 c
ll.p
4 :20 Lift and Drag by Pressure Distributions =r
Still a third method exists whereby the lift and drag may be measured: Fig; 4:52 The actual pressure distribution and its presentation.
the integration of the static pressures over the wing. For these tests the
airfoil is equipped with many flush orifices, each individually connected the determination of normal force is shown in Fig. 4: 52b, and parallel to
to a tube of a multiple manometer. For lift determinations the pressures the chord for chord force determination in Fig. 4: 52c. Several of the
are plotted perpendicular to the chord, yielding the normal force coeffi- pressure readings are labeled so that their relative positions may be
cient CN' When plotted parallel to the chord, they give the chord force followed in the various plots.
coefficient, Ce. The approximate CL may be found from The growth of the pressure distribution with angle of attack is shown
for a typical airfoil in Fig. 4: 53; in this figure may also be found a partial
(4:22) answer to the oft-repeated question "Which lifts more, the upper or the
,. lower surface?" At zero lift, both surfaces have both positive and negative
The actual static-pressure distribution over a wing is shown in Fig. lift. With increasing angle of attack the upper surface increases in pro-
4: 52a. The same pressure distribution plotted normal to the chord for portion until it finally is lifting about 70 per cent of the total.
-2 -
between upper and lower surfaces at the leading
edge. The ideal angle is more familiar to practical
aerodynamicists as the middle of the drag bucket.
-1
It may be worthwhile to note that a stagnation
41" point on the trailing edge of an airfoil occurs,
0
even theoretically, only when the airfoil does not Fig. 4; 54
a = g. have a cusp trailing edge.
+1 eL= 0.72 Pressure distributions are usually plotted as follows:
-4 Pressures are read with a multiple manometer that mayor may not
be inclined. The true head in anyone tube, p, equals (p' sin e) x (sp. gr.
-3 of liquid), where p' is the measured head as defined in Fig. 4: 54. The nor-
mal force
~I~
-2
N = f t\p dS
-1 where t\p = P« - PI' P« = pressure on upper surface, P! = pressure on

lower surface, and S = wing area.
0 For a unit depth of span,
+1
N = f t\p de
where e = wing chord.
-1 -1
By definition,
!
41" 0 I---::=-_-==.lo...;;;:~ ~I" 0 ~==::::======::::;)-

;---------------
and hence
(4:23)
a = 20·
Wing stalled
+1 +1 It follows that the pressures may be plotted in units of dynamic pressure
against their respective locations on the chord. Further, the area under
Fig. 4; 53 Growth of static-pressure distribution with angle of attack.
such a curve divided by the chord is the normal force coefficient, and the
moment of area about the leading edge divided by the area is the center
Many interesting observations may be made from pressure distributions. of pressure.
These include: ' When a trailing edge flap is lowered, it is customary to show the flap
1. The location of the minimum pressure point and its strength. pressures normal to the flap chord in its down position. (See Fig. 4: 55.)
2. The load that the skin is to withstand and its distribution. For finding the total CN due to the main wing and flap we have
3. The location of the point of maximum velocity and its value. This CN = CNWing + CNflap cos (JF (4:24)
follows from item 1.
4. The location of the maximum pressure point and its strength. where (J F = flap angle.
5. The probable type of boundary layer flow and its extent. It should be noted that, though good agreement between CNand CL
6. The center of pressure location. can be obtained, the drag measured by the pressure distribution,
7. The critical Mach number. This follows from item 3. CD pressure = Co cos ex+ CN sin ex,
8. The airfoil ideal angle. This occurs when the flow enters the leading does not include skin friction or induced drag.
edge smoothly, i.e.; when there is no measurable pressure differential
.......,
4:8 How would you find the effect of a sting employed for a wing-alone
-8 test?
4:9 Draw and explain a setup that could be used to determine the effect of
-6 the model on the supports.
l
4:10 Is a fork-type support used to decrease model yaw deflection?
4:11 Give the runs and procedure to get the tare and interference of a three-
finned bomb on a single support.
o~----------~~+--
+1 References and Bibliography
4: 1 B. Melville Jones, Measurement of Profile Drag by the Pitot-Traverse Method,

Fig. 4:56 Fig. 4: 55
R&M 1688, 1936.
4:2 Joseph Bicknell, Determination of the Profile Drag of an Airplane Wing in Flight
The point is sometimes raised that a fallacy is involved in plotting the at High Reynolds Numbers, TR 667, 1939.
pressures that act normal to the curved surface of the wing as though they 4:3 A. Silverstein, A Simple Method for Determining Wing Profile Drag in Flight,
were normal to the chord. Actually there is no error. A simple analogy J{1.S, May 1940.
4:4 Robert B. Ormsby, Jr., Notes on the Design, Calibration, and Instrumentation,
is observable in the pressure which is acting radially in a pipe but whose
and Maintenance of Strain-Gage Balances, DTMB Aero Report 854, 1953.
force trying to split the pipe is the pressure times the section area made 4:5 J. R. Anderson, Strain Gage Balances for Wind Tunnels-An Outline of Practice
by a plane that contains a diameter. in the United Kingdom, AGARD Report 5.
The mathematical explanation is as follows. Consider a small element 4:6 P. Rebuffet, Some Strain Gage Balances Used in French Wind Tunnels, AGARD
of surface ds, which is subjected to a static pressure p acting normal to it. Report 6-T.
The total force on the element is p ds, directed along p, and the com-
ponent of this force normal to the chord line is p ds cos 0'" (See Fig. 4 :56.)
But ds cos IX = de, where de is a short length of the chord, so that the
total force normal to the wing chord line is N = f tJ.p de.
It will be noted in Fig. 4: 55 that a maximum stagnation pressure of
tJ.p/q = + 1.0 is usually developed near the leading edge of a wing. This
may be accepted as the rule for section tests, but swept-back panels will
show less than tJ.p/q = + 1.0 at all stations except at the plane of symmetry.
Problems
4:1 Define balance alignment.

4:2 Explain how to attain alignment.
4:3 Explain the situation and suggest the necessary corrections if the drag
is less when the wing lifts normally than when it is inverted.
4:4 Discuss the difference between the effect of the model on the supports and
the effect of the supports on the model.
4:5 State several difficulties mherent in a wire balance.
4:6 Sketch an airplane, and show the forces and moments on it.
4:7 Under What conditions does a wake survey fail to read the drag?
Testing Procedure / 193
Chapter five
Testing procedure
There is very little sense in testing an aircraft component or a complete

model unless the data are going to be used. Accordingly, we could say
that the discussion of each testing procedure should be followed by a
few words on the degree to which the data may be trusted. This plan has
been decided against, however, and the use of wind tunnel data in general Fig. 5: 1 Assembly of model of turboprop powered fighter. (Courtesy Aerolab
has been treated in a single chapter (Chapter 7). This permits a more Development Corp.)
direct approach when extrapolation to full scale is under consideration.
Before we begin to discuss testing procedure, however, it seems useful
to discuss the building of the models for testing, planning the tests, and
obtaining a tunnel. Additional comments on helicopter models will be
found in Chapter 10.
5:1 Model Design and Construction
The type and the construction of the wind tunnel model are dictated
by the tunnel in which it is to be tested and the type of test to be made.
After the obvious and paramount necessity of extreme accuracy, acces-
sibility and maintenance are next in importance. Working conditions in
a wind tunnel are at best very trying. The temperature may vary from
30°F in winter to 140°F in summer. The model is usually so placed that
accessibility is at a premium, and repair facilities mayor may not be
available. All these factors demand that changes be as simple as possible,
and that the model with all its parts and additions be thoroughly tested
outside the tunnel before tests are commenced.
In general, models made of laminated mahogany will be adequately
strong without steel beams for tests up to 100 mph. Above that, and to
about 300 mph, wood models with steel load members are satisfactory
(see Fig. 5: 2); for the higher speeds metal is needed. These speed criteria
are, of course, very rough and general. A very thin model might easily
Fig. 5: 2 Fitting laminated wood profile to steel spar of model. Pressure leads attached
require solid steel construction although testing is to be at only 100 mph.
to metal sections may be seen running down both leading and trailing edges of the spar.
The junior author once utilized a built-up rib-spar construction on a 6 (Courtesy Aerolab Development Corp.)
per cent thick-wing having 60-deg sweepback. When covered with i-inch
192
194 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Procedure I 195
aluminum alloy sheet the model was very rigid; great care must be used
to maintain airfoil contour-not an easy job. The criterion for model
strength is deflection rather than yield load limits, as great rigidity is f..e- Dummy bayonet
desirable. * In the high-speed range margins of safety of the order of 4.0
are usually required. It is advisable to provide metal beams for any control
surfaces in order to maintain the best accuracy of the hinge alignment.
The only serious design changes between model and full scale include
(1) provision of variable horizontal and vertical tail incidence whether
the real airplane will have them or not, and (2) omission of miniature
parts such as pitot tubes, etc., whose Reynolds number would be too low Slotted filler block
at model scale.
A wing fitting of the type shown in Fig. 5: 3 is in general use. It provides
an attachment for a dummy bayonet. Two sealing blocks are needed for
both upper and lower surfaces, one with a slot to allow a strut to pass,
and one solid to be used when the dummy system is not employed.
(Recall that during the process of testing the model must be mounted
both normal and inverted, with and without the image system.) The
second set of blocks may be omitted and the slot sealed with tape if
filler block
desired.
The most satisfactory material for wind tunnel models to be used up to
about 300 mph is well-seasoned Honduras mahogany. This wood is easy
to work, glues well, takes all types of finish, and is little subject to warping.
A second choice is walnut, also a nice wood to work but likely to have
curly grain and hence more difficult to work to close tolerances. Holly Bayonet
has high tearing resistance and is excellent for trailing edges. Some of the
softer woods, plastic, plaster, and metals can be used; each has its char-
acteristic advantages and disadvantages for construction and maintenance. Fig. 5: 3 Typical model attachment fitting.
The mahogany form block should be composed of laminations from i
to f inch wide. They should be cut from larger pieces and have alternate Necessary pressure tubes and steel beams may be either incorporated
strips turned end to end so that any warping tendency will be resisted. in the block or added later, depending on the design.
The block should be glued according to standard practices; i.e., glue Usually models have many component parts, each to be made sepa-
should be fresh, pressure adequate, and drying time sufficient (1 to 5 days). rately. This works out well with the construction procedure because it is
When practical, 2 or 3 weeks' seasoning is desirable. advisable to make each part from f-6 to t inch oversize and allow some
Some of the new plastics, epoxy resins, and fiberglass are often very additional seasoning over and above that needed for the block, to allow
useful in model building. Where weight is a problem (as on flutter models) any strains in the block a chance to be relieved by warping. ,
fiberglass can be used for external stores, slipper tanks, etc. Even the The last fraction of an inch is then worked down to female templates
low-melting-point alloys can be used in many ways. For example, fillets by files, scrapers, and sandpaper. The day should be so planned that
can be made of Cerrobend, which works easily and takes a good pol~sh. time remains to spray at least one coat of clear lacquer after the piece
A variety of epoxy plastics are available from Ren Plastics, Inc., Lansing, is done to seal it and prevent warping due to changes in its moisture
Michigan. - content.
* Unless, of course, the deflection is intentional and controlled (See 'Sections 5: 16 Hinged surfaces present a problem for the model designer largely
and 5:17.) because the smallest hinge possible to construct is far too large in scale.
196 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Procedure / 197
In view of the hopelessness of accurate reproduction the designer just and the smoothness behind intentional roughness thus makes sense.
does the best he can. Dimensions may be harder to justify, except to note the large difference
Several basic types of hinges are in general use. The first is simply a in pitching moment associated with changes in camber or camber shape.
set of brackets for each angle setting. This is a slow method with respect In attempts at extended laminar flow, the need for accuracy rapidly makes
to model changes, and it slows model construction as well. A serious itself evident.
factor is that if test results indicate during the program that additional Air passages, radiator openings, and cooling entrances may be simulated
angles are required, the new brackets usually require shop work above the by an indenture of the entry without any completed flow passages. Such
level of tunnel engineers and tie up the tunnel during fitting as well. passages if completed could have Reynolds numbers too low for satis-
A second method is to furnish the surfaces with hinges and to use an factory testing. A parallel situation exists for all small excrescences:
exterior sector with drilled holes for each angle setting. This is a good aerials, bomb racks, pitot-static tubes, and the like. They too would
positive method that at least yields the same setting for repeat points, and show such scale effect that their true effect could not be measured, and
it is only the work of a moment if additional settings become necessary. hence they are left off.
One must assume, of course, that such a sector in the "breeze" will not Pressure models for tests of the type described in Section 4:20 (see
cause appreciable trouble. . Figs. 5:4 and 5: 5) require additional care in design and construction.
A third method is to furnish hinges and an interior setting lock. We Usually the pressure taps on the wing are located at 0, 1.25, 2.5, 5.0,
have had too many of these slip, and have broken too many, to be en- 10.0, 15.0, 20.0, 30.0, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 95, and 100 per cent of the
thusiastic about this type except when it is designed by someone with chord on both upper and lower surface at several span wise stations.
much experience. The engineer using this type of hinge should check This obviously necessitates a large number of tubes, which should be
the setting at the end of each run. brought out from the model under circumstances least influencing the
Model makers differ in their opinions of suitable finishes. The choice
is usually betweel! three types, all quick drying: shellac, clear lacquer,
or pigmented lacquer. Shellac and the clear lacquers seem to yield a
slightly thinner coat (0.002 to 0.005 inch) than the pigmented lacquer
(0.003 to 0.008 inch). On the other hand many model makers believe that
the smoothest finish is obtained only with the pigmented lacquer. Re-
gardless of the choice, an adjustment in the templates should be made to
allow room for the finish. Finishes put on and sanded back to zero
thickness are not believed to offer sufficient protection and moisture seal.
The usual procedure to follow in applying a finish is to apply and sand
four to six coats, using progressively finer waterproof sandpaper. When
inspection indicates the surface to be filled, a rubbing compound may be
used to obtain a high gloss. The model should be waxed before shipping
and again after it is mounted in the tunnel.
A model for a 7 by 10 ft tunnel should have the wing contour accurate
to 0.005 inch to the true contour, and the fuselage to within 0.01 inch.
No perceptible ridges or joints should be permitted. If a metal model is
to be employed, a surface finish of rms 10 (25 microinches) may be at-
tained by using No. 600 wet emery paper. If this discussion of model
accuracy and finish seems nonsensical in the light of later (Section 7: 1)
addition of roughness to trip the boundary layer, it is not quite as bad as
it seems. The drag of a turbulent boundary layer on a smooth surface is
Fig. 5: 4 The great complexity of a pressure model as exemplified by this pre-setup
both different and more repeatable than that on a questionable surface, photograph of the Norair T-38. (Courtesy Norair Corp.)
198 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Procedure J 199
Though many satisfactory pressure models have been built using copper
tubing, manometer fill time can usually be saved by going to annealed
stainless steel tubing since, for a given (and usually critical) outside diam-
eter, its inside diameter is a maximum. The stainless tubing is less likely
to kink than copper, but it is harder to solder without an acid treatment.
Manometer fill times, which run as much as 2 min under some circum-
stances, may be estimated with good accuracy from the data in Refs. 5: 12
and 5: 13.
The leads from the model are most easily made of plastic tubing, which
has little tendency to kink or leak and has good bending qualities. A
sort of multiple tube is available that furnishes 10 leads about i2' inch in
diameter in a thin flat strip l'6 inch thick by 1 inch wide. It is hard to
envision a more compact arrangement.
When speed rather than accuracy is the major factor, pressure models
can be made from the solid type by belting the model parallel to the
airstream with strips of the multiple plastic tubing mentioned' above.
Holes drilled in the tubing at the selected stations enable pressures to be read
at one chordwise station per tube. Actually, of course, the presence of the
flat tubing alters the true contours and hence also alters the pressure distri-
Fig.5:5 The same model as shown in Fig. 5:4, but after a good many man-hours-of bution about the model. The error so introduced is often surprisingly small.
work. The tubing is now connected to scanivalves, which permit rapid electrical readout Though perhaps not a wind tunnel design criterion per se, the fact
and avoid the long fill time of manometer tubes outside the tunnel. A port-side fuselage
remains that wind tunnel models have to be moved about, and, depending
half-shell is used to complete the model. (Courtesy Norair Corp.)
on their size, this may become a ticklish problem. Most tunnels have a
flow. First, however, let us consider the design of the pressure orifices lifting crane for moving the model into the test section, and in turn when-
themselves. ever possible model designers should provide an attachment near the center
If static-pressure orifices are kept small (say about i'"'2 inch in diameter), of gravity of the model. Some tunnels provide canvas sandbags for
negligible difference is found between drilling them perpendicular to the supporting the model when it is resting on the floor or a table.
surface or pendicular to the chord. But it is certain that they must be Some sort of modeling-day-type material is frequently needed for
absolutely flush. A copper or brass tube has a tendency to form a slight filling cracks, covering screw holes, and making minor contour changes.
ridge as the softer wood is filed down about it. Some designers use metal Children's modeling day or, better, sculptors' Plastalina No.4, will suffice
strips at the section where the orifices are to be, thus avoiding the diffi- for low-speed work. When extra strength or high temperatures must be
culties of filing dissimilar materials. An artifice practiced by the Canadian considered, a stiff wax made according to the formula given below will be
National Research Council seems a satisfactory arrangement. This em- found excellent. The acetone and pyroxylin putties are also very good
braces a solid transparent plastic plug leading down to the buried brass although they require a few minutes' drying time.
tubes. After the airfoil is shaped, holes are drilled down to the tubes
Tunnel Wax Formula
through the plastic. Since the plastic offers filing characteristics similar
to those of wood, remarkable smoothness is attained. If the wings of the Beeswax About 80% by weight
model are exceedingly thin, it is sometimes advantageous to put the upper Venice turpentine About 20 % by weight
surface orifices on one wing and those for the lower surface on the other. Powdered rosin About i % by weight
In metal models, pressure tubes may be laid in grooves which are then Bring turpentine to a boil; add the rosin, and stir. Add the beeswax in small
peened over and filled with zinc metal spray and finally drilled at the chunks and allow to melt. Stir thoroughly.
proper station. Remove from heat and pour into trays for cooling.
5:2 Planning the Test 8. Whenever possible find out how others do the type of test you
contemplate and profit from their experience.
A wind tunnel test should be run only if (a) some new knowledge is 9. Be clear in all instruction and data presentation. Never use the
desired and (b) the test as planned has a reasonable chance of obtaining word "pressure" when "static pressure" or "total pressure" might be
the knowledge sought with the necessary accuracy. In view of the cost of confused. Always use a subscript for pitching and yawing moments to
models and tunnel time, it should be determined that the "new knowledge" indicate the axis about which they are measured.
does not already exist. In many cases-too many cases-a good library
search could have saved both time and money. 5:3 Tunnel Occupancy Procedure
It is hard to write specific rules for setting up a test and taking data, Each tunnel has a somewhat different procedure for use, and no exact
since there are many types of tests. However, the following procedures rules can be written to cover them all. Nevertheless, a description of
do stand as accepted and good. If some seem obvious to the experienced a typical tunnel procurement may be useful in giving a general familiarity
engineer, we hasten to add that at one time or another we have seen all with the system.
the rules stated below completely disregarded. Most of the large wind tunnels are scheduled about 6 months in advance,
and hence an inventor seeking to prove some new idea may be very dis-
1. Check all calibration curves of new equipment before, during, and appointed in the delay he may be subjected to. Aircraft companies avoid
after a test. Always calibrate for the full-load range, and always use a this problem by regularly scheduling tests of 12 to 100 hours' duration
number ofloads-not a single load and the assumption that the calibration every few weeks. Then, as their time approaches, they select from needed
is linear. tests the one upon which the greatest urgency rests. As a testing time
2. Take enough points so that the loss of anyone point will not hurt approaches, the following procedure is usual.
the fairing of the curve. 1. About 2 months before a test, the tunnel is informed of the tunnel
3. Always repeat the wind-off zero and the wind-on first point at the configuration desired: external balance, swept strut," two-dimensional
end of the run. Have acceptable balance "drift" limits set up before the test section, etc. If the-a;;';rire"(i"
setup does not meld with 'th~othe';-pr~:"
program .starts (0.1 or 0.2 per cent of maximum reading is a reasonable grams scheduled about that time, a shift of a week or so may be necessary
drift allowance).' . to avoid excessive tunnel changes.
4. Take points on base runs at every degree plus 0.5-deg readings at the 2. Three weeks before the test complete model drawings, stress analysis,
stall or other points of interest. Take routine runs with 2-deg readings desired tunnel operating conditions, and a preliminary run list are sent
and l-deg increments at the stall. to the tunnel manager.
5. Check all models against their templates and check the templates. 3. Two weeks before the test a meeting is arranged between the engi-
Do not hesitate to cancel a program and pay the cancellation fee if the neers who will supervise the test for both the tunnel and the airplane
model is not within acceptable limits. If you do, the new shop foreman company. At this meeting any points not apparent in the pretest infor-
will have future models right. mation may be ironed out. -.-~
6. Be very careful when you shorten a program by omitting "irrelevant" Agreement on the special equipment needed is reached: manometers
components. For instance, changes that primarily affect the pitching (number of tubes and expected pressure ranges), cameras both still and
moment only might lead one to read the pitching balance. This omission motion picture. If a punch-in system is used, the items to be punched in
would make it impossible to plot the data completely since the angle and the number of significant figures involved are discussed. The realistic
of attack correction is affected by the lift, which must also be known, definition of desired accuracy should include forces and moments; angle
and, indeed, if later a change to a new center of gravity seems desirable settings, pressures, and model location; the acceptance of reduced ac-
the drag values must be obtained. curacy where it actually is sufficient may result in considerable savings in
Similarly reading less than six components in the interest of saving time time and money.
on yaw runs can also lead to serious work-up troubles on the same nature. A list of plots needed and the form of the tables of data are presented.
7. Plan model variations of wide enough scope to bracket needed data Agreement is reached on a date for this presentation of preliminary data
so that interpolation rather than extrapolation is in order. and for the final report.
( --
4. One week before the test the company representatives arrive with
the model and commence as much of the setup and gravity tares as feasible
outside the tunnel. There may still remain some questions about the
program which must be settled before running. The representatives must
do a certain amount of legwork to ascertain that all the items previously
agreed upon have actually been accomplished.
5. During the last day before the test, company representatives remain
on one-hour alert, ready to move into the tunnel and start their test.
5:4 General Testing Procedure

Depending on the innovations incorporated and the terms of the devel-
.2.E~~.t contract or program, a new model airplane may require froIIlOrl"e
to six models (or more) and up to six different wind tunnels. A typical
program is as follows:
After the preliminary ~ of the proposed new .airplane has been
made, a "complete" model is designed and constructed. This first*
model, usually of 6 to 16 per cent scale, is a breakdown model; that is,
the different configurations of the airplane may be built up progressively
through additions to the winq alone, making possible the evaluation of
the rel~tiv~ effect of each ~l!!P0nent. Testing this model requires meas-
urement of all six forces and moments: lift, drag, and side force, and
rolling, yawing, and pitching moments. The )p/eo!tant 9iteri1!_ of maxi-
mum lift (stalling speed), minimum drag (high speed), and static stability Fig. ~:6 Breakdown of Globemaster YB-124B wind tunnel model. Across the top of
the picture are the smooth nacelles for the power-off tests, and just ahead of the nose is
are evaluated. The breakdown model aids in determining the exterior
the nose wheel. Below the power-off nacelles are the power-on nacelles, each with an
configuration of the airplane so that the ~@!~odels can be designed. electric drive motor. The main landing gear doors are between the pairs of power-on
(See Fig. 5: 6.) nac~lIes, and at the san:-e level but farther out are the propellers, Just above the wing
The breakdown model is ~ for much more than simply satisfying leadmg edge are the main wheel assemblies. The wing leading edge section has cut-outs
the aerodynamicists ~sit:Y. about the contributions of each component, for. the nacelles and motor mounts, and at its tips are the wing-tip heaters. The wing
trailing edge sectIOn has the slot-lip ailerons removed and placed just aft of the trailing
One instance comes to mind where much of the breakdown was omitted
edge. At the base of the fuselage are the elevator and rudder actuators, and just outside
("We can only fly the ~e airplane"). When the performance fell far of them are the wing-fuselage fillets, The tail on the left is complete with both horizontal
short of that predicted, and. after the tunnel and. tunnel crew had been and vertical surfaces; to its left is an alternate dorsal. The smooth tail cone at the
duly excoriated, a breakdown model disclosed-that the horizontal jet pod bottom right is for the tail-off runs. The span of this model is approximately 8 it.
supports were lifting "nearly as much as the wing," and in the ~2E.£~!!.e (Courtesy Douglas Aircraft Co.)
direction!
The second model (after the first breakdown model there is no specific A third model, also light and fragile, may be flown in a free-flight
order for the additional ones) may be a small-scale spin model for deter- tunnel where motion pictures record its stability and maneuverability.
mining thetSPin-recovg.J: characteristics in a spin tunnel. Here the model A fourth model, SQ constructed that its rigidity is related to the full-scale
is put into a tailspin in the vertical airstream of the tunnel, and a remotely airplane, may be tested for critical flutter speed (Ref. 2: 1),
operated mechanism moves the control surfaces as desired to bring the . I~ the design appears satisfactory or can be made so after these pre-
plane out of the spin. Motion pictures of the recovery can be examined liminary tests, larger models of component parts are tested. Aileron
to see whether the procedure is satisfactory. ' panels and tail surfaces to perhaps 40 per cent scale may be tested, and
nacelles to a similar scale may be investigated for cooling and drag.
* High-speed tests for transonic airplanes may precede the low-speed tests,
204 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Procedure / 205
Compressibility effects are investigated with high-speed models in high- Last, but not least, a check of expected loads should be made to ascer-
speed tunnels. Sometimes additional section tes~s of the .airf?ils t~ be tain that ample provision has been made to run the entire program at
used are made in a two-dimensional tunnel, and If the design IS entirely one speed. Changing the tunnel speed during a program adds one more
untested pressure distributions over the flap, flap vanes, etc., may be effect to the data.
taken to determine loads for the structural design.
Finally, when the first actual airplane is finished it can be tested in a 1. After the first run has been made, it should be' checked thoroughly
full-scale tunnel for aerodynamic "clean-up" changes. Here also the against expected results. If possible, the setup should be arranged so that
manufacturing irregularities can be examined and improvements suggested. the first run is simple enough for comparison with previous tests. Items
Military airplanes can be subjected to simulated battle damage so that to be checked include O(Z.L., dCL/dO(, CLmax, CnOmin, and CmO'
studies can be made of possible catastrophic effects. 2. Determine the testing accuracy by:
The cost of such a program is not small, of course. Yet, compared to (a) Running a test twice without any change in it at all. This tests the
the cost of building the actual airplane, testing it, and changing it, the reproducible accuracy of the balance and the speed control. '
model-testing cost becomes minor indeed. Rarely would a single concern (b) Resetting and repeating a run made previously after there have
have the entire facilities required for a complete testing program. The been several intervening runs. This determines the reproducible accuracy
customary solution is for the complete model and the control surface panels of setting the flaps, tabs, etc., as well as the accuracy of the balance and
to be tested in the company's own wind tunnel, leaving the spin, stability, speed control.
flutter, and high Mach number' work to tunnels specially designed for them. 3. Keep a running plot of all data as they come out. Any uncertain
The basic parameters of the tunnel that need direct attgntion before the points can be substantiated immediately by taking readings at small in-
wind is turned on include considerations of the average angle of flow, the crements above and below the uncertain ones.
average q, and the balance loads: -. 4. Occasionally repeat a basic run. This will indicate any gradual
The average angle of flow need not be considered before the full test model warpage or other alterations occurring with time.
of a three-dimensional wing. As shown in Section 4: 17 it is accurately -5. Always repeat the first reading a~ the end of each run. This will
determined by the model normal and inverted tests of the alignment indicate any control surface slippage, etc. Inspect the model frequently,
determination. A two-dimensional model should also be run normal and checking all control settings, and wherever possible make angular meas-
inverted. However, when inversion is not to be employed for any of a urements of controls, etc., with the inevitable slack taken out in the
number of reasons, or when it is actually impossible, as for a panel model, loaded direction.
the procedure outlined in Section 3: 6 may be followed for finding the Besides checking the control settings 'one must check that the setting
average angle for a given model. A rough checkmay be made from the quadrants are right. An example comes to mind of a model whose stabilizer
first run by comparing the expected and obtained angles of zero lift. quadrant markings were an even 10 deg off. Fortunately the model had
Indeed, particularly for the panels, so much advantage accrues in the been run before and the wide difference in trim conditions started a
analysis of later data from assuming the models to be absolutely accurat~ search for trouble. One can imagine much difficulty arising later if a test
and hence making expected and obtained angles of zero lift identical that pilot is told to set the stabilizers 10 deg wrong for the first flight!
this is the usual procedure, 6. Make every data sheet self-contained. Avoid using expressions such
The average dynamic pressure must be _calculat~d for each model of. as "Same as Run 6," for this necessitates looking up Run 6. Every data
different planform by a method like that for obtaining the average angle. sheet must contain the model designation, configuration, test speed, date,
•That is, the product of local q (from the dynamic pressure survey of the and tunnel temperature and pressure. Further data, such as effective
test section) and the model chord at the, same station is plotted against . Reynolds number and model dimensions, are valuable.
the model span. If the area under the qc yersus span curve is then divide.d 7. Keep an accurate log of everything that happens. When analyzing
by the total wing area, the resulting quotient is the average dynamic the data the exact point at which changes were made may be of paramount
pressure. This average dynamic pressure is not used to find the various importance.
coefficients until it is increased by the blocking .'factor obtained from 8. Always keep a run list in chronological order; never assign a number
Chapter 6. like "Run 3b" just because the later run is a check of Run 3.
The size and design of the tunnel determine the size of the model that Further, this Reynolds number should be obtained by a high-speed or
can be accommodated and, sometimes, other important criteria such as large model, not by the introduction of turbulence into the airstream.
model weight or power arrangements. Occasionally a gasoline engine A second and serious difficulty is that the tare and interference of the
can be operated in the tunnel (Ref. 5: 1). The tunnel itself also determines mounting system will be at least as large as the wing minimum drag, and
the complexity of the model and hence its cost. The cost ranges from extreme care must be taken if good data are to result.
about $25 for the simplest small wing of 15-inch span to $600,000 for a Tare and interference drag can be reduced by careful engineering of the
complete four-engine V/STOL model using remotely operated ailerons, supports and attachment points. (See Section 4: lO.)
elevators, rudders, cowl flaps, landing gear, wing incidence and hydrau- Wings that are part of a systematic research program should be made
lically driven propellers. The amount of remotely operated equipment as simply as possible, preferably without taper and with simple tips.
is a function of the number of tests to be made and the type of tunnel. Their span should be held to less than 0.8 tunnel span to avoid excessive
wall effects. For most wing tests all wall corrections should be investigated.
5:5 Testing Three-Dimensional Wings In general the aerodynamicist will be most interested in dCL/doc , CL max'
The first wind tunnel tests ever made were concerned with the behavior ocZ.L_; C DO min' e, the aerodynamic center, Cmac' and the center of pressure.
of wings (Fig. 5: 7), and probably more tests are made today on this item The following comments will give the tunnel engineer some feel for the
than on any other. Much progress has been made on airfoil design, but problem.
wing design is still in its infancy. The variables of sweepback, twist, a. dCL/doc. The theoretical relation for the slope of the lift curve of
section, taper, and tips are too much' for any short research program. a finite span wing has been given as eq. 10: 44 of Ref. 6: 39. This equation
The foremost difficulties encountered in making wing-alone tests include allows for the effect of the downwash at the wing (but not streamline
the necessity of obtaining a moderately high Reynolds number (at least curvature), the variation of downwash across the span, and the Jones
2,500,000) if extrapolation to higher Reynolds numbers is to be attempted. edge effect. For modern wings with thin boundary layers, the theoretical
relations usually are slightly high (about 0.003 per degree), possibly owing
to the neglect of the streamline curvature effect. For general comparison
with experimental results the theoretical values are presented for a wide
range of tapers and aspect ratios in Figs. 5: 8-5 : 11. Figures covering
other taper ratios and elliptic planforms may be found in Chapter 10 of
Ref. 6:39.
A far shorter but less accurate relation that is useful for rough approxi-
mations * is . .
dCL = 0.1 AR (5: 1)

doc AR + 2
where AR = aspect ratio.

The lift curve slope decreases with sweep roughly by the cosine of the
sweep angle of the quarter chord. For lift curve slopes of swept and
delta wings the latest NASA report should be consulted; however, the
following equation yields results that agree well with experimental data
'(see NACA TN 2495):
dCL ao
- = 0.95 IcosA (5:2)
d« 1 + 18.24ao/AR'V (c/4)
Fig. 5: 7 Three-dimensional wing being tested with image system in. Omission of the
image pitch strut reduces the total drag of the system with little error in data. (Courtesy * The familiar value of 21T per radian is the theoretical slope for thin airfoils and is
Wichita State University.) frequently exceeded in practice.
Testing Procedure I 209
Airfoil thickness ratio

0.11 r----,---,-----,,-----,-----,-----,-----,---::::J 0.20 0.11 Airfoil thickness ratio
0.16
0.12
~I~
...... 0.10 I---+--+----+------:::;j,..-<s"......"b-=-:±::"'"""-==,=",_.....,
OQ04
.
M
~ 0
"0
~
8. 0.09 1----+-----17S~""S_i""7..,c_~......,,:::::..._-t_--+---t--_1 8.., 0.09
~ e
::J
"u U
:E
..,
~ 0.08 i----,.f5-:7"7""74----+-----1i---+---+---+--___t 0.08
:S :S
o x=o 0
8. a
0
~ 0.07 ~~7L-+--___tI_--+---+---t_--+--___t--____j iii
6 8 10 12 14 16 18· 20 0.064~-~6~--;8--~1:;-0--7.12;;----:1~4---1L6 --_j18--_j20

Aspect ratio Aspect ratio
Fig. 5: 8 Theoretical slope of the lift curve for wings having a taper ratio of zero Fig. 5:10 Theoretical slope of the lift curve for wings having a taper ratio of 0.75.
(pointed tips).

0.11 0.10
0.20
0.16
0.12
o.os
!';"Ill
l .... 0.10
., '"l;,.)"'.,....lll 0.09 0.04
0
.,e
OJ)
"0 '0
!ij,
C1)
~
., ~ 0.08
.,
0.. 0.09 .,
0..
c: e
::J
::J
U U
:E., ~
C1)
;5. :S
0
0
.,
0..
C1)
0..
>'=1.2
0 0
(ii (ii 0.06
0.06 ---;6----::a---:.10::-----:l12:----:1L4---1L6--- .L --_j20

0.054,:-
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 1 8
Fig. 5: 9 Theoretical slope of the lift curve for wings with a taper ratio of 0.25. Fig. 5: 11 Theoretical slope of the lift curve for wings having a taper ratio of 1.2.
Airfoil thickness ratio. Airfoil thickn~ss ratio

0.11 0.20 0.11
0.16
0.12
0.08 t.J"11S
0"'11$ ~----4-----~----~----~~~~~__~~=-~~
...
.,"tI 0.10 __ =-~0.~
o ., 0.10
"CO ."
.,.
:!!
., ~
.,
't:I
't:I
~
., 8. 0.09
0. 0.09
~ ~
" "
(,)
s.,
(,)
~., 0.08 0.08

-so :E
'0 >"=0 '0
8. 8.
0
0
<n 0.07 iii 0,07
0.06 0.06 :-----;----:-----::7--~~--L--..L--L---]

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18· 20 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Fig. 5: 8 Theoretical slope of the lift curve for wings having a taper ratio of zero Fig. 5: 10 Theoretical slope of the lift curve for wings having a taper ratio of 0.75.
(pointed tips).

0.11
0.10 ,----;---r---,---;---..,....---r------..--==-_. 0.20
0.16
0.12
0.08
0"'
... 11$
~"'I.g
., 0.09 t---r------i------i---=...-::;;;-:::::;...4::;,........,::q,_=::::::r.:-=-=I g.04
.,-e 0.10 ~
e .,
., bO
't:I
bO
't:I
.~, ~
0. 0.08
.,
0. 0.09
'"e::s
c:
"
o
(,)
s., ~ 0.07
0.08
:E
'"
£;
'0 ;\=1.2
'0
., .,a.
0. 0
0
iii 0.06
zs
0.06
0.05 :-----::------:--_.J.-_--'- __ -l.. __ _L, __ -L__ ...l
4 6 12 20 4 6 8 W U 14 16 18 20
Fig. 5: 9 Theoretical slope of the lift curve for wings with a taper ratio of 0.25. Fig. 5: 11 Theoretical slope of the lift curve for wings having a taper ratio of 1.2.
~
I
b. CL max' The maximum lift coefficient for airfoils varies from 0.6 the pl?t, :with a slight bending at both the lower and higher values of C L *
for very thin profiles to about 1.7 for highly cambered thick profiles. In The sl?lllfi~ance of the divergence from the straight line at the low lift
general it increases with Reynolds number. (See Chapter 7.) The wing coeffic.lents IS that CDO mi? does not occur at CL = 0 for a cambered airfoil.
maximum lift coefficient usually runs from 85 to 90 per cent of the airfoil The divergence at .the higher values of C L is due to flow separation. At
values, and is never more than the airfoil values. Swept wings show a any rate, the ~quat~on of the straight line (which is extended until it inter-
loss considerably more than the above values. It is a little-known but sects the abscissa) IS
well-substantiated fact that CL max is affected by Mach number even in
the low-speed range around M = 0.2. Accordingly, tests for maximum
lift should be run at the same landing Mach number as the proposed and hence K=_l_'
airplane. e27TAR (5:4)
c. IXZ.L.' The angle of zero lift in degrees is roughly equal to the amount
of camber in per cent for airfoils and untwisted wings of constant section.
It requires a considerable amount of calculation to determine IXZ.L. for
a twisted wing. .
andt
e =J K7T~R (5: 5)
. It has _been suggeste~ tha~, since the low drag coefficient indicated by the
d. CDO min' The minimum coefficient of drag decreases with increasing
mterse~tlOn of the straight line and the CD axis does not exist in a practical
Reynolds number (see Chapter 7) and usually has a value between
sense, It sh?uld be indicated not as CDO min but as an effective parasite
0.0050 and 0.0085 in the tunnel after the tare and interference have been drag coefficient CDPe' Hence we have .
subtracted.
e. The customary definition of the drag coefficient C 2
CD = CDPe + e27T~R (5:6)

CL2
CD = CDomin + e27TAR (5: 3)
_The value of e as defined above will be about 0.85 to 0.95 for straight
wmgs, and an approximate value may be found from the empirical relation
makes the determination of the span efficiency factor e of importance.
This value may be determined most easily by making a plot of CD versus e = 1.00 - 0.009AR (5 :7)
CL2 (Fig. 5: 12). It will appear as a straight line along the major part of where AR = aspect ratio.
..
For swept wings of fairly low aspect ratio, rough empirical values for e
0.08 may be found from
e = 1.00 - 0.00008A 2 (5:8)
where A = sweep angle in degrees. .
0.06
/v .It should be no~ed ~hat concentrating on getting a high value for e is
misplaced eo:phasls, since the induced drag is much more closely related
./ to as?ect rat.1O,tha~ to e. Carrying this philosophy a little further, the
rJ 0.04
V u~twlsted elliptic .wmg has the minimum induced drag (greatest e) for a
/A" glve~ span. Yet It s~ould ~evert be used because for a given wing root
0.02 bendmg ~oment (wing weight) a little increase of span yields a greater
t/ aspect ratio and less drag, even though e (the so-called efficiency) is less.
,/
o . * Some of the newer air~oils may have to be broken down into two or three strai ht
Iines, When this occurs different values of e and C . must be used f th g
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 priate range of CL' . DO mm or e appro-
cL2
t Many engineers use e where the authors have used e'. Watch for this.
Fig. 5: 12 CD versus CL2 for an NACA 23012 wing. t One exception: when maximum span has been fixed.
The above discussion has treated e as though it mostly accounted for L
the "loss" is not using an elliptic wing. Actually it also includes the change
of profile drag with angle of attack and other miscellaneous items, but Mounting trunnion and
balance moment center
inclusion of these items does not change the conclusions given above.
Some new ideas about e and induced drag for nonplanar lifting systems
have been presented by Cone (Ref. 5: 17). He finds for- wings with ~pan-
wise curvature a possible theoretical increase in effective aspect ratio of
as much as 50 per cent. It is thus theoretically possible for a properly Fig. 5: 13
designed nonplanar wing to have 33.3 per cent less induced drag than
fiat, elliptical planform with the same total lift force. A limiting case of behind and below the probable location of the aerodynamic center (Fig.
spanwise camber is the annular airfoil whose induced drag is 50 per ~ent 5: 13). (The aerodynamic center is defined as the point about which the
,I
less than that of the elliptical planar wing. Some of these theoretical moment coefficient is constant.) Let the distance along the chord from
gains could be offset byincreasing wing weight, production costs, and the trunnion to .the aerodynamic center be Xl> and let the distance above
skin friction. .
the trunnion be YI' Both Xl and Yl are measured in fractions of the MAC*
The tunnel engineer may expect such wings to produce unusually high It will be seen that
Iift slopes for the given aspect ratio, and e_ values in excess of 1.0 (see
Ref. 5: 1.8). Ma.c = Mtr - x1c(L cos oc+ D sin ~ - Ylc(D cos oc- L sin oc) (5: 9)
Example 5:1 Values of CL and CD are given in Table 5:1. Find the where Mtr = the moment measured about the mounting trunnion. Hence
span efficiency factor e if AR = 6.0.
Cmac = Cmtr - x1(CL cos oc+ CD sin oc)- Yl(CD cos oc- CL sin oc)
From a plot of CD versus CL2, the slope, K, is found to be 0.0611.
Hence (5: 10)
Applying the condition that Cmac does not vary with CL we get
e = .Jl/KTTR = .Jl/0.061br· 6
e = 0.932 dCmac = 0= dCmtr
It is also noted that C DFe = 0.0064. dCL dCL
f. Location of the aerodynamic center may be computed as follows. *
Consider a wing mounted so that the axis of rotation is at some point
- [(1 + CD dCLdoc) cos « + (dCD _ CL doc) sinocJxI
dCL dCL
Table 5:1
CL
- [(dCD _ CL doc) cos o: -
dCL . deL
(1 + CD dCL doc) sin OCJYl (5: 11)
01: CD
The data may easily be used to find C L> CD' oc,and also the slopes dCmtri
-1.2 0.0 0.0079
0.2 0.1 0.0079 dC L _and doc/dCL since they are straight lines. The determination of
1.6 0.2 0.0090 dCD/dCL is difficult, for it is a curve.
4.3 0.4 0.0167 >I< The mean aerodynamic chord may be found from either
7.0 0.6 0.0298
9.7 0.8 0.0467
12.3 1.0 0.0673
15.1 1.2 0.0928
17.9 1.4 0.1260 where C'I' = wing tip chord and C R = wing root chord for straight tapered wings, or
MAC =- 2lbl2 c2dy

* A second method of calculating the location of the aerodynamic center is given in S 0
the appendix of NACA TR 627. for other planforms.
r
If the wing efficiency factor has been determined, dCn/dCL may be Substituting into eq. (5:11) we have:
found directly from
[( 1 + c., doc) cos oc+ (dCn _ CL dIX) sin oc]Xl
dCL dCL dCL
(5: 12) + [(ddCCn + CL dIX) COS IX_ (1 + Cn dIX) sinoc]Yl = dCmtr

L dCL dCL dCL
If information for the above equation is not available, the slope of the + 0.0084)(0.999) +
[(1 (0 - 0.34)(0.0401)]Xl
drag curve at the proper point may be obtained by the familiar mirror 5.87 5.87
method. In this method a small hand mirror is set directly on the plotted
curve and adjusted until the reflected curve appears as a smooth continu- + [0 - 0.34 (0.999) - (1 + 0.0084 (0.0401»)J s, = 0.254
5.87 5.87
ation of the original. Under these conditions the plane of the mirror
will be perpendicular to the drag curve at the selected CL, and the drag and [(1 + 0.0210)(0.988) + (0.048 _ 1.0 )(0.153)] Xl
curve slope may then be computed. 5.87 5.87
Equation (5: 11), having two unknowns, requires the substitution of
two points and then the simultaneous solution of the resulting equations. + [(0.048 - 1.0 )(0.988) - (1 + 0.0210)(0.153)JYI = 0.254
5.87 5.87
The approximation of measuring dCn/dC L may be eliminated for one
of these points by selecting for the point the angle at which Cn'is a These equations simplify to
minimum. At this point, obviously, dCn/dCL = O. 0.99811xl + 0,0178YI = 0.254
Example 5:2 Find the aerodynamic center of an airfoil whose tests 0.9728x1 + 0.0645YI = 0.254
yield the data in Table 5: 2. The mounting trunnion is at the 49 per cent and hence Xl = 0.252
chord point and 5.0 per cent below the chord line. ".
YI = 0.136
Table 5:2 The aerodynamic center is 25 - (49.0 - 25.2) = 1.2 per cent ahead of
the quarter chord point, and (5.0 - 13.6) = 8.6 per cent above the chord.
(X, CL Cn Cmtr
. In ord.er to save time in locating the aerodynamic center, the assumption
-2 -0.086 0.0120 -0.023 IS sometimes made that the moment is due to entirely to the lift and that
0 0.111 0.0095 0.024 the aerodynamic center is on the chord line. Since the lift and drag act
2 0.326 0.0087 0.079 through the aerodynamic center, the moment about the trunnion is
4 0.531 0.0096 0.131 (Fig. 5: 14)
6 0.737 0,0138 0.183
Mtr = Mac + L(tr - ac)c (5: 13)
8 0.943 0.0195 0.231
10 1.118 0.0267 0.281
0,317 L
12 1.260 0.0369
Plots of the data yield dCmtr/dC L = 0.254.

dC L/doc = 0.1025 per degree
= 5.87 per radian
At oc= 2.3 deg, CL = 0.34, Cno min = 0.0084, and dC n/dC L = 0.,
At oc= 8.8 deg, CL = 1.00, Cn = 0.0210, and by the mirror method
dCn/dCL = 0.048. Fig. 5:14
Table 5:3
where Mac = moment about the aerodynamic center, and tr = chordwise
Q( Cmac Q(
Cmac
location of the balance trunnion.
Rewriting eq. (S: 13) in coefficient form, we have -2 -0.001 6 0.000 .
Cmtr = Cmac + C L(tr - ac) (S: 14) 0 -0.003 8 -0.001
2 -0.002 10 0.000
and differentiating and transposing (dCmac/dC L = 0), 4 -0.002 12 0.000
ac = tr - dCmtr/dCL (S: IS)
As indicated by theory, the Cm due to changing exis constant about the
The aerodynamic center is theoretically a small amount behind the
quarter chord. The Cm due to camber is a constant about the half chord.
quarter chord. In practice, it is found ahead of the quarter chord for
Hence adding camber in the form of flaps merely increases the value of
the older profiles and behind for the newer profiles.
Cmac without changing the location of the aerodynamic center as deter-
Example 5:2a Calculate the location of the aerodynamic center for the mined by changing ex.
data of example S: 2, using eq. (S: 14) . . h. The center of pressure is defined as "that point on the chord of an
1. From a plot of Cmtr versus C L, airfoil through which the resultant force acts." Though its usefulness has
declined with the introduction of the concept of the aerodynamic center,
dCmtr/dC L = 0.2S4
it must occasionally be determined from force tests. (See Section 4:20
2. Substitution the trunnion location and dCmtr!dC L in eq. (S: IS), we for determining the center of pressure by the pressure distribution method.)
have ac = 0.49 - 0.2S4 = 0.236. This compares with 0.241 by the The procedure is as follows:
method of eq. (S: 11). ' The forces measured appear as a lift force L, a drag force D, and a
Equation (S: 14) indicates that when .C L = 0, Cma~ = CmtI' In other moment about the mounting trunnion Mtr (Fig. S: IS). At the point
words, tne value of the moment coefficient at the point where the curve through which the resultant force acts, the moment vanishes. Hence
strikes the C L axis is approximately the value of Cmac' Rather than call
it that, the usual practice is to label the above intersection Cmo· . Mcp =0= Mtr + L(P cos ex) + D(P sin ex)
g. After the location of the aerodynamic center has been obtained
where p is the distance from the trunnion to the center of pressure, positive
the moment coefficient about it may be found from
to the rear of the trunnion.
Cmac = Cmtr - X1(CL cos (J.. + CD sin ex) We then have
-Yl(CDcosex- CLsinex) (S:16) -Cmtr = CL(P!c) cos ex + CD(P/c) sin ex = 0
The value of Cmac varies with the amount and shape of the camber line.
It is about zero for symmetrical wings; -0.007 for a 23012; and -0.07 and p -Cmtr
for a Clark Y. Flap-down values may exceed -1.0. CCL cos ex+ CD sin ex
Example 5:3 Calculate the Cmac for example S: 2. . L

Substituting each point into eq. (S: 10) we have the data shown III
Table S:3.
It is not unusual to find some small spread in the values of Cmac'
although strictly speaking, the definition states that it must be. constant ',
It is a surprising fact that the location of the aerodynamic center 1S
practically unchanged by flaps. The explanation lies in the manner in
which the moment is generated:
I I Fig. 5:15
Cm total = Cm due to changing + Cm due to camber
"'
(1.
I , I
The location of the center of pressure from the wing leading edge is then may also be read from the pressure on the tunnel walls, but in many cases
the wing is mounted on trunnions and the moment is read with a simple
CP = (PIc) + (alc) (5: 17)
beam balance. The proportionately large drag of two endplates prohibits
Example 5:4 A wing is mounted with the trunnion at the 23.5 per cent accurate drag measurements by the usual force tests and complicates the
chord point. At ~ = 7.3, we have CL = 0.6, CD = 0.0320, and Cmtr = endplate seal.
-0.011. Find the center of pressure. Since the models customarily used in two-dimensional· tunnels are
larger in proportion to jet size than others, corrections for constriction,
_p= - Cmtr 0.011 buoyancy, and camber must be considered (Chapter 6). Excessive errors
---------------=-----------------------
c CL cos o: + CD sin ~ (0.6)(0.9919) + (0.0320)(0.127) due to wall effect will arise in Cl max·ifthe model chord exceeds 0.4h and
= 0.0184 in cao min if it exceeds 0.7h; where h is the tunnel height.
The information obtained from two-dimensional tests will be reducible
CP = 0.0184 + 0.235 = 0.253 = 25.3 % to sec~ion coefficients Cl, cao, a~d cmyo. These coefficients (unlike wing
5:6 Testing Two-Dimensional Wings coeff!clents CL, CD' and Cmw which are an average of conditions including
Alterations to airfoil sections are frequently investigated in two- vary~ng Reynolds n~mber and effective angles of attack across the span)
dimensional tunnels wherein a short constant chord section of a wing com- consider only a section under constant load and hence constant effective
pletely spans the jet width (Fig. 5: 16), simulating infinite aspect ratio. angle of attack. It is customary to consider the minimum profile drag
The jet is usually 2t to 4 times higher than it is wide. In some tunnels of coefficient CDO as equivalent to Cao when both are at the same Reynolds
this type the drag is read by the momentum survey method, and the lift number. Likewise, it is assumed that Cmac= cmac. The lift coefficients
by the pressure on the tunnel walls (Section 4: 19). The pitching moment c, and CL may also be co-nsidered equal except at their maximum, where
the spanwise lift distribution usually results in a diminution in lift of at
least 10 to 15 per cent for straight wings. Expressed symbolically,
CL max= 0.90cl max (approximately) (5: 18)
It has been found difficult to apply data obtained with a two-dimensional
setup to three-dimensional wings because spanwise pressure gradients
frequently induce spanwise flow and invalidate the purely chord wise
information. Yet the two-dimensional tunnel, by simplifying model
construction and increasing the speed of testing and the work-up of data,
has an important place in the field of aeronautical research. Reduction
of lift, drag, and moment data is covered in Chapter 6.
The location of the aerodynamic center and the center of pressure may
be calculated as discussed in Section 5: 5 (f) and (h).
The slope of the lift curve of a two-dimensional wing will suffer from
four effects when extrapolated to the finite case.
1. Losses associated with downwash at the wing due to the trailing
vortex system. These both change average flow direction and produce a
streamline curvature effect.
2. Losses associated with variation of angle of attack across the span
if the wing is not elliptic and untwisted.
3. Losses associated with the fact that some air now goes around the
Fig. 5: 16 Model in a two-dimensional jet. (Official photograph, National Aeronautics wing and not over it (Jones edge effect).
and Space Administration.) 4. Losses associated with varying Reynolds number due to taper.
220 J Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Procedure J 221
5:7 Testing Component Parts of an Airplane

The testing of large-scale models of part of an airplane offers many
advantages provided that the data can be pr.operly applied to the air~lan~.
\
Nacelles, tail surfaces, dive brakes, and ailerons are parts belongmg III
this group. .
To take a concrete example, models of 8-ft span are about the maximum
usually tested in a 10-ft tunnel. If the original s~ip has a w~ng span. of
80 ft the largest model that can be tested will be 1-0 scale. ThIS reduction
in size makes it nearly impossible to reproduce small items accurately;
their Reynolds number will be very small; and it will be exceedingly
difficult to measure the hinge moments of control surfaces. A 30 per cent
model of the vertical tail could be tested as well as a 30 per cent aileron
model, but, if such large-scale panel models are to be employed, they
must of course, be tested under flow conditions that simulate those on
the complete airplane. Mounting the panel like a complete wing (Fig.
4: 24) permits an endflow about the inboard tip that does not actually
exist on the real airplane. Such flow may easily invalidate the test results,
and unfortunately even the addition of an endplate will not provide
sufficient sealing to produce complete flow conditions.
Two arrangements are satisfactory: mounting the panel 0t? a turntable
.~
(Fig. 5: 17), or mounting it with a small gap (less than 0.005 span) between
its inboard end and the tunnel floor (Fig. 4':23). Either of these arrange- ~
ments will seal the inboard end of the panel and subject it to nearly the
same flow conditions as would occur on the actual ship. Usually the Fig. 5: 17 Reflection-plane tail test. (Courtesy General Dynamics-Convair.)
effective aspect ratio then developed will be about 0.95(2b)2/(2SfP), where
b is the panel span and SfP the panel area. - _ . Thus a left panel should be mounted on a right wall, * and a right panel on
An important and sometimes insoluble problem may .anse f?r aileron a left wall. Floor-mounted models should be left airplane panels.
panels from sweptback wings. Here the flow over the aJlero~ IS affected In the selection of the panel span the inboard juncture of aileron or
very strongly by the remainder of the wing and cannot be SImulated by flaps should riot occur at the floor but a few inches above it.
any simple reflection plane. It is therefore suggested that .a thorough Owing to asymmetry much of the panel data will require that the loads
study of span wise loadings be made and adequate correlation assure~ from the panel with flap or aileron zero be subtracted from those with
before attempting panel tests of such ailerons. A full half-span model IS surface deflected in order to determine the contribution of the control.
satisfactory. -. . Obviously, since the surface zero data are to be repeatedly used, only
A minor point in panel testing of the type shown III FIgs. 4:23 ~nd very good data should be used for the base rim, but good data are not
5: 17 is that, though the hinge moments should be reduced to coefficient always obtainable. For instance, the deflection of the surface will cause
form by using the tunnel dynamic pressure, the force coefficie~ts .s~ould a change of lift and hence a change in wall correction angle. The proper
be based on tunnel dynamic pressure corrected to allow for the diminished basic coefficient should be obtained from curves of surface zero. data
velocity in the boundary layer. This corrected q is usually about 99 per plotted against corrected angle of attack. The problem is further confused
cent of the centerline q. by the fact that the surface deflected may allow greater angles of attack
Minimum confusion in applying the test data will result if the panel
is selected so that positive tunnel directions are positive airplane directions. * Not upside-down on a left wall.
220 / / =l Testing
«.? Testing Procedure / 223
.id no basic data can exist for the entire range.
5:7 5:9). Schrenk's. method\for untwisted wings without flaps is as follows:
.ns necessary for referring panel tests of ailerons,
1. Plot the WIng chord against the span. If the airfoil section varies
TJ co the complete ship are given in the following then a weighted chord '
adv c1=cao/iio (5:20)
Nr should be used. The term with the bar is the average section slope given by
ols: Aileron Panels
th
.esigner is interested in three items connected with pro- Go = ~ Iab/2aoc dy (5:21)
One, the rolling moment, he is seeking. The other two,
.oment and the hinge moment, are the price that must be 2" On t~e same graph, plot a quarter ellipse whose area is equal to
rdition, the tunnel engineer is concerned with referring the half the WIngarea, ~nd w~ose span equals the wing span.
,e complete airplane. The problem first apparent is 'that the 3. The span loading WIll be represented by a line midway between
.idel will not have thesame lift curve slope a~ the complete wing. and 2. (See Fig. 5: 18). .
•y, however, this is of small import as long as the roll due to a The data for an aileron test require some special consideration, for
. aileron deflection is at a known wing lift coefficient. This, it will three. reaso?s: . the structural loss due to cable stretch and wing twist;
shown, requires that the complete wing be previously tested and its the simulation of a symmetrical case as a result of the carry-over arising
,t curve known and available. The procedure for then referring the from the wall reflection (see Section 6: 26); and the doubled force incre-
aileron panel angles of attack to the complete wing is as follows: ments arising from the same source. Cable stretch and wing twist are
- ~
1. From the estimated performance of the airplane, note the speeds probl~ms that must b~ evaluated by the structural engineers for a partie-
that correspond to various important flight conditions such as top and ~lar ~Irplane. Assuming that the carry-over is small, one is fully justified
cruising speeds at various altitudes. Calculate the complete wing lift In USIngth~ measure ~orce data (corrected for wall effects and blocking)
coefficients that correspond to thesespeeds. . for c~mpuh~g ~he rolling ~nd yawing moments about the ship centerline.
2. Plot the span. loading curve. (See Schrenk's method given below.) But If one IS Interested In the complete wing lift, drag, and pitching
The total area under this curve, A;, divided by the total wing area, ST' is moment, the measured data, including as they do the full reflection, are
a measure of the wing lift coefficient. Likewise, the area of that part of t~o large. In ?ther words a 50-lb lift increment (t1CL = 0.1, say) for one
span loading curve above the panel 'span A;, when' divided by the area ~lleron. down IS. not a lOO-lbincrement (tlCL = 0.1) when the whole wing
of the wing panel ST)' is a measure of the parrellift coefficient. The ratio IS considered, SIncethe image aileron should not be down. Thus, letting a
of these two ratios, then, is the ratio of the complete wing lift coefficient 4r----,-----r----~--~----~
CLw to the panel lift coefficient CLp' That is,
CLw AT/ST
--=--- (5: 19)
CLp Ap/ST)
Equation (5: 19) may be used to find the panel lift coefficients that
correspond to the selected wing lift coefficients.
3. Test the panel with aileron zero and obtain a plot of CLp versus (Xu,
where (Xu is the angle of attack uncorrected for tunnel wall effect.
4. From 3, read the uncorrected angles that should be set to read the
desired panel lift coefficients. The tunnel operator may then set these
uncorrected angles with arbitrary aileron deflections and maintain proper
panel model to complete model correlation. O~--~-----L----L---~--~~
o 1 2 3 4 5
The span loading as required above may be simply found by a method Span, feet
proposed by Schrenk (Ref. 5: 8), or by one proposed by Pearson (Ref.
Fig. 5:18
subscript d mean aileron down, and 0 mean control neutral, wing data
for an asymmetrical model may be found from
CL = CLo + CLd (5:22)

. 2
_ CDo
C D-
+ CDd (5:23)
2
(5:24)
The roll and yaw data may be treated as outlined below.

In testing one panel of a wing, it is seen that a yawing and rolling Fig. 5: 19 Panel rolling moment and its relation to the rest of the airplane. (Front
view.)
moment about the imaginary ship centerline is produced that in actuality
would be canceled by the panel on the other side. Thus it is necessary to
subtract the rolling moment coefficient of the panel with aileron zero,
. subtract the moments due to the panel with aileron zero from the moments
Cw· Bence the rolling moment coefficient of one aileron about the
with the aileron deflected. The subtraction also acts to remove the tare airplane centerline is
effects of the turntable, the net result being the yawing and rolling mo-
C I = CI'P* + CLp -Sp a' CLO (5:26)
ments due to the deflection of the aileron only. The only requirement is - -
that the test conditions must simulate the proper spanwise loading over
s; bw
the aileron. Bya similar process, the yawing moment coefficient due to one aileron
In working up the data, the coefficients must be corrected to complete is (Fig. 5: 20)
wing areas and spans so that the results will be usable. The definitions C
n
= C* - CD'
np p
Sp
S b
s: - C
nO (5:27)
are as follows (the subscript p indicates "panel"): w w
where C = YMp/qSwbw; b' = distance of balance yaw axis to ship; and

np
CLp -- Lp
S panel lift coefficient, CnO = yawing moment coefficient of one panel about ship centerline,
q p aileron zero.
D' For structural purposes, or a check of the spanwise load calculations,
CD'P' -- - S panel drag coefficient including mounting plate drag,
q 'P the lateral center of pressure may be found by dividing the semi-span
rolling moment about the airplane axis· of symmetry by the lift.
C = YMp panel yawing moment coefficient, Although not directly apparent, the rolling moment coefficient also
n'P qSwbw
determines the helix angle (see Fig. 5:21) as shown on next page.
C ---'I)
RM panel rolling moment coefficient about balance rolling At a given rate of steady roll the rolling moment is opposed by an
lp - qS b
w.w
axis, based on wing area and span. equal and opposite damping moment. In the usual symbols, the rolling
To get the rolling moment at the ship centerline we have (Fig. 5: 19) moment
RM = (p/2)SV2C1b = DM
- RMs = RMp + La'
S a' where PM = damping moment. Dividing through by the helix angle,
C1' = CI'P + CL'I) --2_ (5:25) pb/2V (p = rolling velocity, radians per second),
S s; bw
where a' is the distance from the balance rolling moment axis to airplane DM = pb e SV b _s__
2 = E. SV b
2
dCI
centerline (the subscript s indicates "ship"). . 2V 2 pb/2V 2 p 2 d(pb(2V)
However, this represents the moment of one panel plus the aileron * Panel rolling and yawing moment coefficients; do not confuse with damping-in-
about the ship centerline; to find the part due to the aileron only, we roll dCdd(Pb/2V) or damping-in-yaw dCn/d(rb/2V).
0.7
--- ---
Airstream 1.00
~
I- -=-
I
o
:;::;
o.s ~a\~O \!!b- 0.50 ~

~
"\a~ \0 ~ 1--
/"" 0;;..;.- -- ~
Cl.
·--:'.-nc-e-I""1~t -:v V --:::: I-j,--

--0.25 ~Elliptic
k\
0.5
-: -
I--r-
0.25
_.__.----, ---
yaw ax~_J
I
' 1 --
1
_
'I ~,
k:;':~
........... V
f-
,--
---
1,....-- -----j
p 0.4
+YM
-----.._) \:
6 8 10
Aspect ratio
12 14 16
'-Tunnel
I \\
\l
\' ;
J
Fig. 5: 22 C,» for various values of aspect ratio and taper.
walls
(-----\11 ---, and the rolling velocity is
2V
p=--
c, (5:29)
'----\11---,
tI b Cl~
Fig. 5: 20 Panel yawing moment and its relation to the rest of the airplane. (Plan
The maximum rolling velocity is usually limited by stick force con-
siderations rather than by .the airplane's actual ability to roll. Power-
view.)
driven controls as well as aerodynamic balances to decrease the hinge
The term d(C!)/d(pb/2V) is called the damping-in-roll coefficient (f~e- moments are used to increase the rolling velocity; however, wing twist
quently written Cl~) and is a function 0: wing taper and aspect :at~; will decrease roll velocity.
both of which are constant for a gi~en alr~lane. Values of Cll> m y
Example 5:5 Data from a test run at q = 25.61bJft2 on a wing panel
found in Fig. 5 :22. The helix angle IS then
of 12 ft2 yields CL = 0.789, CD = 0.0599 'at = 5.44 deg, left aileron (J..
pb = _S (5:28) down 15 deg. (Data have been corrected for tunnel wall effect.) Cl~ =
2V Cll> -0.0102, Cn~= -0.0010. Find the rolling and yawing moments about
the ship centerline if the distance from the balance roll axis to the ship
centerline is 8 ft. The rolling moment for aileron zero is CIO = 0.0191,
and the yawing moment is Cno = -0.0028. Sw = 70 ft2, b.; = 25 ft.
= -0.0102 + 0.789 12 _! - 0.0191

7025
= -0.0102 + 0.0433 - 0.0191 = 0.0140/
S b'
Cn = Cnl> + CD'v2 - - CnVO
Sw b,v
Fig. 5:21 = -0.0010 - 0.0599 12 _! + 0.0028

7025
* E uation (5: 28) applies only to roll without yaw or sideslip an~ can be misleading = -0.0015
at hig~ angles of attack, where adverse yaw in flight may be appreciable.
0 +0.03
(Y)
::;
+ 0
....
.£
7r-
'0; C
0 V>
N :::s +0.02
+ ....
~
~
o
......
C/)
C1>
~
00
Q)
G
'"
<U
;>
~ Q
1;,)"
~ 'C- +0.01 /
V
c:
V
+'0 .~ .s
.J .~ :t: .!:!
,
c-
~<U ~~
u 8
J ~
0
0
0 o 1:t C 0
-
7 7
Q) C1> Q)
t;::
c: E E
Q)
'0
c·
e
o 0
E E K"
e 0
bDbD
...... ..!!!
0
e .~,g -0.01
V I
'ro
~ .,en '" 0
>-c:r:: v
.3
l----"' .5
~/
--- ~ 0
N
0
(Y)
I
::r:
"'"
t"l
.;..; "B
._biJS.,
1-4"0
.0
::;
0
-0.02
-0.03
I -30
<0
so <0 -20 -10 o +10 +20 +30
~
o
o
o
~
o
~
0
0 NO<=! 0
0 Up Left aileron deflection, 8", degrees Down
+ + + + I I I
°H:J '~Uap!HaOj iusuroiu a3u!4 UOJal!V Fig. 5: 25 Left aileron power.
N
0 Example 5:6 Assume that sufficient control force exists to develop the
0
0 above C, at 150 mph. Calculate the helix angle and rate of roll. The wing
+
taper ratio is 2: 1 (/I. = 0.50), and the model is 40 per cent scale.
..... b2 252
0
<=! li 1. AR = - = _
S 70 = 893.
. From Fig. 5:10 at AR = 8.93 and .oj. =
~ .s 0:1
e-,
.., 0.50,
........
'CC1>
'u
.,>
....
V>
.."...- o:t:Q) "0 CIT.> = 0.520

0:1
/
V .....
8 E
0
u
0
....c
Q) .£
<
::;
0
....
pb
_
2V
C1
= _' '= --
CIT.>
0.014
0.520
=
.
0.0269 radian
0 E
,-V
pb 2V
I bD <"I
t"l 2. p = __ 57.3
I
C
.~ .,., 2V b
g>'! biJ
= 0.0269 (2)(150)(1.47) 57.3
0 iZ
I
25/0.40
(Y)
0
0
= 10.9 deg/sec.
0
8 ~ (Y')
I
::3
o f:!
o
..-(
~
0
0 o
0
0
Typical data that might be expected from tests of a modern aileron
+ + + I I I are shown in Figs. 5 :23, 5 :24, and 5 :25. The roll versus yaw plot is
I;) '~Uap!Hao:>~uawow llu!llo~ particularly useful when figuring ratios for differential ailerons.
'1
Perhaps at this point it would be fitting to discuss the lateral axis more also include various devices aft, of the hinge line, such as balance tabs,
fully in order to explain the reaction obtained before and during a roll. spring tabs, and beveled trailing edges.
Consider the case when the ailerons are deflected, but no roll has yet had
Aerodynamic balances are simpler and lighter than mass balances or
time to develop, or perhaps an asymmetrical span loading is being resisted.
power boost and hence are to be preferred as long as battle damage or icing
The down aileron creates more lift and induced drag and usually more need not be considered. Unfortunately, most aerodynamic balances are
profile drag, whereas the opposite effect is noticed for the up aileron. The effective for only a portion of the aileron travel, as may be seen by the ex-
net result is a yawing moment opposite in sign to the rolling moment: ~ent of the decreased slope in Fig. 5: 24. A measure of balance superiority
left yaw for right aileron. ' This condition is undesirable, of course; in IS then the range of decreased hinge moments as well as the slope of the
many planes the pilot merely adds a slight extra rudder deflection and ?alanced part of the curve. Complete aileron data must, of course,
never notices the aileron effect. In others, particularly where powered include the effect of the other aileron as well as the amount of the
ailerons are employed to obtain the maximum deflections, the amount differential decided upon.
of rudder needed to balance the adverse yaw may be so large that little The aileron hinge moment coefficient eHa is frequently defined by
rudder is left to overcome additional asymmetrical drag caused by the
inactivity of one engine. Many methods are suggested for balancing this HM
CHa=-- (5: 30)
adverse yaw, among them an artificially increased profile drag of the qSaca
raised aileron, which tends to pull the lowered wing into the turn. Such
a profile-drag increase can be obtained either by a special aileron design where HM = aileron hinge moment, positive when it aids control deflec-
or by gearing the aileron controls so that the raised aileron has a greater tion; Sa = area of aileron aft of hinge line; and ca = average chord of
aileron aft of hinge line.' ,
deflection than the depressed one; The latter system is referred to as
"differential ailerons." Differential ailerons reduce adverse yaw but are Another definition of the hinge moment is based on the use of the
usually accompanied by an overall reduction in maximum rate of roll. root mean square chord aft of the hinge as follows:
The designer, therefore, notes not only the maximum amount of roll
C _ HM
(C! max) from graphs such as Fig. 5: 25 but also examines data such as Ha - - 2b
qCf I
those shown in Fig. 5:23 to observe the amount of adverse yaw, a mini-
mum being desirable. Since nose left yaw is negative and right roll where cf = root mean square chord of flap or aileron aft of the hinge,
positive, the yaw is adverse when it has an opposite sign to the roll. and b, = flap or aileron span.
Now we come to a point important to the tunnel engineer. Referring The quantity cib, is most easily obtained by integrating the area under
to Fig. 5: 23 again, we note that when the curve appears in the first and the curve of local flap chord squared against flap span.
third quadrants, favorable yaw is indicated, but it will actually exist only The variance of definitions, again demonstrates the necessity of clear
when the airplane does not roll. When rolling occurs the direction of the and complete statements on every item.
relative wind over each wing is so altered that a strong adverse yaw is Complete consideration of hinge moments must include the lever ratio
developed, and the results of the static tunnel test may be entirely of the controls. Various limiting conditions may be imposed. One is
erroneous. that maximum aileron deflection must be obtained from combat speed to
Under most conditions, the air loads on the ailerons oppose their stall with a 50-lb stick or wheel force; another, that maximum wheel
deflection, producing a moment that must be supplied by the pilot or by deflection should be limited to 100 deg. * The second usually limits the
some outside means. Methods employed to help the pilots include use of gearing as a means of reducing wheel forces.
powered "boosters" and mass and aerodynamic balance. The mass Sometimes ailerons and even, airplanes are compared by the rolling
balances may 'only balance the weight of the surface or they may be velocity obtained at some particular altitude and airspeed with a 50-lb
arranged to provide an inertia force while the ship is rotating. The stick force. Plots of wheel movement versus rolling velocity at various
aerodynamic balances control surface areas of various cross-sectional airspeeds may be made.
shapes ahead of the hinge and area disposition such as horns, shielded
horns, and internal, medium nose, and sharp nose balances. They may
* Owing to aileron cable stretch, the calculated aileron deflection for a given wheel
deflection may not be attained. The engineer must consider this in his design.
In closing this section on ailerons we note that the spoilers used to The designer of a'vertical tail seeks:
allow larger flap areas frequently show negative action for the first few 1. A large side force with minimum drag.
degrees of deflection. A simple cure for this trouble is to arrange the 2. The steepest slope to the side force curve so that small yaw produces
linkage so that about 5 degrees of aileron is realized before the spoiler large stabilizing forces.
starts. Its irregularity then shows up only as a wiggle in the total roll 3. The smallest hinge moment consistent with positive control feel. On a
and hinge moment curves. full-scale military ship 180lb pedal force is considered a maximum.
4. Proper rudder balance so that under no conditions will the pilot
Example 5:7 An airplane has the following specifications: be unable to (,eturn the rudder to neutral, and preferably it should not
even tend to overbalance.
W = 40,000Ib, At -10 deg aileron, CHa = 0.0188, 5. A zero trail angle* so that control-free stability is the same as control-
S = 755 ft2, b = 71.5 ft, fixed stability. It will be seen that the zero trail angle permits smaller
= 17.43 ft2,
Sa.il Aileron chord aft of hinge = 1.426 ft, pedal forces and rudder movements to return a yawed ship to zero.
Wheel radius = 0.625 ft, Wheel throw = 3.33. 6. The largest yawing moments about the airplane's center of gravity.
Aileron differential = 1: 1, Aileron deflection This moment is due almost entirely to the side force. The proportions
At + 10 deg aileron, due to the yawing moment of the vertical tail about its own quarter
CHa = -0.0089, chord and the yawing moment of the vertical tail surface due to its drag
are quite small but not always insignificant.
Calculate the wheel force (one hand) necessary to deflect the ailerons The rudder calculations, unlike the aileron panel tests, will require the
10 deg at 262 mph indicated airspeed. absolute value of the drag coefficient.. (See eq. (5: 31)). This is not easily
For the total hinge moment coefficient resulting from both ailerons, obtained with a panel test, but, in view of the small contribution of the
we have drag effect, an approximation may be made by reading the section drags
CHa = 0.0188 - (-0.0089) = 0.0277 with a wake survey rake at stations along the vertical tail with the rudder
angle zero, and by summing them to get the total drag coefficient. This
u;« = qSaCaCHa = (175.2)(17.43)(1.426)(0.0277)
may be subtracted from the minimum drag as read by the balance to get
= 120.5 lb-ft the drag of the endplate. The method as outlined makes the very question-
able assumption that the tare drag is unaffected by rudder angle, which
120.5 is justified only by the peculiar conditions of this setup in which tare
Wheel moment = _- = 36.21b-ft
3.33 accuracy is not vital.
The signs of the rudder angles are confusing and hence are stated below.
Wheel force = 36.2 = 58.0 lb They follow the rule for right aileron, elevator, and rudder that positive
0.625 control angle produces negative airplane movement. Negative movement
embraces left roll, nose left yaw, and dive. Another definition for control
5 9 Testing Controls: Rudders deflections is that they are positive if the air load on them has a positive
The rudder is supposed to produce a side force that in turn produces a direction, that is, if the force increment due to the control deflection is
yawing moment about the center of gravity of the airplane. This mayor directed up or toward the right wingtip. This rule also holds for tabs as
may not produce yaw, for the lateral loading may be asymmetrical and well as complete surfaces.
the rudder employed only to maintain a straight course. Some drag, a The rudder setup for finding n (and hence Cn) is shown in Fig. 5 :27.
small moment about the quarter-chord line of the tail itself, some roll, The contributing parts are: (1) the moment due to the vertical tail side
and a rudder hinge moment will also be created. The fact that the drag forces, (2) the moment due to the vertical tail drag, (3) the moment due
moment is stabilizing is no argument in favor of a large vertical tail to the vertical tail moment about its own quarter chord.
drag, since, in maintaining a straight course with asymmetrical loading, * For zero trail angle the rudder is so balanced that it remains at a zero deflection
drag is decidedly harmful, even when the airplane is yawed.
234 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Procedure J 235
j
In symbols these factors become
neg = (nv)v - Yvlv cos "P - Dv1v sin "P
= qSvcvCnlv - qSvCyv cos "P . l; - qSvCDv sin "P . lv
= -~~ Cn1v -
~~
- CYvcos "P -
~~. C
- "P (5:31)
Dv Sill
Sb Sb bS
where ncg = ya"Yingmoment of vertical tail about center of gravity,
S; = vertical tail area,
Cniv = vertical tail moment coefficient about its own quarter chord,
Cv = mean aerodynamic chord of vertical tail,
S = wing area,
b = wing span,
Iv = tail length (distance from tail quarter chord to center of
gravity),
CYv = Yv/qSv,
"P = angle of yaw,
(nv)" = moment of vertical tail about its own quarter chord,
Fig. 5 :26 Setup for calibrating .hinge m~ment strain gages on a panel model. For
quick checks a good spring scale IS convenient.
D; = drag of vertical tail.
Sometimes it is desired to estimate the tail contribution to yawing
moment; in this case some simplification of eq. (5: 31) is possible. The
tail drag term and the tail moment about its own quarter chord are small,
and for moderate yaw angles cos"P 1.0. Letting Svlv/Sb equal the tail
R:j
volume coefficient, V, and putting Cyv = CLv = av"P, we have

Cncg = -av"P V,
where a; = dCLv/dav
This equation does not include the sidewash effect discussed in the next
paragraph; it also assumes that the ratio of dynamic pressures qv/q is unity.
It was mentioned in Section 5: 8 that span loading must be considered
in order to apply data properly from an aileron panel test to the complete
airplane. In section. 5: 10 attention is drawn to the proper method of
applying the data from an isolated horizontal tail by evaluating the
downwash. The vertical tail is less affected by the remainder of the air-
Cf4 tail
plane, but some sidewash does exist when the airplane is yawed. Hence
15 deg yaw by no means results in a vertical tail angle of attack of 15 deg.
Proper evaluation of the sidewash can be made by equipping the complete
model with a vertical tail whose incidence is variable, and by going
through a procedure similar to that outlined for the horizontal tail in
Section 5: 10.
Example 5:8 A vertical tail model whose. area is 12 ft2 is tested at
100 mph. The model MAC = 3.0 ft. The actual airplane, of which the
Fig. 5: 27 Planview of yawed airplane.
236 J Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Procedure / 237
.r-
+1.6
~-.,....---,---....,--,---r-I 5:10 Testing Controls: Elevators
The elevators may be also tested by the panel mounting method. With
this arrangement, one-half the horizontal tail is usually mounted as shown
in Fig. 5: 17 and the results are doubled to get the data for the entire tail.
It will be noted that for airplanes of conventional dimensions, the
pitching moment of the horizontal tail about its own quarter chord and
the pitching moment about the airplane center of gravity produced by the
horizontal tail drag are negligible when compared to the moment pro-
duced by the tail lifting force. Hence it will probably be necessary only
to measure the lift of the panel model along with the elevator hinge
moments to evaluate the desired qualities. Occasionally it will be desirable
to compare two different methods of trimming to determine which has
less drag for a given lift. Then, of course, drag measurements will be
necessary.
The tail lift curve slope as determined from the panel model may require
adjustment in order to apply the test results. For example, suppose that
the complete model has been tested at a constant angle of attack with
varying settings of the stabilizer. The pitching moment about the airplane
center of gravity due to the horizontal tail,
(5 :32)
may be measured, and with the known tail area S, and tail length It the
value of CLt may be determined. In these calculations it is probably
better to use q t = qfreestrea.m than the very questionable q t = O.8qfreestream
-1.~L3-0--_~2-0 --_...l1-0---0L-----:-+-:-1-:O -----:+-:2::::0--+::-:30
sometimes arbitrarily employed. From the calculated CLt and known
IX
stabilizer angles the slope of the tail lift curve on the airplane (dC LtldtXt)
Fig. 5: 28 Typical panel lift curves. The breaks in the curves for large flap deflections may be established. It then remains to diminish the panel lift curve slope
occur when the flap stalls. by the factor (dC LtldtXt)aiIplane divided by (dC LtldtXt)panel'
The procedure followed to align the hinge moment data to the airplane
model is 40 per cent scale, has a wing area of 750 ft2 and a .span of 78 ft. may be traced through Fig. 5 :29 as shown on next page.
The tail length is 30 ft. Find the tail yawing moment coefficient about the Let us suppose that the power-off moment curves of our example
center of gravity if CYt = 0.794, CDt = 0.0991, Cn!t = -0.1067 for airplane are as shown in Fig. 5: 29 for the model with tail and without tail,
VJ = 6 deg. The rudder is deflected 10 deg. some center of gravity location * being specified. If lines abc, del, etc., are
St (MAC)
• t C
S I
_ _!_ ....:!... CYt cos
s, - It CDt SIll
.
VJ
drawn between points of equal angle of attack values, the difference be-
tween the model plus tail (M + T) and M - T curves is the contribution
.11 - -
Cncg = - nit Y' S b
Sw b", Sw bw w w
of the horizontal tail with elevator zero at the specified tXw. The moment
12 3 (-0 1067)_ 12(0.4)(30) 0.794(0.9945) due to the tail llCmt = qtCCLt)Stlt and values of CLt are readily deter-
= (0.40)2(750)(0.4)78' (0.40)2(750)(0.4)(78) mined. From the previously prepared tail lift curve we find the tail angles
12 0.4(30) (0.0991)(0.1045) * If another location is desired for the center of gravity, the curves may be rotated
(0.40)2(750)0.4(78) about zero lift by the relation
= -0.001025 - 0.0304 - 0.00398 !:!. dC", = % MAC change = !:!.C
dCL 100 g
= -0.0354
2. From the chart of hinge moment versus (Xtail we read (say) for
(X =
+12 and oe
= -15 deg aCHe = 0.0640.
3. From the airplane geometry and q (step 1) the elevator hinge moment
is calculated from HMe = qSeCe . CHe.
. 4. From the curve of mechanical advantage versus oe,
and the known
linkage lengths, the stick force may then be found.
I~ this manner the various flight conditions may be investigated and
desirable balance changes evaluated. Note that the ability of an ele-
vator to stall the ship may well be a function of the elevator size for if the
el~vator is not large enough to do the job, additional deflecti;n through
trim tabs * or power boost will be of no avail.
5:11 Testing Complete Models
The six-component test of a complete model is the most difficult of all

wind tunnel tests. More variables are under consideration than in other
tests, for one ~hing, and the individual' tests are more complicated, for
another. For Instance, each drag run requires three additional runs to
evaluate the tare, interference, and alignment. (See Sections 4: 17 and
G", 4: 18.)
G (/(",=-2 e.G", due The complete testing of an entire model includes the investigation of
4(/(",=+0 to tail;
(/(",=-2,. the effect of all major variables (flaps, gear, etc.) on all forces and
Iil (/(",=+2
OE=O· moments.
e.G", due to OE= - 5° For the most tests of complete models the boundary corrections large
when (/(t = - 6.1° enough to matter are confined to buoyancy, blocking, wake displacement,
Fig. 5 :29 downw.ash, and pitching m~ment. ~ut it is good policy to investigate
corrections due to asymmetncalloadmg and propeller wake effects just in
of attack that correspond to the CLt values, and so label the lines abc, case any of them are in the range of accuracy.
def, etc., as = -6.1, -4.2, etc. This procedure furnishes the relation
(Xt The question whether to trip the boundary layer has to be determined
between the panel tests and the complete 'airplane, since values of hinge largely ~rom.experience in a particular tunnel. If the test speed and the
moment and tail lift coefficient for various angles of attack are available model SIzeYIeldReyno~ds numbers of over 1,500,000:tripping of the wing
from the panel tests. and fuselage probably IS not necessary. But the chords of the horizontal
To carry this chart to completion, the values of t1Cm for various ele- and ~ertical tail a:e usually such that it is advisable to install trippers,
vator deflections are calculated from the CLt values corresponding to the especially when hmge moments are being read. See Section 7: 1 for a
tail angles of attack, and curves of constant elevator deflections may be discussion of boundary layer tripping.
drawn in. The complete chart may then be used to read the amount of . A li~t of'the runs usually employed for an unpowered model is pro-
elevator needed to trim at any CL or the amount of moment available for vided In Table 5:4. The numerical values in this table are of course
maneuvering with a specified stick load. The maneuvering investigation only ~pproxim~t~, exact values being dictated by the particuJ~r design i~
requires the hinge moment data and the mechanical advantage, as follows: question. Additional runs would be needed to check fillets alternative
tail surfaces, or ground effect. ' .
1. Assume the chart to indicate that an elevator deflection of -15 deg
is required to trim at CL = 1.9 and (Xtail = + 12. From the airplane * When running tabs, use a constant tab angle to surface angle ratio, rather than
geometry and CL = 1.9, the value of q may be found from q = W!SCL• random tab angles. The data will then be much easier, to analyze.
Attention is drawn to items in Table 5: 4 marked "correlation." In
Table 5:4 Test Program of Unpowered Unswept Model* many instances correlation runs are added to evaluate separate ~ffects of
configurations that would never be flown. For example, a two-motored
W= wing V = vertical tail
B = fuselage G = gear model usually has a run made without nacelles. The data from this run
H = horizontal tail F = flaps compared with those from the run with them in place aid in identifying
"Tare" = dummies in Polar plot = C L VS. ex,
"Correlation" refers to CD' and C", from the effect of the nacelles on the airplane's efficiency, drag, and lift. After
data accumulated to OtZ.L. through stall; several models have been tested the usual effects of a "good" nacelle be-
assist in laying out Polar run = L, D, M,
new designs from Otz.L. through come known, and, when a "poor" one turns up, it is so identified and
stall attention is directed toward improving it. A standard procedure is to
Model Con-
Runs figuration Data Sought Run Consists of list the important performance parameters in tabular form, noting the
Po lars, model normal and in-
change in each as each component is added to the wing. Studies made of
1-4 W Tare, interference, and align-
ment; final polar plot verted, dummies in, dummies such tables can be informative indeed.
out Comments on the customary curves and information desired follow.
Wing lateral stability for future Yaw ±30°, at C L = 0.3 and 1.0
5-6 W
correlation The Lift Curve, Flaps up. Items of interest on the flap-up lift curve
Tare, interference, and align- Polars, model normal and in-
7-10 WB
ment, final polar plot verted, dummies in, dummies include the value of CL max for determining flap-up stalling speed and
out
Wing and body lateral stability Yaw ±30° at CL = 0.3 and 1.0 minimum radius of turn, the shape of the curve at the stall (it should be
11-12 WB
for future correlation moderately smooth, but may not be), the angle of zero lift, the slope of
Polar plot, effect of horizontal Polar
13 WBH the lift curve dCL/dex, and the value of negative CL max' At the Reynolds
tail
Lateral stability for evaluating Yaw ±30° at C L = 0.3 and 1.0 numbers usually encountered in the wind tunnel, CL max will be from
14-15 WBH
vertical tail and correlation
Polar plot; effect of vertical tail polar 0.6 to 1.7, and dCL/dex for unswept wings will be about O.IR/(R + 2) per
16 WBHV
17-18 WBHV Directional stability Yaw ±300 at C L = 0.3 and 1.0 degree where R = aspect ratio. The complete ship values for CL max and
Tailsefting and downwash. Polar with tail incidence -4,
19-23 WBHV dC Lid(/. will be about 10 per cent greater than the wing alone, the actual
-3, -2, -1, 1
24-25 WBHV Effect of yaw on static longitudi- Polar with 1p = 5°, 10° value being less than measured model CL max' since the model will not be
nal stability trimmed at high ex with elevator zero. Construction of the power-off trim
Rudder equilibrium and power Yaw ±300 at CL = 0.3 and 1.0;
26-43 WBHV
rudder, 2, 5, 10, -2, -5, lift curve is shown in Fig. 5: 30.
-10, -15, -20, -25 deg
Yaw ±30° at CL = 0.3 and 1.0 Usually the addition of a fuselage increases the angle of zero lift in the
44-63 WBHV Aileron power
with aileron -25, -20, -15, positive direction and results in a loss in stability.
-10, -5, 5, 10,15,20,25 deg
Polars with elevators from _25°
64-72 WBHV Elevator power The Lift Curve, Flaps down. This curve will have very nearly the same
to 15°,1p = 0
73-89 WBHVF Effect of flaps on elevator and Polarewith elevators from _25° slope as the flap-up curve and the same location of the aerodynamic
to 15°,1p = 0, flaps 30°, 55°
trim
Yaw ±30° at Ot = 3.0 and 10°,
center. The value of flap-down CL max is important for determining the
90-95 WBHVF Effect of flaps on lateral stability
flaps 20, 35, and 55 increment due to the flap tJ.CL max' for this apparently does not change
Polars with flaps 55°,1p = 0, ail-
96-104 WBHVF Effect of flaps on lateral control with Reynolds number and may be used to determine full-scale CL max'
105 WBHFG Effect of gear down
erons at - 25 to 20
Polars with flaps 55°, 1p = °
model inverted to reduce inter-
flaps down (see Section 7: 3), which is needed for landing and take-off
ference between supports and
runs. The value of CL max' flaps down, will vary from 1.2 to 2.9, the higher
gear, and vertical tail removed value being sought after but rarely attained.
to avoid physical interference The angle of 0.9 CL max is of interest for landing-gear-length considera-
with tail strut
WBHFG Effect of gear down on lateral Yaw ±30° with cc =
3° and 10°, tions. It will probably be from t deg to 3 deg less for flaps down than for
106
stability flaps 550; model inverted flaps up if the flaps cover the inboard wing area, and 5 to 8 deg less if they
* An airplane with sweep requires more stall studies than are shown in the table, particu- cover the entire span. Again the sharpness of the stall is of interest,
larly for longitudinal, lateral, and directional stability. since large lift coefficients that are perilously close to a violent stall
cannot safely be utilized to their full value. There is usually little need to
2. Low aspect ratio wings with sweep have a leading edge vortex and
this range the readings should be made every degree. Ship CD min will
are not usually sensitive to Reynolds number unless the leading edge
vary widely with the type of airplane and wing loading, a value of 0.0120
radius is large. RN = 2,000,000 is usually adequate. being not unreasonable for a clean fighter.
3. High aspect ratio wings are quite sensitive to Reynolds number,
The airplane drag coefficient, CD' at CL max is needed for takeoff and
although not above RN = 5,000,000. landing calculations. Varying widely, depending on type of airplane and
4. Leading edge slats are usually insensitive to Reynolds number, amount of flap, this coefficient may range from 0.1000 to 0.5000.
but although slats reduce the effect of Reynolds number. on C L max' a
substantial variation of pitching moment at the stall may be found.
Table 5:6 Drag Data from Tests of a Twin-Jet Fighter-Type Aircraft
Table 5:5 Lift Curue Data from Tests of a Twin-Jet Fighter Configuration CDO + kC L2 I1CDO e
Configuration IXZ.L. I1IXz.L. CLa I1CL CLmax I1CL max W 0.0049 + 0.0933CL2 0.87
WB* 0.0111 + 0.0982C L2 0.0062 0.85
W -0.3 0.0612 1.115 WBHV 0.0131 + 0.0982CL2 0.0020 0.85
WB +0.2 0.5 0.0650 0.D38 1.1 15 0.0 WBHVTt 0.0148 + 0.0923C L2 0.0017 0.875
WBC +1.0 0.8 0.0650 0.0 1.115 0.0 WBHVG 0.D305 + 0.0982C L2 0.0174t 0.85
WBCHV +0.9 -0.1 0.0709 0.059 1.197 +0.082 WBHVGF20 0.058 + 0.0577CL2 0.0275 1.105
WBCHVF20* -1.2 -2.1 0.0700 -0.009 1.34 +0.143 WBHVGFso 0.1130 + 0.0292CL2 0.055 l.555
WBCHVFso -4.2 -3.0 0.0700 0.0 1.37 +0.03
WBCHVGt +0.9 0.0 0.0700 0.0 1.197 0.0 * Includes canopy.
WBCHVGF20 -1.2 -2.1 0.0700 0.0 1.34 +0.143 t Tip tanks.
WBCHVGFso -4.2 -3.0 00.700 0.0 1.37 +0.03 t Compared with WBHV.
* Nose flap 30 deg with all T.E. flap deflections.
-The shape of the drag curve is important for climb and cruising, a
t Compared with WBCHV.
minimum change with CL being desirable.
5. In studying C L max' the model should be as close to trim as possible. Drag data for a twin-jet fighter are shown Table 5: 6. Of interest here
On low aspect ratio models with short tails, the tail effectiveness varies is the decrease of effective induced drag when flaps are down. The incre-
with angle of attack as the local dynamic pressure changes. ments of drag due to gear, flaps, tip tanks, etc. are presented on a basis
6. The addition of nacelles usually reduces C L maX' In summary, proof wing area for consideration on the particular airplane at hand. It is
vision must be made for measuring C L max for a wide range of Reynolds also common to see them quoted on their own frontal area so that their
numbers to assure that the region in which conditions stabilize has been losses may be compared from airplane to airplane.
covered.
The Pitching Moment Curve. The slope of the pitching moment curve
Data from tests of a model of a twin-jet penetration fighter are pre- must be negative for stability, of course, although definite values for the
sented in Table 5: 5. As is shown, it is customary to list both the funda- desired slope have not yet been agreed upon. ' The usual practice is to test
mental data and the progressive increments, the increments drawing the model mounted at its most rearward center of gravity location and to
attention to both good and bad items more directly than the total numbers. increase the tail area until the slope of the pitching moment curve dCm/dC L
The data as shown are for an untrimmed model, and the increase of lift is between -0.1 and -0.15 for power off, controls fixed. Assuming* a
curve and maximum lift with the addition of the horizontal tail will be- loss of 0.08 due to the propeller and 0.02 for free controls the value
come a decrease when trim is considered. A pair of nacelles usually of dCm/dC L = -0.1 will be just sufficient to achieve neutral stability
reduces the lift curve slope about 0.02. The angle for 0.9 C L max (which (dCm/dCL = 0) under the most critical condition. Many of the high-
is of interest in designing the landing gear) should not be taken too powered airplanes lose more than 0.08, so that dCm/dC L power off may
seriously until ground board tests are completed. occasionally need to be as low as -0.50 for propeller-driven aircraft;
The Drag Curves, Flaps up and down. The designer is particularly it is less for jets.
interested in CD min for top-speed calculations. To ensure accuracy in * See under Power Effects, page 259 for more complete data.
Sometimes the stability is stated in terms of the added rearward travel Of interest is the customary destabilizing effect of the fuselage and of
possible without instability. This might be 0.1 MAC, meaning that the course the large stabilizing effect of the horizontal tail.
ship will still be stable if the center of gravity is moved one-tenth chord ~or minimum drag, the stabilizer should be set so that be = 0 deg for
aft of the normal rearward location. It should further be stated whether cruise. A large CmG (high camber wing, long fuselage nose) works well
this is for control-free or control-fixed condition. for this, since i't makes Cmcg = 0 for model minus tail occur at a high
Actually, the amount of maximum stability is also a function of center (cruise) CL, especially for airplanes designed for high altitudes. The
of gravity travel. If a large travel (say 15per cent MAC) must be tolerated, above conditions also decrease be for landing.
excessive stability may be required in the most forward position. Occasionally the power-on stability is the same for tail on or off. For
this case a new tail location is obviously necessary.
Table 5:7 Longitudinal Stability Data for Two Propeller-Driven Airplanes,
The slope of the tail lift curve is obtained by holding OCwing constant
Power off
and varying the tail incidence and computing the resulting pitching
Single-Engine Airplane Twin-Engine Airplane
moment data. The tail lift curve slope should be evaluated early in the
Con- dCm dCm program, since it is needed for the tail-on wall corrections.
figuration CmO D.Cmo CLtrlm
dCL AC Cmo - sc.; dCL
W -0.021 0.50 0.042 25.S -0.007 0.017 The Elevator or Stabilizer Power Curve. The plot of ~Cm against
WB -0.036 -0.015 0.40 0.091 20.9 -0.015 -O.OOS 0.025 elevator deflection or stabilizer incidence is made at several values of the
WBH 0.062 0.098 0.53 -0.120 42.0 -0.020' -0.005" 0.085'
WBHV 0.032 -0.029 0.25 -0.130 43.0 0.024 0.044 -0.102 lift coefficient. It indicates the amount of elevator or stabilizer deflection
WBHVFso 0.102 0.070 0.86 -O.IIS 41.S needed to produce a certain moment coefficient (Fig. 5: 33). Usually the
WBHVF ss 0.167 0.065 1.22 -0.138 43.8
plot is nearly a straight line from + 15 to - 20 deg deflection with a
Center of gravity at 30.0 % MAC, 0.4 % above MAC. Center of gravity at 30 % MAC, slope of about -0.02 for elevators and about twice that for the complete
on MAC.
• WBN, not WBH. tail. The elevator stalls on one side above that, and further deflection
is useless. Some of the newer designs seem to hold good for a slightly
In the case of many modern high-performance aircraft equipped with greater range.
unit horizontal tailor stabilators that are power operated, the forward A further study of the elevator may be made from a plot of Cmcg versus
center of gravity location is not as restricted. In this case the stick force CL for several elevator angles (Fig. 5: 34). The intersections of the curves
is not a function of center of gravity, since it is artificial. Also there is with the axis indicate trim condition. This plot may also be made
no distinction between stick-fixed and stick-free stability because of the against «. The plot for an airplane with a unit horizontal tail would be
irreversible control system for which no "floating" is possible. similar.
The lift, drag, and moment data are usually presented on one sheet The elevator tests are made to determine whether the elevator is large
(see Fig. 5: 31). The reversal of the moment positive and negative values enough for necessary control under all flight conditions. A successful ele-
makes the moment curve appear "normal" when viewed with the page vator is powerful enough to develop maximum CL or allowable load
on end. factor at all permissible speeds at all permissible center of gravity locations.
In general we may say that the stability runs are made to see whether The most critical condition is normally landing with most forward center
the horizontal tail is large enough to meet the stick-fixed stability require- of gravity and ground effect, the test usually encompassing polars with
ments of positive static and dynamic stability under the worst condition propellers windmilling, flaps and gear down, and elevator angles from 0
(usually rated power climbs or approach with flap and gear down, aft to -25 deg.
center of gravity) and to meet the elevator floating requirements of sta- It is also necessary to determine whether the elevator balance is suffi-
bility at best climb speed with 75 per cent rated power. These tests require cient to keep the control forces small enough that maximum load factors
polars with rated power, flaps and gear up, and with 50 per cent rated may be developed with more than 40 lb and less than 150lb stick force. The
power, flaps and gear down, both tests encompassing a range of elevator control force criterion is usually critical in landing or accelerated flight,
deflections from 0 to -10 deg. flaps and gear up, props windmilling. .
Longitudinal stability data for two airplanes are listed in Table 5: 7. For a jet airplane, 10 lb stick force per g and 20 lb per degree of elevator
+0.4 for a medium bomber to 150 deg per second for a very maneuverable
r:[\" fighter.
+0.3
1\ Sometimes the criteria may be stated in terms of the helix angle (Section
5: 8), typical needs being (for military aircraft): (1) a helix angle of at
+0.2
\ t" least 0.09 at 0.7 IYmax with rudder zero, flaps and gear up, normal rated
power; and (2) a helix angle of at least 0.07, rudder zero, power off,
flaps and gear down at 1.2 Vstau.
1\\ Requirements for commercial airplanes are usually satisfied with less
J<I
+0.1
0
, than the above values.
Tests required to obtain the above information embrace runs at the
proper angles of attack, 'If = O. The rolling moments are measured for
various aileron deflections and the helix angles computed as in Section
5: 8. (See runs 44--63 of Table 5:4.) A discussion of aileron hinge
moments is also presented in Section 5: 8.
When taking aileron or rudder data a small amount of rolling and
-0.1 ~ yawing moment and side force is usually found even when the controls
-0.2
,
\\ are neutral and there is zero yaw. This delta is due to either asymmetrical
flow in the tunnel or model asymmetry, and both the appearance and the
usefulness of the data are improved if aileron and rudder moments. are
\'I(0e subtracted from the data so that only deflected controls have any value,
as, of course, they should.
-0.3
-0.4
-30
Up
Nose down
-20 -10 0
Elevator deflection,
\
+10
oe,
..
deg
Stabilizer incidence, it
+20
t-
+30
Down
Nose up
It is a nice refinement to run aileron tests with the horizontal tail off,
for two reasons. The first (and minor one) is that it saves several columns
of calculating in the work-up since tunnel wall effect on the horizontal
tail is then nonexistent. The second is that when the ailerons are deflected
in flight the airplane normally rolls and the inboard aileron trailing vortices
+0.2r--.--'---r--'--'-~---r--'--'--'---r--'
Fig. 5: 33 Typical plot of change in moment coefficient with elevator and stabilizer
deflection.
are reasonable figures, but with irreversible controls these may be set to
most any desired value,
The Aileron Power Curves. The aileron criteria are usually determined
at zero yaw and may be considered from the plots of Cz v~rsus Cn (Fig.
5 :23), C! and c; versus ba (Fig. 5 :25), and CHa versus ba (FIg. 5 :24). The
important qualities of good ailerons are hi~h rolling moment and low
hinge moments-the latter usually not obtainable from tests of a co~-
plete model. (See Section 5: 8). The maximum rate of ~011and the maxi-
mum helix angle are determined from C, max (see Sec~lOn5: 8), a Cz max
of 0.03 being satisfactory for one aileron. The maximum rate of roll 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
(taking due account of the stick forces)* will vary from 50 deg per second CL
* Unless, again, power-boosted or power-operated controls are used. Fig. 5: 34 Typical plot of Cmcg versus CL for several elevator deflections.
speed with asymmetric power (one engine out, the other at full
for at' . I ) . power
.wo-engIne aIrp ane , rudder free and trim tab neutral, without
exceeding a lS-deg angle of bank.
The mos~ critical condition for the criterion of decreasing pedal f
occurs at high/thrust coefficient, flaps and gear down at I I orce
. h id li ' arge anges 0 f
ng t Sl es p, an~ test runs must be made accordingly.
The asy~metnc power* condition requires yaw runs at the attitude
correspond~ng to I?
V stall gea.r do~n, flaps at take-off setting, take-off
power on right engIne, left engIne windmilling.
Usually :~e ~udde.r information is grouped into two curves. The first,
~udder equilibrium, ISa plot of rudder deflection against angle of yaw, or
•
•
I~ ot~er words. or ~or c, ~?
~his need be taken for yaw in only one
direction, for It will be similar In the other owing to symmetry. The
slope d"P/dor can be about 1.2 for maneuverable airplanes on down to
O.Sfor the more stable types.
The se~ond curve: rudder power, is ~ plot. of c, versus or' A slope of
~Cn/~or - -0.001 I~ re.aso~a~~e,varymg WIdely with airplane specifica-
tions ; One ~sual cntenon IS one degree slip per degree rudder deflec-
tion;" that IS, dc; /. ac;
"P .
do d = F = 1.00
Fig. 5: 35 A semi-span mount using the external balance. (Courtesy Wichita State r "P r
University.) Again the curve need be plotted only for either plus or minus rudder.
are swept away from the horizontal tail by the helix angle. When the +0.03
model is immobile in the tunnel these vortices stream back quite close to
the horizontal tail and induce a loading on it that does not occur in rolling
flight. +0.02
Rudder Power and Equilibrium Curves. In most single-engine aircraft

the rudder is not a critical component. It must furnish adequate control
+0.01
on the ground and in the air, but no criteria similar to "rate of roll" or
"pounds of stick force per g" have been established. The problem of the -s
high-powered single-engine aircraft becomes difficult under the high-power
0
low-airspeed (wave-off) condition. Here it is not unusual to require full
rudder* to overcome torque to maintain straight flight. The criteria
become more those of hinge moments (Sections 5: 8 and S: 9) than those
-0.Q1
usually obtainable from the complete model. Particular attention must
be paid to avoiding overbalance at high rudder deflections .
•
The modern high-performance multiengine airplane must possess suffi- -0.02 ;n-~:;---~-~ __ _L__ L _ _j
cient directional stability to prevent itfrom reaching excessive angles of -30 -20 -10 0 +10 +20 +30
yaw or developing rudder forces that tend to keep the plane yawing. Right Rudder deflection, 8" degrees Lett
Further, it must also be able to be balanced directionally at the best climb Fig. 5: 36 Rudder power.
>I< This is the critical condition for multiengine types.
* Not as critical for jets.
+30 stab~l~tyfor a given amount of directional stability results in spiral in-
stability ". I:I0wever, the ad~antages in general control and handling
characteristics are so great WIth a relatively large vertical tail that some
+20 spiral instabqity is. accept~~le. Hence dihedral investigations are usually
more concern.ed WIth avoiding Dutch roll than escaping spiral instability .
. For most airplanes the critical condition will occur at high speed, where
dihedral effect will be a maximum and directional stability a minimum
owi~g to small power effects. The test runs therefore embrace yaw runs
at high speed, flaps and gear up, with propeller windmilling or at high-
<,
speed thrust coefficient. .
Tests have indicated that a value of roll to yaw that will give what pilots
~
'0 -10
Q)
00
c:
-c
-20
\
I'\d~
~r =-0.80
-30
-20 -10 o +10
Angle of yaw. 1/1. degrees
\ +20 +30
Fig. 5: 37 Rudder equilibrium.
The rudder hinge moment should be such that 180lb pedal force is
O~~~ __ ~~~ ~ __ ~ __ _l __ ~ __ __j
never exceeded. No help from a trim device is assumed. o 0.05 0.10 0 5 10 +0.1 o -0.1
The effect of yaw on the characteristics of an airplane is shown in Fig. CD a Cm
5·:38.
The Amount of Lateral Stability as Compared with the Amount of 1.60
Directional Stability. Information about the roll axis is needed to deter-
mine whether sufficient dihedral is incorporated in the design to provide
lateral stability at the most critical condition. This will be, for most
0
10 , 20 20
1 0
20
10", 0
1.20
airplanes, the approach with flaps down and power on, where power and
flaps combine t? reduce.the ,di~edral effect. The ailerons should be free Il30' ~
30\ 301"
if possib~e. ...., ..' ...:: Ih.. .. . rJ 0.80

(
!
The tests for lateral stability embrace yaw runs at the approach attitude,
flaps and gea~.-ti6wn,and 50 per centnormal power. (See runs 90-95 in
0.40
Table 5':4 for gear-updata: add runs with. gear down.) . The angle of I
.
attack for the approach should be chosen on the basis of tunnel CL max
/,'
I
(used to get 1.2 V stau), but the' thrust coefficient should be based on full- o
scale conditions. y/ '. '- o -0.Ql -0.02 -0.03 +0.05 o +0.2 +0.1 Q
Too much lateral stability for a givjn amount of directional stability C" Cc
results in an objectionable motion palled a Dutc~.%J/;:: Too little lateral Fig. 5: 38 Effect of model yaw on basic characteristics.
• ;.';ii,
..,....;,
... '''_.(,;
. ~":~ ~, .!.,J
254 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Procedure I 255
Table 5:8 Direction Stability for a Single-Engined Attack Plane, Low and +1 0
High Angles of Attack I
Configuration Cn,!, dCzfdCn
+8
1\ Stable region
/
V
W
-0.00012t
-0.00014
0.00056
0.00037 C/)
3l
.. \ /
v
~ +6
0.00002
\
0.00118 0.00130 0.00058 "C
WB 0.00082 0.00096 0.00037 o
~ /
0.00063 -0.00055 0.00070 0.00012 al +4
'\ 1/
.s::
WBH 0.00027 -0.00055 0.00087 0.00050 '0
'0
....c: Spiral instability
-0.00165 -0.00228 0.00120 0.00050 -0.727 5 +2
WBHV o E \
/
-0.00186 -0.00213 0.00087 -0.467 -c Dutch roll
(too little
vertical tail)
-0.00230 0.00040 -0.174 o \
WBHVF45
-0.00250 0.00012 -0.480
V
0.00040 -0.174 ,
-0.00230 -2
WBHVFs5 0.00 0
-0.00250 o 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12
Amount of vertical tail area, ~v
t The upper value is for a. = 2.5 deg; the lower, for a. = 11.1 deg.
Fig. 5: 39 Proper dihedral for various amounts of fin area.
call satisfactory stability is

dCzld7p cs: -0.8 (5: 33)
dCn/d7p -
Satisfactory
A value of dC •./d7p = -0.0010 for controls fixed and -0.0007 for
controls free is reasonable for a large transport.
A very rough idea of the proper distribution of dihedral and fin area
may be obtained from Fig. 5: 39, which is an adaptation from Fig. 4 of
Ref. 5: 3 and from Fig. 5: 40. The value of y in Fig. 5: 39 is for a lightly
loaded high-wing monoplane; for low-wing airplanes, y should be
replaced by y L' where
YL = Y + 3 deg (5:34)
The 3-deg difference between high and low wing configurations is due to
fuselage crossflow effects. The effective dihedral is always wanted and it
may be obtained by recalling that a value of dCzld7p = 0.0002 is equivalent
to 1 deg effective dihedral. Wing sweep also can have a pronounced Fig. 5 :40 Free flight tunnel results showing good and bad combinations of C
effect on the effective dihedral; highly sweptback wings display too much ~~ ~
dihedral at moderate lift coefficients and are normally constructed with
no geometric dihedral.
Since geometric wing dihedral alone does not indicate the overall Tunnel
effective dihedral which includes vertical tail, wingtip shape, sidewash,
and power. effects, a more quantitative indication of the effect of combi-
nations of directional stability and effective dihedral is shown in Fig. 5: 40.
As shown excessive dihedral coupled with weak weathercocking leads to
r
the oscillatory or Dutch Roll boundary. Excessive directional stability
leads to the spiral divergence boundary. The complete wind tunnel model
yields the total stability and dihedral including all interference effects.
The vertical tail size is not set to avoid spiral instability because, this
mode is not critical. The directional stability should be sufficient to
prevent excessive yawing during rudder fixed rolls and during flight in
rough air. '
It is convenient at this point to draw attention to an alteration that
may have to be made to the ordinary wind tunnel data when the model
is yawed. '
The majority of the wind tunnel balances read pitching moment about
a horizontal axis perpendicular to the wind tunnel jet axis and passing
through the balance resolving center. The rolling moment is read about
the centerline of the wind tunnel test section, and the yawing perpendic-
ular to roll and pitch. Hence, when the model is yawed, the indicated
rolling moment Lw' and pitching moment M ware for axes parallel and Fig. 5:42
perpendicular to the relative wind (wind axis) and not for axes parallel
and perpendicular to the centerline of the airplane. (See Fig. 5: 42.) relative .to axes y~wed but not pitched-the so-called stability axes.
In some cases the aerodynamicist needs data relative to body axes which Conversion from wind axes to either system is indicated in Table 5: 9. *
move with the airplane and are fixed to it; in others the data are needed The y.a~ tests will also yield the value of the side force Y = qSCy.
No particular slo.pe or values to Cy are required. The only use of Cy is
+0.02 to calculate the SIde force for asymmetrical flight and hence the necessary
~ngle of b~nk to counteract said side force with a tangent component of
lift.. The .sld~ ~orce needed to overcome the torque reaction at low speed
+0.01 while mamtaming straight flight may also be evaluated.
.Tailsetting and Average Downwasn Angle. To avoid the drag of cruising

-s 0
with elevators deflected, and the loss of maximum D.C due to elevator
if p~~tial .ele~ator is needed for trim, it is usually de~rable to set the
J
stabIlizer. I.ncldenc~ so t?at the ship is trimmed at cruising with 0. = O.
~or stability considerations as well as correlation for future designs, it
-0.01 IS necessary to know the angle of downwash at the tail for each wing .
angle of attack. The procedure is as follows:
-0.02 1.. Run the .~odel with the horizontal tail removed, probably obtaining
-12 -8 -4 0 +4 +8 +12 a tall-off stability curve as shown in Fig. 5 :43.
Yaw angle. 1/1. degrees
* Man~ engineers prefer to use symbols other than those presented above in order
Fig. 5:41 Typical yaw characteristics. to leave lift, drag, etc., properly unique for reference to the relative wind.
Table 5:9a Wind Axes to Body Axes Since i)(w and it are known for the points of intersection, €w may be
determined from eq. (5: 35), and a plot of €w against i)(w or C L may be
CLB = CL cos ex. + CD cos 'If! sin ex. + Cy sin 'IfI sin ex. made. This plot and the usual effect of
CDB = CD cos 'IfI cos ex. - CL sin ex. - Cy sin 'If! cos ex.
flaps on down wash are shown in Fig. t,.
CmB = Cm cos 'If! - (bjc)C! sin 'If!
5: 44. Not infrequently the curve of €w Flaps down~ ..............
""'''''
Cm = C! cos 'If! cos ex. + (cjb)Cm sin 'If! cos ex. - Cn sin ex.
------ --
........
against i)(w is a straight line.
CnB = Cn cos ex. + C! cos 'If! sin ex. + (cjb)Cm sin 'IfI sin ex
CYB = Cy cos 'If! + CD sin 'If! Methods shortcutting the above
lengthy procedure have been devised
Table 5 :9b Wind Axes to Stability Axes based on the assumption that the wing
downwash is zero at zero lift. Though
CLS = CL this is true enough for the complete
CDS = CD cos 'If! - C y sin 'If! wing, the tail occupies only a fraction Fig. 5 :44
Cms = Cm cos 'If! + (bjc)C! sin 'If! of the wing span and hence quite often
CIS = C! cos 'If! + (cJb)Cm sin 'If!
shows a value of down wash existing when the wing is at zero lift. This
CnS = C; makes the short methods open to question.
C Y S = C Y cos 'If! + CD sin 'If!
Power Effects. An important phase of complete model testing is the
2. Next run the model with the horizontal tail on, using tail incidence, determination of the power-on effects. Though for light planes this
it, angles of, say, -8, -4, 0, 4, 8 deg. Curves as indicated in Fig. 5 :43 could be safely neglected or "estimated," the low power loadings on many
will be obtained. modern airplanes lead to differences in power-on and power-off flight
characteristics that are impossible to ignore and very difficult to predict.
Now the intersections of the horizontal tail-on curve with the tail-off
The effects of the power are divided into two classes:
curve are points where, for a given wing angle of attack i)(w, the tail-on
pitching stability equals the tail-off pitching stability; i.e., the tail is at 1. The effects due primarily to the power. These include the thrust
zero lift, and hence moment, torque reaction, and force due to the yawed propeller.
(5: 35)
2. The effects due to the resulting slipstream. These effects depend
where €'W = downwash angle at the tail; i)(T = tail angle of attack. very largely on when and how completely the tail is immersed in the
slipstream and on the flight condition, which in turn determines the ratio
of the dynamic pressure in the slipstream qs to the freestream dynamic
pressure q. * Also important are the rotation of the slipstream and the
change of down wash at the tail.
In a conventional single-engine aircraft, the application of power is

accompanied by a rolling moment due to torque and slipstream over the
wings. When ailerons are applied to correct this effect, a nose left yawing
moment is incurred. The twist of the slipstream striking the vertical
fin produces a large side force and more left yaw. The yawed propeller
adds an additional small amount of nose left yaw. At the same time,
depending on the location of the horizontal tail, changes in longitudinal
trim occur, owing to both thrust moment and slipstream. All these
changes keep the pilot very busy, and it becomes important that the loss
of stability about any of the axes should not be added to his troubles.
em
Fig. 5:43 * The value of q.lq varies from about 1.05 at top speed to 1.8 at take-off.
Fortunately, the above effects may be evaluated in the wind tunnel, and
the aircraft may be revised or the pilot forewarned. .
The model engine-propeller combination should be chosed to duplicate
the full-scale conditions as nearly as possible. In orger to preserve the
proper ratio of qs/q, it is important that the thrust of the model propeller
be proportionately the same as in the full-scale ship. To preserve the
same twist, the torque should also be the same. These conditions lead at
once to the necessity of having the model propeller similar to the full-scale
propeller. The blade setting that most nearly aligns the model and full-
scale thrust is that of equal Vlnd ratios. For convenience, this may be put
in coefficient form as follows:
Define
(5:36)
and (5:37)
where T and Q are thrust and torque respectively, and d the propeller
diameter. Then using subscript S for full-scale airplane and subscript M
for model, we have for similarity
Vs VM (5:38)
--=---
Fig. 5: 45 Interior view of model with cast aluminum fuselage, fillets, and flaps,
showing drive shaft for IlO-hp electric motor. (Courtesy Aerolab Development Corp.)
Ts
Also TOM = V 2d and Tas = -V-2""'d-2
P M M
2
P s s Obtaining equal model and full-scale values of To and Qo, however, is
a little more complicated than duplicating equal lift and drag coefficients,
2 2
TOM TM pVs ds and a proper procedure must be followed. This includes calibrating the
Dividing, we have --= 2 2 model motor-propeller combination and arranging some suitable pro-
Tos pVM dM Ts
cedure for duplicating desired values of To and Qo while the tests are
Substituting from eq. (5: 38) and clearing, we obtain
being run.'
2 4 1. Calibration of the motor and propeller -. Since it usually takes every

Tos Ts nM dM
last fraction of allowable space to house the motor in the model (see
Now it can also be shown that the thrust Fig. 5 :45), there is rarely sufficient room left for the installation of devices
and for reading the torque as the tests are proceeding. Hence it is necessary
to calibrate the motor and obtain various thrusts and torques in the tunnel
and that, for a given V/nd, if the two propellers are geometrically similar, by regulating the power supplied at various blade angles.
I',I
CTS = CTM (this omits scale effect). Hence The motor-propeller calibration is as follows:
2 4
TM = nM dM and TOM = 1 1. Set the motor in a dynamometer and obtain curves of bhp for
2 4
Ts ns ds Tos various values of kw input and rpm. The plot will appear as in Fig. 5 :46.
or, if the model is tested at TOM = T as' similarity of thrust will be pre- 2. With thrust line at zero angle of attack, install the model with motor
served, In a similar manner, QOM should equal Qos· and propeller in the tunnel. For various rpm and motor outputs, read the
suitable throughout the range. Usually one angle can be picked for low
speeds and another for high speeds.
2. Running the tests. Now, although the calibration has defined various
values of thrust and torque, the tunnel operators are not yet in a position
to know what thrust to apply. The
thrust output of the airplane's motor
Curves of varies with CL (forward speed). To Tc
constant bhp ~;::..._~
isolate this variation, a plot of To
against CL is made for the airplane
(Fig. 5: 48). From Fig. 5: 47 the cor-
/ responding Qa for the model is read,
Maximum rpm
/ and from a plot of To against rpm
(not shown) the rpm is read. After Fig. 5:48
rpm
the rpm and torque are known, jhe
Fig. 5:46 bhp" is calculated, and the kw input is found from Fig. 5: 46. The
airplane CL is used to calculate the corresponding model lift, and an
thrust for various blade angles. Plot this as Ta versus Qo for constant operating chart of kw input versus model lift in pounds is prepared. By
blade angle. See dashed curves in Fig. 5 :47. watching his lift scale, the tunnel operator is able to set the kw input to
3. From the actual airplane-performance calculations, read the thrust the model motor that will yield the proper To and Q c-
and torque for a given power condition. It will be observed that con.stant The necessity of approximating full-scale Vlnd leads to unusually high
power does not result in constant thrust because the propeller efficiency rpm for the model propeller. This condition follows from the fact that
varies. Plot the thrust and torque as To versus Qo on the same plot as the the tunnel speed may approach the airplane speed though the diameter
model To and Qc. See solid line, Fig. 5: 47. From this combined plot of the model propeller may well be -/"0 scale. Normally this scale relation
select the model blade angle that most nearly matches the required To would indicate a model rpm of 10 times the actual airplane rpm, but a
versus Qa curve. second effect tends to diminish the exceedingly high rpm on the many
Since the airplane curve includes many blade angles as a result of the models, particularly those of low power loading. It is shown in Chapter
constant-speed propeller, no one fixed blade angle on the model will be 6 that to a large degree the size of the wind tunnel limits the size of the
model to be tested. In turn the size of the model dictates the maximum
size of the electric motor to be installed for driving the propeller. If no
motor can be found that supplies enough power to drive the propeller at
design Vlnd when the tunnel is at full speed, the tunnel velocity must be
,-
Model 'lift, pounds
Fig. 5:47 Fig. 5 :49

Testing. Procedure / 265
Table 5:11 Some Wind Tunnel Model Propeller
Sizes and Weights
Propeller Weight Centrifugal Load
Diameter, per Blade, under Operating
in. Ib Conditions, lb
7 0.02 600
14 0.10
22 1.00
coo.ling water enter the tail of the model through the rear support. Some
typical model propeller sizes are listed in Table 5: 11.
Because of the small ~ize of h~draulic motors and the high rpm they de-
~ve~op, they are now being used in many instances for V/STOL propeller
drive systems. Typically, pressures of from 600 to 5000 psi are needed to
Fig. 5: 50 High-speed model motor and gear train for propeller drive. (Courtesy meet th.e power requirements. Some performance curves for a typical
Aerolab Development Corp.) hydraulic motor are shown in Fig. 5: 51. Recently compressed air "jet"
fans have been dev~loped fO.r VTOL models, particularly the fan-in-wing
diminished until the proper V/nd can be realized. Very often the final type. The~e are of either the Impulse or the reaction type; typical sizes and
tunnel speed is around 60 mph for the power-on tests, and a low Reynolds t~rust ratmgs are listed in Table 5: 12. Performance curves are shown in
number must be tolerated for both propeller blades and model. FIg. 5:52.
The need for meeting the requirements of wind tunnel model motors Work is currently being done on the use of steam drives for an internal
has brought about the introduction of special electric motors combining pump to simulate the jet exhaust from a turboprop installation.
small frontal area and high rpm and requiring, in turn, water cooling and The effect of power varies widely with many factors. The results of one
a current source of variable frequency. See Fig. 5: 50. Some of the motors . test are shown in Fig. 5: 54 to illustrate a method of presenting the data.
available are listed in Table 5: 10. In many setups both the power and
500 ........
V
Table 5:10 Dimensions of Some Wind-Tunnel Overall efficiency 100
//'
Model Motors /' ./
400 V Output torque ./
hp
Diameter,
in.
Length,
in. rpm ...,
.J:l
/ ,~
80
-'"~
c:
o
6.4
9
2.16
2.2
12.00
7.5
12,000
27,000
.S 300
.;
::>
E'
o
~v
~
,
~ 60 Q)
c.
:>;
o
c:
1-200 '(\'1 ~~ Q)
'0
20 3.2 7.0 18,000 40
~p~ ~
35 4 10.0 18,000 ~~ Constants
Stroke angle................ 30·
52 4 17 11,500 100 .~
Pressure............... 3000 psi - 20
'/ Hydraulic fluid .... Mil·0-5606
75 4.5 12 18,000 rem perature........ 150· ± 5· F
130 8 16 5,400 ~ I I I 0
150 7.5 14 8,000 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
200 10 33 Motor speed, rpm
5,000
1000 28 38 2,100 Fig. 5: 51 Hydraulic motor characteristic performance curves (intermittent hp = 34.9
at 4850rpm). (Courtesy Vickers Inc.)
70 .>: 7 .0 Table 5:12 Characteristic of Jets Fans (Courtesy Tech Development)

50
~ 5.o
~ .~e(; ./ PERFORMANCE
40 4 .0
'"'0 ~ . \e2_i-'"
I>-'{ 3.0 ~ Drive Drive
.....
x
E
30
20
<, ...... ./
»: 2 .0 -0
~
£ Model Diam., Depth, Wt., Rotation Thrust
Press. Air
in. in. lb lb rpm psig

e-
K e lb/sec
-
"0 's
.l!l 0- REACTION TYPE
ro
c:r: 10 L ~ rpm 1.0
~
~ TD-134-1 3 2 0.5 ccw 2.5 32000 150 0.Q25
7
/ r--- t:--........ 0 .7
'0;
3!
TD-134-2
TD-169-J
3
6
2
3
0.5
2.75
cw
ccw
2.5
35
32000
23000
150
220
0.Q25
0.35
III TD-169-2 6 3 2.75 cw 35 23000 220 0.35
5 / 0 .5 ~ TD-169-D* 6 6 5.0 dual 60 26000 220 0.66
/ 0.4 E TD-122-2 6.5 2.5 2.8 cw 20 20000 100 0.25
/ 8 TD-133-1 7 3 3.5 ccw 60 23000 250 0.72
0.3 TD-J33-2 7 3 3.5 cw 60 23000 250 0.72
L 0.2
TD-167-lt 8.5 5.4 22.0
IMPULSE
ccw
TYPE
74 18500 250 1.05
0.15 TD-174A-I 4.5 1.38 1.4 ccw 10 24000 160 0.185

TD-174A-2 4.5 1.38 1.4 cw 10 24000 160 0.185
~~ TD-174-1 6 1.38 2.0 ccw 30 25000 220 0.55
TD-174-2 6 1.38 2.0 cw 30 25000 220 0.55
.......
70 0
/
........- • TD-169-D has 2 coaxial fans turning in opposite directions.
50 0 t TD-167-1 has adjustable inlet guide vanes.
40 0 ~{~<;\ V
30 0
7
20 0 L
£
~ 10 0
~ /
V 10
"0 70 7
.l!l
&. 50 V 1h~e~ ~
5
/ ~
40
/ ...............
...- 4
30
20
y 3
0
II 1
3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24
Fan diameter, in.
Fig. 5: 53 A powered model test. It is unusual to be able to get the necessary electrical
Fig. 5: 52 Typical performance curves for a reaction-type jet fan. Thrust and rpm land water leads into a model in such a clean manner. (Courtesy Wichita State
performance as shown above can be obtained from impulse-type jet fans of smaller University.)
thickness, lower weight, and somewhat higher air consumption. (see Table 5: 12 for
range of drive pressures.) (Courtesy Tech. Development, Inc.)
tests of a fuselage without the presence of the wing are of very questionable
-- Propellers off value. When a fuselage alone is tested the buoyancy effects (see Section
----- Propellers windmilling 6: 9) are usually important. Blocking corrections are commonly moderate
--- 6000 rpm to large.
--- 7000 rpm _--
~acelle. tests ar~ much more valuable than fuselage tests because usually
/------' entirely different Items are being investigated. Generally the nacelle tests
/- ar.e concerned only with cooling pressure drops and cooling drags and not
/
'j /// / / __.-
I
with the total nacelle drag; which would be largely dependent on the wing-
nacelle interference.
/ For a wing plus fuselage and/or a horizontal tail on, Sections 6:21 and
i I
I /
I /
/
6: 22 should be consulted.
I ,
I /
/
l
/ If a power-driven propeller is to be utilized in the set-up, careful con-
sideration sho~~d be. given to the control and measurement of the rpm.
I. , / For na~elles snn.ulatmg modern high-power units, the loss of a single
revolution per minute can represent a large thrust decrement and, in turn
can invalidate any drag measurements that may be made. It is usually
advantageous to fix the rpm by means of a synchronous driving motor
°ex 10
20 0.1 °
C",0.25
-0.1 and to vary the tunnel speed and propeller blade angle to get various
flight conditions. Such an azrangement corresponds to the customary
/ Fig.5:54 The effect of power on a four-engine transport. Test run at q = 8.0Ib/ft2• constant-speed setup of most airplanes.
Note windmilling propeller data for approach condition. The power effect for other
types of aircraft, single-engine, for instance, could be widely different.
The. u~ual nacelle (Fig. 5: 55) is of such dimensions that buoyancy,
constnction, and propeller corrections are important. For clarity, let us
Power effects for turboprop installations are likely to be particularly bad, assume that a model is to be tested at 100 mph. The constriction effect
since the light engine weight usually results in a forward propeller location of the closed jet increases the velocity over the model so that the results are
which, coupled with the great thrust, produces a very large destabilizing similar to those encountered in free air at a slightly higher speed, say 102
moment at high pitch angles. mph. The. effect on the propeller is opposite, however, yielding the results
Propeller failures seem most likely to occur when the model is at high expected III free air at 96 mph. It is therefore necessary to increase the
angles of yaw, and, accordingly, yaw tests of powered models should be tunnel speed to approx~mately 104 mph, at which time the propeller slip- .
last on the schedule. stream IS the same as III free air at 100 mph. The propeller coefficients
Power effects on pure jet aircraft are not usually as severe as on other are then based on 100 mph.
types. There is no slipstream per se, but the jet exhaust can entrain air The buoyancy effect is assumed to be the same as expected at 100 mph
around the horizontal tail and thus induce a "downwash" effect. There without the propeller.
is also a normal force at the inlet which in most cases is destabilizing. Drag coefficients for a nacelle may be based either on nacelle frontal
The engine thrust may sometimes be simulated by cold air passed through area or on engine disk area. The choice should be clearly stated. The
the nacelle (as has sometimes been done in the case of flutter models) or quantity of cooling air per second Q is usually defined by ,
exhaust duct. * In many cases power effects can be accurately calculated
and power-on tests may not be required. (5: 39)
5 :12 Testing Fuselages, Nacelles, and Bodies of Revolution where K = engine conductivity; S = nacelle or engine frontal area, ft";
Tests of fuselages alone are rarely made, for the interference effect of !:J.p = baffle pressure drop, Ib/ft2; p = air density, slugs/ft3•
the wing on the fuselage is of such prime importance and magnitude that . Bodies of revolutio~ or fuselages are best tested on their sides, using a
* See Section 5: 15. single strut and yawing the model to simulate angles of attack. This
0.08 r---r---r---,---.,----....-----.
o
0.8 1.0 1.2
Fig. 5:56
data, each type perhaps being advantageous for particular applications.

One of the more popular forms is
P
\
Cp = -3-5 = Power coefficient (5:40)
pn d
Fig. 5: 55 Propeller test rig in United Aircraft wind tunnel. A cooling test would, of
course, have a simulated engine nacelle, and probably a stub wing as well. (Courtesy CT =
pn
;d 4 = Thrust coefficient (5:41)
United Aircraft Corp.)
where P = power input, ft-Ib/sec; n = rps; d = propeller diameter, ft;

procedure both reduces the tare and interference and makes their deter- T = thrust, lb. The "variable" of propeller testing is usually the advance
mination easier. For accurate angle determination the torsional deflection ratio, J = Vind, where V is in feet per second and n in revolutions per
of the strut under torque load should be calibrated and allowed for in the second. A form using more conventional quantities is J = 88 V/Nd,
setting or work-up. where V is in miles per hour and N in revolutions per minute. It will be
seen that the two are numerically identical.
5:13 Testing Propellers Plots of Cp and CT against J for a typical propeller are shown in Fig.
Propellers are frequently investigated in wind tunnels either alone or in 5:56. .
conjunction with a fuselage or nacelle. If an entire model is tested, the
propeller diameter will be small compared to the tunnel jet diameter, and 5 :14 Testing for Cavity Resonance
the corrections to, be described will become small also. For tests in which One of the gewer proble~s that besets the modern high-speed aircraft
propeller characteristics are to be determined, the propeller diameter may is cavity resonance, a high-intensity vibration of wheel wells, bomb bays, or
well be 60 per cent of the jet diameter, and the corrections are not only cockpits that arises when their covers are removed and the high-speed air-
large but unfortunately not as accurate as those for wings. An approach stream moves by (and into) the opening. Frequently the resonance
to the problem has been made by Glauert; boundary corrections for reaches alarming proportions, causing unsteady bombing platforms,
propellers may be found in Section 6: 28. dizziness and nausea of the crews, or, if left unheeded, failure of parts or
Numerous coefficients have been advanced for presenting propeller of all the airplane.
This phenomenon has been located by means of tunnel tests, and over- ship, defining the coefficient
come by means of Helmholtz resonators, tuned chambers which are T' _ Thrust
opened into the offending cavity. The procedure for the tunnel test is to c - (pI2)SVo2 (5:42)
open the various cavities one at a time and to pick up their natural fre-
quencies with a pressure pickup fed into a scope or recording oscillograph. but subtracting from the model thrust the momentum m V due to th
The resonance, if any, will occur close to the same speed at which it will free stream air. This will make the flow at the tail of the m~del simulat~
occur on the airplane, but at a frequency increased by the scale factor. that developed by the actual airplane. Definitions used above include
If space is available for Helmholtz resonators they may be tried; if not,
m = mass flow per second from model jet,
scoops or lips may be added to the cavities intuitively until the intensity
Vo '= freestream velocity,
is down.
S = wing area.
A second approach, if the natural frequency has already been deter-
mined by flight test, is to mount the model on strain gages selected so . Although the blocking and induced flow corrections (Chapter 6) are
that their spring constant and the mass of the model result in the natural mdependent of the model mounting system, additional corrections for
frequency value already known. Decreased amplitudes of vibration then flow through nacelles and base pressure usually are needed when stin _
indicate the success of the cure being considered. mounted jet planes are tested. g
5:15 Testing Jet-Engine Models Nacelle Flo~. Nacelles should have constant-diameter ducts, and since
the actual engmes are rated ~t a net thrust value, the drag of the air going
The need for power-on tests is far less acute for a jet-engine airplane
through the empty nacelle IS extraneous. Skin friction drag should be
than for a propeller-driveri one. The effect of the thrust moment is easily
computed and.subtract~d from the axial force (not the drag). An approxi-
calculable, and there is no large slipstream of high rotation which strikes
mate method IS to read a turbulent drag coefficient from Fig. 7: I at the
the fuselage and tail with a wide variety of effects. Indeed, the sting
Reynolds number based on nacelle length, take half of it, since it is based
mounting usually employed helps simulate the jet stream for the single-
on an airfoil with two wetted sides, and reduce that value by S IS
engine airplane. h S' h d . d lW,
were. d IS t e uct Internal area and Sw the wing area on which the
rIi"
.il
I
There are two schools of thought about the simulation of the power-off
jet engine. One prefers to fair both front and back with smooth-fitting
blocks; the other simply leaves a clear passage. Of the two, the tunnel
c~efficlents are based. A reasonable value for a typical nacelle and
wmg area averages about !leD = 0.001. '
I'
!I seems a bit closer to actual conditions, although for most models the Nacelle and Fuselage Base Drag, The nacelles, base cutoff, and balance
I
"free" space is usually sorely needed for an internal balance. chamber all re?resent drags :vhich are usually corrected to zero drag for
When it is decided to simulate the jet flow, added difficulties arise. data presentation, (The project aerodynamicists may well re-correct this
First, although the jet engine itself has a subsonic velocity, a supersonic for actual flight use.) .
cold air stream will be needed to obtain the proper thrust. This need
5:16 Dynamic Aeroelastic Testing
arises because normal jet velocities run around 1400 ft per sec and remain
subsonic only because their temperature is so high. The difference in Today's, design trend toward thinner wings equipped with external
temperature is of little account, producing no measurable effect so long stores, engme pods, and t~e like ~as aggravated the already existing prob-
as the proper mass flow is maintained. That the freestream air is not lem of structural deformation. SInce the deflection of the aircraft structure
employed produces more serious effects: the drag of the engine nacelle can change the, dynamic', behavior and the flutter characteristics the
will be in error because some of the air on the full-scale ship goes through testing of flexible models in the wind tunnel is necessary to determine
it instead of around it, and, if the same thrust coefficient is maintained these "elastic" effects.
for model and full-scale ship, the change of mass flow at the model's tail Essentially, two basic types of aeroelestic models have evolved the
due to the addition of outside air will not reproduce true conditions. A dynan:ic stability model, and the flutter model. As pointed out in' Ref.
solution to this problem is to adjust the flow from the model jet so that 5: 14~ In dynamic ~t~bility tests one is interested in a dynamic behavior
the same thrust coefficient is maintained for both model and full-scale dominated by a rigid body modes of motion. On the other hand, for
~
,
274 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing • Testing Procedure I 275

3. Flutter mode (symmetrical or anti symmetrical),
4. Fuselage coupling,
5. Wing-empennage interaction.
In most cases where complete models are tested, 'it is common practice to
q mount the model on a vertical "fly rod." This system (see Fig. 5: 58)
600 allows fairly free motion in pitch, roll, yaw, and vertical translation. Fore
and aft and spanwise motions are considerably restrained, however.
400 Component testing of wing panels (aileron flutter) and empennage
models is frequently undertaken to obtain individual flutter characteristics
200 of the particular component. Figure 5: 59 shows a large-scale empennage
model mounted on the tunnel. The fuselage and wings have been simu-
lated by duplicating wing-fuselage mass and stiffness.
50
It is interesting to note that the high-speed camera is one of the most
useful devices in flutter testing because it will indicate the flutter mode
Fig. 5: 57 Effect of airplane deformation on static longitudinal stability, swept-wing
shape; strain gages mounted on' the wing spars or other parts of the
bomber.
main structure will record flutter frequency.
flutter tests, one is interested in the elastic modes (or, really, a dynamic The actual testing procedure is to approach the expected critical flutter
instability brought on by the elasticity of the structure). speed slowly. At each new speed setting, the model can be excited by
Elastic models may be used in steady-state testing to determine the
effect of deflection on static stability by mounting the model on the
balance support system. It is important, however, to duplicate to scale
the deformations of the full-scale vehicle and to be sure that the support
system allows the model to deform elastically. Figure 5: 57 illustrates the
effect of deflection on the static stability curve; the dashed curve is the
effective stability curve, since the aircraft does not fly at constant q of over
the CL range.
Most model suspension rigs allow freedom in pitch, vertical translation,
'I and yaw with limited roll, and fore and aft freedom. Such a system will
.! not allow a determination of the long-period or phugoid motion because
the tunnel operates at constant speed whereas wide changes in velocity
I occur during the phugoid on the full-scale vehicle.
I
The model may be "kicked" into a displaced altitude and released; the
ensuing motion defines the short-period oscillation which occurs at con-
stant speed. Camera studies, recording oscillographs, or similar instru-
mentation may be used to record the motion. Such quantities as the period
of the motion, the time to damp to one-half amplitude, and the number of
oscillations to damp to one-half amplitude may be determined.
Flutter testing seems to be more common for low-speed tunnels than
testing for dynamic stability. In flutter testing, one looks for
1. Critical flutter speed, Fig. 5: 58 Flutter model on vertical "fly" rod mount (a large fuel load in 'wings is
2. Flutter frequency, simulated here). (Courtesy Lockheed Georgia Co.)
convenient to use. The model scale stiffness, mass distribution, bending,

and torsional stiffness should be duplicated. The requirement on mass
is that the mass or weight ratio should be:
(m/7Tpb2)M
..:......:--'---'-= = 1 (5:43)
(m/7Tpb2)A
(5:44)
where m = mass per foot
PM = tunnel operating density
PA = flight density of full-scale aircraft
The total mass or weight ratio then becomes
MM = PM(bM)3 (5:45)
MA PA bA
The frequency ratio that should be preserved is
C:L = 1 (5 :46)
Fig. 5: 59 Large-scale model of empennage

Georgia Co.)
for flutter tests. (Courtesy Lockheed G:t
means of a "jerk wire." Tracings of strain gage output can be monitored
on a suitable chart recorder. As critical speed is approached, the damping
or
(::L G:t = (5:47)
time increases and can easily be detected on the recorder. Finally, when Other relations important for flutter models are
the recording pen indicates divergence, the cameras are turned on and the
1. The velocity ratio
run is terminated.
Data from flutter tests are presented as the dynamic pressure for flutter
against speed (or, more useful to the pilot) indicated airspeed for flutter
against altitude. One may also spot on the design speed of the aircraft
\ ;~~(~~r
2. The "static" moment scale ratio
(5:48)
which, of course, should be less than the flutter speed at any particular
altitude. SM _ PM(bM)4
(5:49)
SA PA bA
5:17 Flutter Model Design and Scaling
3. The weight moment of inertia ratio
In constructing flutt~t models, the proper scaling of model character-
istics is important. Since the model geometric scale ratio affects other
1M = PM(bM\5 (5 :50)
parameters, it is usually fixed by a consideration of wind tunnel limita-
1A PA bAl
tions. The maximum model span that the tunnel can accommodate (with- 4. The stiffness ratio
out excessive blocking or wall interference) then sets the ratio b'M:/bA (Ref.
5: 14). The subscripts refer to model and full scale airplane. The quan- Model stiffness PM(VM)2(bM)4 (5: 51)
tity b can be any linear dimension, although wing span appears more Airplane stiffness = PA VA bA
Although the foregoing ratios are used in model design, the completed
model is given vibration tests to determine the true frequency.
Since actual-scale reproduction of the airplane structure is not practical,
the model designer seeks a simplified structure that will give the right
bending and torsional stiffness. For low-speed models, a single spar as (a) Front view of beam
shown in Fig. 5: 60 can frequently be used to obtain the moments of
inertia for both vertical and fore and aft bending. It is customary to
have all the stiffness in the spar with
the covering providing only the aero-
dynamic shape. To accomplish this, the
wing, fuselage, or tail external shape is
made in sections, with rubber dental
T dam covering the gaps between.
After the spar is fabricated, the
Fig. 5: 60 Typical spar cross sec- stiffness can be checked by static de-
tion for low-speed flutter model. flection tests. For these tests, the spar
Dimensions a and b determined by is mounted as a cantilever beam and
In and J required. Dimension c de- loaded in the horizontal plane. As seen
termined by If required. Dimension
in Fig. 5: 61a, small mirrors attached I
d set at 0.1 b. In and If are k Un deflected position
moments of inertia in vertical and along the spar reflect light from a Load 1'- of beam
fore and aft bending. projector onto a grid, which provides (b) Top view of test rig
the information for obtaining the slope
Fig. 5: 61 Setup for checking spar stiffness.
of the elastic curve. From Fig. 5: 6lh, we see that the deflection h of
the reflected light is a direct indication of the slope at any station, since
and since the spar stations are finite distances apart the equation
h
: . 0=- (5:52) :4 fn+lM
21 n~~n+O = - die (5:54)
n E1
..
Now from beam deflection analysis the deflection is known to be applies. Therefore to obtain the average value of M!E1 between stations
it is only necessary to subtract successive values of the measured deflections
to get
(5:53)
(5: 55)
Since ~0 is equal to the area of the M!E1 curve between stations, the
or
M d(~~) average value of M! E1 is obtained by dividing ~0 by the distance between
stations. Finally, l/El is obtained by dividing out the known applied
E1 dx
bending moment. The values for bending stiffness in the other plane and
dy for the torsional stiffness can be found by the same procedure. All
with -=0 quantities should be compared to the reduced airplane data to check
dx
the exactness of the model spar design.
M The low-speed flutter model usually does not have either the right
Then -dx = d0
E1 scaled weight (gravitional force) or the right deflection ratio. The ratio
of gravitational force to aerodynamic force is
!?!:"' _ _L (5:56)
pb2 _ V2jb
The ratio g/(V2jb) is seldom scaled properly, so that some additional

vertical force must be applied if the model is to fly at the proper lift
Table 5:13 Typical Flutter Model Scale Ratios for a Four-Engine Turbofan
Cargo Plane
Ratio Symbol Numerical' Value
Geometric bMJbA 1/24*

Density PM/PA 1.44t
Velocity VM/VA IJ7.5
(V/bw)M
Frequ<:ncy 3.20
(V/bw)A
r5M/oM
Deflection 2.34
r5AlbA
Weight WM/WA 1/9,600
Static moment SMJSA 1/230,400
Weight moment of inertia IMJIA 1/5,529,600
,_•
Stiffness EIMJEIA or GJM/GJA 1/12,960,000
* Dictated by size of tunnel to be used.

t Dictated by tunnel and flight conditions.
coefficient. As for deflections, nr-e ratio of the deflection (due to a scaled

load) of an aeroelastic model to that of the full-scale airplane should be
(5: 57)
However, for most flutter models this unit value is seldom achieved, but
fortunately the product in (5: 57) may go as high as 3.0 without intro-
ducing any appreciable error. Some typical values of the various ratios
introduced in this section are listed in Table 5: 13. Steps in the construction
of a flutter model are shown in Figs. 5: 62 and 5: 63.
5:18 Testing for Spin Recovery

Since there are only two spin tunnels in the country, the procedures for
spin testing are not of general enough interest to be deeply explored here.
Fig. 5: 62 (a) Preparing the framework for a flutter model, and (b) the nearly completed
The layout of a spin tunnel has been discussed in Section 1: 11; a few
model. The dark lines are joints rather than glue locations. (Courtesy McDonnell
Aircraft Corp.) comments on spin tunnel problems follow.
Normal limits for the errors in the above' are ± I per cent in weight,
There are four types of spins to be considered: incipient spins (or
"getting out before you get in"), oscillatory spins, steady spins, and ± 1 per cent in center of gravity location, and ± 5 per cent in moment of
inertia. The requirements of such a model dictate balsa construction for
inverted spins. Spin experts prefer to emphasize getting out before you
light planes and mahogany for some of the heavier fighters. The following
get in as the safest way to handle the hazards of tailspins. This is par-
may be obtained from reading the films: angle of attack, angle of bank,
ticularly true for aircraft with high wing loadings, as correlation exists
revolutions per second, and number of turns to recover. The most impor-
between increasing the wing loading and the number of turns to recover.
tant factors-number of turns to recover and vertical distance to recover=-
For the tests, models may best be constructed of molded plastic, using
may be obtained within a 5 per cent error. Much new work is going on
a form. Accordingly, the first model (of, say, '18-:in,span) will cost about
in this area to assure spin recovery for truncated cone re-entry bodies.
two thousand dollars; subsequent models will be perhaps two hundred
In this application a drogue chute deployment replaces control movement.
dollars each, The models are hollow and house spring-loaded controls,
See Ref. 5: 19.
which are magnetically triggered by a Gauss belt around the tunnel when
a recovery is to be attempted. When the control moves, a little flag on 5:19 Testing Windmill Generators
a six-inch string is released to give a time-zero signal to the cameras.
Skilled technicians have learned how to toss the model into the vertical The need for a power source to operate when a jet-engine airplane has
airstream to start the spin. An understanding of the gryoscopic moments a high-altitude flame-out has reactivated the interest shown many years
on the airplane and their effect on recovery has enabled spin experts to ~go in wind-driven generators, and not infrequently the tunnel engineer
proceed directly towards discovering the best control s~quence.. For IS called upon to evaluate a particular generator by an operational test.
instance, rolling into the spin will drop the nose of an airplane WIth a When this is so, the special precautions that are paid to models such as
large moment of inertia about its Y-axis (little wing, long fuselage) rotors, propellers, and the like, whose possibility of failure is higher than
whereas the opposite maneuver is needed for aircraft with a larger moment that of rigid models, should be applied. .
of inertia about the fuselage centerline. Corrections to the data from a windmill test are subject to boundary
Since the spin is a stalled maneuver, and since stalling is a strong . corrections as outlined in Chapter 6, specifically wake blocking, and pro-
function of Reynolds number, it is pleasantly surprising that there is good peller corrections with a n~ative sign. However, in most cases the wind-
correlation between model spin tests and full-scale spins. In general, one mill is so small relative to the tunnel and the interest in very accurate data
may say that a model that exhibits good recovery (two quarter turn~ or as compared to proof testing is so slight that corrections may be neglected.
less after control movement) will also be good at full scale. Marginal It is of interest to look into the mechanism of a windmill from the
recoveries may be better or worse during full-scale flights. Reference 5: 16 theoretical side in order to gain an understanding of how it works. Of
points out the interesting fact that the spin tunnel has never missed course the device takes energy from the air, but surprisingly the total
predicting the optimum control technique for recovery. , stream energy is not available to the windmill. In words, the slowing
Spin model span should be less than one-fifth that of the test section. of the stream makes a portion of the air go around the windmill instead
If spin model size is lin full scale, the other scaling should be as follows of through it, and a point may be reached beyond which an attempt
for the conditions of equal Froude number, V211g: to take more energy from the stream is fruitless.
Looking at the problem from a momentum standpoint, we find that
Dimension Model/Full scale if the velocity at the windmill is V(l - a), the final velocity will be
Parameter
Vel - 2a), and letting the windmill radius be R, we have for the power
Length L l/n out
M l/n3 Po = V(l - a)[p7TR2V(1 - a) . V - p7TR2V(1 - a) . V(l - 2a)]
Mass
Time T l/v~ = 27TpR2V3a(1 :- a)2
Linear velocity LJT 1/v'~ Differentiating and solving, we find the maximum power out occurs
Angular velocity l/T v~ when a = t.. Substituting this value, and comparing the maximum
Moment of inertia ML2 l/ns power out with the total in a freestream of the same radius Ps' we have
the wind tunnel the model is tested with a flat panel spanning the tunnel
Po = 0.296p7T~2~3 = 0.594 underneath it. (See Fig. 5: 63.) Using this panel or ground plane is
P, 0.5p7TR V superior to using the tunnel floor (impossible in a circular tunnel anyway),
or even with no-drag blades the windmill can hope for only 59.4 per cent since the thick tunnel boundary layer would impair the results. Even so,
of the stream energy. A good figure in estimating windmill sizes seems the groundboard develops its own boundary layer, which the actual
to be about one-half that theoretically available, or roughly 30 per cent ground would not normally have; this may be drawn off by slots activated
of the total stream energy. During testing, stalled blades should be by flaps on the lower side of the board, or, preferably by a belt moving
avoided, for when they unstall a runaway may occur. at freestream speed. Belts have been run at 100 fps; their upper speed limit
is not yet known.
5:20 Testing with a Ground Plane The ground plane should extend far enough ahead of and behind the'
An aircraft in the landing attitude and within a semispan or less from model so that no local disturbances are introduced. It is better to have
the ground will experience a very definite effect of the "ground. plan~." the ground board too long than too short; three chord lengths ahead of
The cushioning effect of the ground suppresses the vortex formation WIth and six chords behind the quarter-chord should be sufficient for a wing
a resulting decrease in downwash. The indirect influence of this decrease alone. For a complete model, one tail length ahead of model nose and
in downwash is to increase the lift curve slope, decrease the induced drag, one tail length behind the model tail should be adequate. Obviously,
and increase the static margin. The increased static margin requires more the groundboard should be suitably supported to prevent vibration. For
elevator to stall at the ground than in free flight; in fact, as much as these tests the twin-screw sting drive is particularly good because vertical
10 deg more may be necessary. This, of course; places a restriction on ) movement is possible without a change in the model angle of attack.
the forward center of gravity limit or may well dictate what the elevator Blockage under the ground plane should be kept to a minimum, since it
power should be. Elevator hinge moments usually are unaffected. In can cause overflow around the top, and a poor velocity distribution near
the ground plane's leading edge. Sometimes wind tunnel engineers vary
groundboard trailing edge flaps to get the leading edge stagnation point
at the ground board leading edge.
An-interesting effect occurs when a c~n~rd aircraft is tested with a
ground board. Here the canard itself is far out from the ground board in
terms of its own chord and it experiences little ground effect. However,
the main wing shows an increasingly negative moment as the craft nears
the ground. Since this moment must be resisted by an up load on the
canard, stalling of the canard can limit the effective CL max of the aircraft
near the ground.
I Tunnel wall upwash corrections are usually negligible for ground effect
tests (say less than ~a = 0.1 deg and ~CD = 0.0020) and may be omitted.
However if tests away from the ground plane are made, corrections for
"wing off the tunnel centerline" may be needed.
5:21 Testing for Local Loads
Quite often the structures group needs local loads in order to design
an item whose pressure distribution cannot be computed. For bomb-bay-
door motor loads a hinge and a strain gage system are superior to inte-
grated pressures, but if skin loads are needed a particular item may be
equipped with a number of pressure orifices and loads determined from
Fig. 5: 63 Setup for testing with a ground board, using an internal balance. (Courtesy
pressure diagrams. Normally the multiple manometer is referenced to
National Aeronautics and Space Administration.)
tunnel static pressure and the pressure increments are expressed as a
fraction of the freestream dynamic pressure. During the work-up the
reference may be changed to airplane cabin pressure (if relevant) or other
internal pressure.
5:22 Testing Low-Aspect-Ratio Wings

The advantages of using low aspect ratios for supersonic airplanes are
quite impressive, and not infrequently the tunnel engineer finds himself
testing such configurations for low-speed characteristics.
Low-aspect-ratio lift curves may look quite different from those at
high aspect ratio. Below AR = 2.0 the curve is usually concave upwards
(Figs. 5: 64 and 5: 65). The lift curve slope at zero lift may be approximated
by
dCL/drx = 0.008 + 0.018(AR) (per degree) (5: 58)
below AR = 3.0. For greater aspect ratios, eq. (5: 1) should be employed.
Angle of attack, degrees 5:23 Testing Engines
Fig. 5: 64 Lift of rectangular flat plates. The actual operation of piston or jet engines in a wind tunnel for devel-
opment reasons is a very specialized type of test possible in only a very
1,4 few wind tunnels. Of the two, the piston engines present less of a tunnel
problem, since their exhaust is smaller in quantity than that from a jet
1.2 engine. The jet engine requires a huge scavenging system sometimes using
~ half as much power as the tunnel itself in order to keep contamination low.
1.0
./
/ This problem, incidentally, has an interesting facet in high-speed work,
L .".
where the presence of rather small amounts of exhaust changes the values
K r--... of y and hence confuses the operating Mach number. In some low-speed
0.8
~?V
.£ ~?
/"" ~
~
?'
~
<,
tunnels the air exchangers can handle the exhaust problem.
Owing to the relative rarity of engine tests, a complete discussion of
proper methods will not be presented.
p:~ V
0.6
/~
5:24 Jettison Tests
0.4 ~
It is often necessary to determine the satisfactory release characteristics
0.2 ~ ~
V of tip tanks, underwing stores, bombs, or other devices. Although it is
most direct to state that we will design model and test to duplicate the
~~V ratio of inertia forces to gravity forces (Froude number), it is probably
0
more instructive to go through the mental gymnastics of a hypothetical
o 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 case, as follows:
Angle of attack, a, degrees Assume a store 16 ft long and a model 1.6 ft long. Further assume that
Fig. 5: 65 Lift coefficients for delta wings of various aspect ratios, NACA 0012 profile. whenever the full-scale store falls a length, it is pulled back half a length
by aerodynamic drag, and pitches 10 deg. The linear acceleration is hence
16 ft/sec2, and the rotational acceleration 20 deg/secs, Obviously we
would like the model to pitch 10 deg while it is pulled back half a length
also, so that the trajectory is similar to the full-scale condition.
The first thing we note is that while the full-scale store takes 1 sec to
fall a length and pitch 10 deg, the model must do the same in 0.316 sec.
Since half the model length is 0.8 ft, the linear acceleration needed for the
model is again 16 ft/sec2• But the angular acceleration turns out to be
200 degjsec2, or, in other words, the angular acceleration is increased
by the scale factor A(which is equal to IFS IIM, see below).
The aerodynamic force which produces the linear displacement is
proportional to the body area and hence decreases as A2, and if we follow
the dimensionally sound procedure of reducing the model weight by A3,
the linear acceleration will be increased by A. We get around this by
reducing the test speed by Ji
The torque is largely due to the force on the fin area (down by A2), the
dynamic pressure (down by A), and the length of the lever arm (down by
A). In order to get A times the full-scale pitch acceleration, we must
reduce the ¢odel moment of inertia by A5. *
Hence we have (using W for weight, I for moment of inertia, I for
Fig. S: 66 Studying the release of the X-1S from the B-S2 airplane. (Courtesy National typical length, and subscripts M and FS for model and full scale)
Aeronautics and Space Administration.)
W M-- WFS PM (lM)3 - (5: 59)
PFS IFS
IM = LFS ( -IM)5 (5: 60)

lFs
VM= VFS (1M)!

-
IFs
(5:61)
Poor releases (wild pitching or hitting the airplane with the store) are
almost invariable cured by jettison guns, and may be cured by store tilt,
flaps on the airplane fuselage near the store fins, flaps on the store-mount-
ing pylon, or toed-in stores.
Drop data may be presented as moving pictures (Fig. 5: 66) or multiple-
flash stills (Fig. 5: 67) or they may be reduced and plotted as in Fig. 5: 68.
When cameras are used, both side and top cameras are needed, and usually
extra windows must be added to the tunnel.
5:25 Parabrake Testing
Fig. S: 67 Multiple-flash pict~re~ of the rele~se and separation of a bomb sha~e. In
multiple-flash pictures the static Items (the. airplane fuselage a~d the catch-~et ill t~e The use of drag chutes to provide "air braking" is quite common now,
above photograph) will always appear bnghter t~Jan the movmg model, smce their and the wind tunnel may be used to determine the drag characteristics of
image is reinforced by each flash. (Courtesy Sandia Corp.) ,..Notice that we more or less arbitrarily reduced the full-scale weight by ).3. If we
had used ).2 and let VM = V~s, the moment of inertia would have come down by).'. This
type of "heavy scaling" is useful at high Mach number and is discussed in Ref. 5: 20.
c.
.t.~-20
maO
.~ u
1:_
~ 0 -40
-E ,~
~~
.s~
ciJ~
.",
T -------
------------_
u_
oj
-1
bo
<=
tIl~
.L:"O
.8
ii:
---------
oj
bo
<=tlD
_l:l
til Q)
3:"0
til
>- Fig. 5: 69 Mod~1 pa~abrake d~ploy~d behind a cargo transport model. The trailing
loop from the windshield con tams wires to the solenoid-operated chute compartment
doors. (Courtesy Lockheed Georgia Co.)
III
Q)
> .
O.S
~tr
u
Time, sec
Fig. 5: 68 Presentation of store drop data. Other configurations could be plotted on

the same sheet to aid in selecting the best configuration. Stores do not necessarily drop
at the acceleration of gravity.
such devices. The chute may be packed in the model tail section and
opened remotely during the test. Figure 5: 69 shows a drag chute de-
ployed during a tunnel test of a turboprop cargo-troop transport plane.
Troublesome oscillations of the chute occurred during this test program,
probably as a result of too short a bridle and too short suspension lines
on the chute. Wake from the airplane could also have been contributory.
Another type of test employing porous fabric is shown in Fig. 5: 70.
Fig. 5:70 A test setup for studies of a flexible-wing craft. (Courtesy Ryan Aero-
nautical Corp.)
5:26 Testing Stores 5 :27 Testing VISTOL Aircraft
The word "stores" is a catch-all for all types of jettisonable fuel tanks, At the present time and for the forseeable future, much attention will
bomb shapes, and other capacity devices. It general, they are designed be given to wind tunnel tests of various aircraft intended for V/STOL
for minimum drag while on the aircraft, and adequate stability after (Fig. 5: 72). These may have tilting wings, tilting propellers, tilting ducted
jettison. Tests run with the stores alone largely seek solutions for the propellers, buried fans with tilted slipstreams, or a host of other arrange-
stability problems; their cargo is typically of uniform density and their ments. (Helicopters, which are indeed V/STOL aircraft, are discussed in
centers of gravity correspondingly from 40 to 55 per cent of their length Chapter 10.) Since the lift due to the drive systems varies from 100 per
from their nose. cent at zero velocity to zero or nearly zero at maximum flight speed, very
Necessary wall corrections for the tests include wake and solid blocking. few wind tunnel tests are made without using powered models. Those that
The lift is ordinarily so small that downwash corrections are not needed. are, are for the high-speed flight regime and previously discussed methods
Tests consist of angle of attack runs up to very large angles (say 50 to apply.
perhaps 60 deg). These sorts of angles in flight hurt the impact circle of There are two fundamental ways to run powered wind tunnel tests:
probable error and are to be avoided, but stability must still exist if a attempt t? match a steady-state flight condition so that lift is equal to
bad pitch-off produces them. The shape should be tested with the fins in weight and thrust is equal to drag, and read the power required; or set
both the + and x positions. some reasonable power and read the resulting lift and thrust, later picking
The best drag data possible are not good enough for serious bomb work, off those points which correspond to balanced flight conditions. Of the
nor is it possible to correlate tunnel data with flight, simply because the two, the latter is usually to be preferred-provided that one makes certain
flying bomb is always rolling and sometimes pitching. Tare and inter-
ference tests of a store shape are illustrated in Fig. 5: 71.
A few words of free-spinning rocket or bomb models might be added
here in order to reduce heart failure among wind tunnel engineers. A
little thought will reveal that with a model at high angle of attack the
downward moving fin will stall first, and the lift on the upward moving
fin then becomes a "driver." The result can be a great and sudden increase
in rpm-in one instance an increase from 300 to 2000 rpm in a very few
seconds. Don't leave, just shut down the tunnel.
Fig. 5: 71 Testing using a single or double support strut. Both the single and double
support struts are quite weak in torsion (yaw), and any models tested with them should
not have natural frequencies close to those of the tunnel. Seven-by-ten tunnels of the
type shown often have low-speed oscillations around 1 cps, and lateral restraint wires Fig. 5:72 Testing the VZ-l1 V/STOL airplane for ground effect. (Courtesy Ryan
may have to be addeKlf the model natural frequency is in that range. The model shown Aeronautical Corp.)
is installed with an image system. (Courtesy Sandia Corporation.)
in the exit tubes (which must be much larger than those for the compressed
gas coming in). Current effort includes trying to use shaft power brought
to the model from outside. This may also aid in overcoming a common
fault of V/STOL models-their excessive weight. Balances capable of
supporting such loads cannot read the small lifts. Occasionally a wire is
run over a pulley with a counterweight to reduce the effective load on the
balance.
The reduction of data can follow the usual non-dimensionalizing
method, using a reference area and 'a reference length, except for the very
low speed regime, where the coefficients tend toward infinity when q = 0,
and one must employ another base. This can be the static thrust To in
pounds and one simply uses N/To, and M/Toc rather than a coefficient
with ~bscripts. See Section 6: 30 for V/STOL wall corrections.
, Although it is far too early to generalize, a few V/STOL aircraft have
performed better full scale than they did in the tunnel, and the authors are
unaware of any that have gone the other way. Satisfactory correlation be-
tween full scale and flight exists for fuselage angle, power required/hover
power required, louver or flap angle, and longitudinal stick angle.
Fig. 5: 73 VTOL model ready for testing in the settling chamber of the low-speed
tunnel. Note the hydraulic power lines for the drive motor, and tufts for flow studies.
(Courtesy Ling-Temco-Vought Corp.)
to take enough points so that the needed data are bracketed. A second
advantage here is that the data will be ready when a power or drag change
occurs later. Indeed, one often finds that one might as well be taking data
as see-sawing back and forth near a balance point trying to get "on" to
take data.
The V/STOL models are extremely complex. Their power requirements
are usually beyond the capabilities of the variable-frequency electric
motors normally used for propeller drives. Sometimes hydraulic motors
are used (Fig. 5: 73) with, say, 3000 psi inlet pressures and the conse-
quently heavy tubing and hoses (and leaks), and sometimes air motors
(Fig. 5: 74) are used. Here there will be a great expansion of the. air Fig. 5: 74 An air turbine suitable for buried fan and other types of model drives.
through the driving turbines, and freezing temperatures are easy to reach (Courtesy Technical Development Corp.)
296 J Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Procedure / 297
5:28 Testing Re-entry Landing Craft

Empty vehicle overturn moment
Low-speed tests of re-entry landers are made to determine the per-
formance, stability, and control during the terminal portion of re-entry. co 16
Good performance, as measured by satisfactory L/ D, yields increased IS
area in the landing "footprint." The craft themselves typically show X
maximum LID values of l.5 to 2.0; with practical extensible wings as

..,
.0
Steady drag
.s 12 moment
much as four times the above values are possible. or (/)
The low-speed test program resembles that of an airplane (excluding ~

power-on runs), but at the present time good low-speed performance has a "5
o
.0
OJ
low priority as compared to the other aspects of re-entry. ~c:
For the typic~l very low aspect ratio, blunt-airfoil-profile re-entry Q)
Oscillatory lateral
o
::!:
E
moment :3t_
-'
_-
-'
/
Velocity, ft per sec
Fig. 5: 76 Presentation of missile overturn moments.
landers, Reynolds number effects for all the major slopes do not appear
serious as long as the test Reynolds number is about 1,000,000 based on
body length, although tripping the boundary layer is probably advisable.
If expandable wings are provided, it is likely that their Reynolds number
will be very low, and the usual difficulties may be expected. .
Reasonable low-speed results suitable for a first cut at balance load and
angle range are as follows: .
dCL
-- = 0.01 per degree C Domin = 0.0300
doc
CL max = 0.4 at o: = 35 deg CDW Lmax
) = 0.3
Lateral-direction slopes linear to
(!=_)
D max
= 2.0 at o: = 15 deg
perhaps o: = 10 deg
5 :29 Testing for Missile Overturn and Oscillatory

Bending Moments
Large missiles are typically without a rail launching system, and whether
tied down or simply standing on their base are subject to wind effects: a
steady bending moment in the direction of the wind, and an oscillatory
load normal to the wind. Depending on the configuration, either moment
\ may be critical.
Fig. 5: 75 Model of the Saturn SA-l in a wind tunnel for measuring wind steady and
For determination of the base bending moments a model of the missile,
oscillatory loads. (Courtesy National Aeronautics and Space Administration.)
-.
preferably dynamically and elastically scaled, is erected in the tunnel References and Bibliograpby
(Fig. 5: 75), and bending moments about the base normal and parallel to
the wind are read for a range of wind velocities. One may attempt to 5: 1 B. Lockspeiser, Ventilation of 24 ft Wind Tunnel, R&M 1372, 1930.
duplicate the wind shear gradient by screens in the tunnel, or, more typi- 5: 2 C. C. Clyrnen, Power Requirements for Wind Tunnel Motors, Aero Digest,
cally, admit that the shear varies with launch pad location and wind direc- December 1941.
tion and accept the tunnel boundary layer as a "reasonable duplication." 5: 3 Gotthold Mathias, Supplemental Data and Calculations of the Lateral Stability
of Airplanes, TM 742, 1934.
The data are usually presented (Fig. 5: 76) as moment about the base
5: 4 C. H. Zimmerman, An Analysis of Longitudinal Stability in Power-off Flight
in inch-pounds versus wind velocity, and the maximum permissible is with Charts for Use in Design, TR 521, 1935. .
plotted as a limit. Depending on the missile and its dynamic character- 5:5 H. J. Goett, Tunnel Procedure for Determining Critical Stability Procedure,
istics, either the steady moment or the oscillatory moment may be critical. TR 781, 1943.
The size of the missile is such that the Reynolds number is usually super- 5: 6 G. Chester Furlong and Thomas V. Bollech, Effect of Ground Interference on
the Aerodynamic Characteristics of a 42° Swept Wing, TN 2487, 1951.
critical, and this condition (Fig. 4: 13), should be obtained in the tunnel
5: 7 B. W. Augenstein, The Simulation of Combustion Models in Wind Tunnels,
by sufficient velocity, roughness, or the actual missile irregularities. JAS, March 1949.
5:8 O. Schrenk, A Simple Approximation Method for Obtaining the Spanwise Lift
Distribution, TM 948, 1940.
Problems 5: 9 H. A. Pearson, Span Load Distribution for Tapered Wings with Partial-Span
Flaps, TR 585, 1937.
5:1 Outline five procedures that should be followed in any research program. 5: 10 A. H. Flax and H. R. Lawrence, The Aerodynamics of Low-Aspect-Ratio Wings
5:2 The results from a wind tunnel test of a wing of aspect ratio of 5.5 are in and Wing-Body Combinations, Anglo-American Aeronautical Conference, 1951.
the following table. Find e. 5: 11 William Milliken, Dynamic Stability and Control Research, Anglo-American
Aeronautical Conference, 1951.
~ ~ ~ ~ 5: 12 Archibald R. Sinclair and A. Warner Robins, A Method for the Determination
0.1 0.0068 0.5 0.0224 of the Time Lag in Pressure-Measuring Systems Incorporating Capillaries,
0.2 0.0073 0.6 0.0294 TN 2793, 1952.
0.3 0.0104 0.7 0.0375 5:13 Time Lags Due to Compressible-Poiseuille Flow Resistance in Pressure-
0.4 0.0160 0.8 0.0470 Measuring Systems, NOL Memo 10,677, 1950.
5:3 For the wing of problem 5:2 find dCD/dCL at CL = 0.7 by eq. (5:12), 5: 14 Raymond L. Bisplinghoff, Holt Ashley, and Robert L. Halfman, Aeroelasticity,
Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1957.
and check by the mirror method.
5: 15 A. I. Neihouse, W. J. Klinar, and S. H. Scher, Status of Spin Research for Recent
5:4 Locate the center of pressure for a wing whose moment center is at the Airplane Designs, NASA TR R-57, 1960.
25 per cent chord point. Cmtr = -0.300, C L = 1.375, CD = 0.0969, and 5:16 Melvin N. Gough, Notes on Correlation of Model and Full-Scale Spin and
ex = 0.0 deg. Recovery Characteristics, AGARD Report 27, February 1956.
5:5 Explain why wings of finite aspect ratio show a smaller C L max than 5: 17 Clarence D. Cone, Jr., The Theory of Induced Lift and Minimum Induced Drag
wings of "infinite" aspect ratio. of Nonplanar Lifting Systems, NASA TR R-139, 1962.
5:6 A wing has a constant chord center section of 2-ft chord and 3-ft semi- 5: 18 Herman S. Fletcher, Experimental Investigation of Lift, Drag, and Pitching
span. The panel is then tapered 2: 1 and has a 4-ft span. The tip which is Moment of Five Annular Airfoils, NACA TN 4117, 1957.
outside the panel is a semicircle. Find the ratio between panel and com- 5: 19 Henry A. Lee, Peter J. Costigan, and James S. Bowman, Jr., Dynamic Model
plete wing lift coefficients, assuming no twist. Use Schrenk's method. Investigation of a 1/20 Scale Gemini Spacecraft in the Langley Spin Tunnel,
NASA TND-2191, 1964.
5:7 What two steps can be taken during a run to catch errors?
5:20 J. F. Reed and W. H. Curry, A Wind Tunnel Investigation of the Supersonic
5:8 What is the greatest advantage of two-dimensional testing? Characteristics of Three Low-Fineness-Ratio Stores Internally Carried in a
5:9 Draw a plot of CL> CD' and Cmcg for a reasonable airplane, showing Simulated F-I05 Bomb Bay, Sandia Corporation SCTM30-56-51, 1956.
values on the plot, and show (dotted) the same qualities with flaps down.
5:10 What full-scale propeller parameter is duplicated during powered model
testing, and how does this affect model rpm?
5:11 What serious factor is missing when adverse yaw is determined in a wind
tunnel?
Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections I 301
5. An alteration to the normal down wash so that the measured lift and
Chapter six drag are in error. The closed jet makes the lift too large and the drag
too small at a given geometric angle of attack. An open jet has just
the opposite effect.
6. An alteration to the normal downwash behind the wing so that the
measured tailsetting and static stability are in error. In a closed jet the
model has too much stability and an excessively high wake location,
Wind tunnel boundary corrections the opposite being noted in an open jet. This stability effect is large.
7. An alteration to the normal flow pattern so that hinge moments are
too large in a closed test section, too small in an open one.
8. An alteration to the normal flow about an asymmetrically loaded
The conditions under which a model is tested in a wind tunnel are not
wing such that the boundary effects become asymmetric and the observed
the same as those in free air. There is no difference traceable to having
rolling and yawing moments are in error.
the model still and the air moving instead of vice versa, * but the longi-
9. An alteration to the flow about a: thrusting propeller such that a
tudinal static pressure gradient usually present in the test section and the
given thrust occurs at a speed lower than it would in free air when a
open or closed jet. boundaries in most cases produce extraneous forces
closed jet is employed. The effect is opposite when the propeller is braking.
that must be subtracted out. These may be summarized as follows:
Wake effects such as these are negligible when a free jet is employed.
The variation of static pressure along the test section produces a drag
force known as "horizontal buoyancy." It is usually small and in the Fortunately, it is a rare test indeed when all the above corrections must
drag direction in closed test sections, and negligible in open jets, where in be applied. We should note, however, that the additional effects resulting
some cases it becomes thrust. from the customary failings of wind tunnels-angularity of flow, local
The presence of the lateral boundaries produces: variations in velocity, tare, and interference-are extraneous to the basic
wall corrections discussed in this chapter, and it is assumed that the errors
1. A lateral constraint to the flow pattern about a body, known as "solid
due to these effects have already been removed before wall effects are
blocking." In a closed wind tunnel solid blocking is the same as an in-
considered. Methods governing their removal have been discussed in
crease of dynamic pressure, increasing all forces and moments at a given
Chapters 3 and 4.
angle of attack. It is usually negligible with an open test section, since
Since the manner in which the two- and three-dimensional walls affect
the airstream is then free to expand in a normal manner.
the model and are simulated is quite different, they will be individually
2. A lateral constraint to the flow pattern about the wake known as
considered in the sections to come.
"wake blocking." This effect increases with an increase of wake size
(drag), and in a closed test section increases the drag of the model. Wake 6:1 The Method of Images
. blocking is usuallynegligible with an open test section, since the airstream It is well known that the flow pattern about a wing may be closely
is then free to expand in a normal manner. simulated mathematically by replacing it with a vortex system composed
3. An alteration to the local angle of attack along the span. In a of a lifting line vortex and a pair of trailing vortices. Similarly, a solid
closed test section the angles of attack near the wingtips of a model with body may be represented by a source-sink system, and a wake by a source.
large span are increased excessively, making the tip stall start early. The Thus the entire airplane or component may be simulated by "artificial"
effect of an open jet is just the opposite (tips unstalled), and in both cases means to almost any degree of accuracy desired, depending, of course, on
the effect is diminished to the point of negligibility by keeping model span the complexity of calculations that can be tolerated. Fortunately, a very
less than 0.8 tunnel width. simple first-order setup usually suffices.
4. An alteration to the normal curvature of the flow about a wing so Students of fluid theory are well acquainted with the simulation of a
that the wing moment coefficient, wing lift, and angle of attack are boundary near a source, sink, doublet, or vortex by the addition of a
increased in a closed wind tunnel, decreased with an open jet. second source, sink, doublet, or vortex "behind" the boundary to be rep-
'" With the sole exception of ground board testing. res~nted. Solid boundaries are formed by the addition of an image system
300
J
302 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel' Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections ! 303
doubly infinite system of vortices. Figure 6: 3 shows the image system
needed for a wing in a closed rectangular tunnel when the three-dimensional
quantities are required. .
We may through elementary vortex theory and logic develop the form
that corrections for boundary-induced upwash will take for an arbitrarily
shaped test section. The only mathematical tools needed are the expres-
sion for the induced velocity w due to a vortex of strength r at a distance r
=
C'
c B A
c c
w Pj4nr
and the relation between lift and circulation for a uniformly loaded
wing
(6: 1)
B' r = (SVj2b)CL (6:2)

I I
I
·1 I
1 I B 1
1
I I I
1 I 1
I I I
I I I
I 1 I I
1 2
i
I
:-
o-o c-:>
+
I
I +
c-:) G-~:C-J: I I
+ + 1 + I
I' I I I
Fig. 6: 1 Vortex arrangement forsimulation of vertical boundaries. 1 I 1 I
1 I : I
: I I I
which produces a zero streamline matching the solid boundary. An-open 1 I 1 I
1 I I I
boundary requires an image system that produces a zero velocity poten- (a)
tialline which matches the boundary in question. After the image system
is established, its effect on the model is the same as that of the boundary
it represents. c-)
(+)
We may see how to make up an image system by considering the fol-
lowing case for a vortex in a closed rectangular tunnel; and we note
herewith that it is usually necessary to satisfy the conditions only in the
plane of the lifting line. A three-dimensional image system is necessary
to get only the boundary induced upwash aft of the wing, the streamline h
curvature effect, or the corrections for a wing with a lot of sweepback.
Consider a single vortex A which we wish to contain within the solid
i
walls 1 and 2 (Fig. 61). To simulate wall 1, we need a vortex B of sign
opposite to that of A, and for wall 2, a vortex C of the same sign as B.
Now, however, vortex B needs a vortex B' to balance it from wall 2, and
vortex C needs a vortex C' to balance it from wall 1, and so on out to
infinity with vortices of alternating sign.
The containment of a wing or vortex pair similarly becomes that shown (b)
in Fig. 6: 2a for vertical walls and in Fig. 6: 2b for horizontal walls.
Fig. 6:2 Vortex pair arrangement for simulation of (a) vertical boundaries and (b)
The image system for a closed rectangular test section thus becomes a horizontal boundaries.
304 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections I 305
boundary induced upwash becomes
~CDi = ~IXiCL = 15(SjC)CL2 (6:5)
Equation (6:5) is also a general form. The manner in which the down-
wash affects larger models, and how it must be handled for the special cases
of asymmetrical loadings, is covered in later pages.
We will turn now to image systems and other corrections for two-
I
dimensional testing. Later, the corrections for three-dimensional tests
I
I
I will be covered in detail.
/
/
---::r---_L/I _J_
D
I
I
I
I
" 6:2 Wall Corrections for Two-Dimensional Testing
=
I
I In order to study effects primarily concerned with airfoil sections, it is
I--
/5 .r:
B --=:L _I
/~
I
I
customary to build models of constant chord which completely span the

~----..../
test section from wall to wall. * The trailing vortices are then practically
eliminated, and the image system for a small wing consists of a vertical
Fig. 6: 3 Image system for a closed rectangular test section.
row of vortices (having alternately plus and minus signs) above and below
the model. Usually, however, when two-dimensional tests are made, the
Combining the two we get models are made of large chord to obtain the highest Reynolds number
(6:3) possible, and the wing must be represented by a distribution of vortices
w = (SV/81Trb)CL
instead of a single one. The effect of the floor and ceiling of the tunnel is
Now r represents the vortex spacing in the image system which we may to restrain the naturally free air curvature of the flow so that the model
!.
express as some constant times a tunnel dimension, say the tunnel height acts like one with extra camber.
i h, and the model wing span may be expressed in terms of the tunnel The effects of the walls on the model thickness and wake are subject"to
width B. The induced angle at the centerline of the test section is then solid and wake blocking, and buoyancy if the tunnel has a longitudinal
static pressure gradient. These effects will be considered separately.
w S The wall corrections for two-dimensional testing have been discussed
~(~(Xi) =V= 81Tk(b/B)(hB) CL
by Allen and Vincenti in Ref. 6: 1, and it seems logical to follow their
for anyone image, and, summing the whole field, setting B/81Tkb = 15, treatment in general. Since the trailing vortices that escape in the bound-
and noting that hB is the test-section area C, we have ary layer are quite weak, no downwash corrections are needed.
~IXi = o(S/C)CL (6:4) 6:3 Buoyancy (Two Dimensions)
for the complete system. Almost, all wind tunnels with closed throats have a variation in static
It develops that 15is completely determined by the shape of the test pressure along the axis of the test section resulting from the thickening of
section, the size of the model relative to the test section, the type of span- the boundary layer as it progresses toward the exit cone and to the result-
wise load distribution over the model, and whether or not the model is on ant effective diminution of the jet area. It follows that the pressure is
the centerline of the test section. Equation (6: 4) is hence a general form usually progressively more negative as the exit cone is approached, and
useful for all wings and test sections as long as the. wing is small (less than there is hence a tendency for the model to be "drawn" downstream.
O.8B) relative to the test section so that the upwash at the tunnel centerline Glauert finds that the magnitude of the gradient may be expressed as
may be taken as the average upwash. a nondimensional factor k defined by
Since the induced drag coefficient may be written as dp = -k (pJ2)V2
dl B
* There is no occasion in this type of test to have the model off the tunnel centerline.
where IXi = induced angle, the change in induced drag caused by the and the corrections mentioned in this section will cover only the symmetric cases.
306 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections / 307
This equation is most simply solved by plotting local static pressure

against body section area, the buoyancy then becoming the area under
I
I
I
I
the curve.*
====L-~-=_~ _
I I
For the case where the longitudinal static pressure gradient is a straight
line the equation becomes
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
,
I
/::iDE = -I S",(dp/dl) dt
I I
I
I
I
I where S'" = fuselage cross-section area at station x; I = distance from
, I
, I
fuselage nose; dpldl = slope of longitudinal static pressure curve.
! 1
Since ~ Sa: dl = body volume, we have
o 8
Distance from model leading edge, feet /::iDE = -(dp/dl) (body volume) (6:6)
Fig.6:4 Static pressure gradient. Now the existence of a falling static pressure gradient implies that the
test section is getting effectively smaller; in other words, the streamlines
where l = jet length, ft; p = pressure, Ib/ft2; B = jet width, ft. The are being squeezed by the contracting tube. Adding the squeezing effect
factor k is from 0.Q16to 0.040 for a closed square jet of width B, but should
to the pressure-gradient effect, Glauert (Ref. 6 :2) found that the total
be experimentally measured for a given tunnel. drag increment (for a two-dimensional body) is
The amount of "horizontal buoyancy" is usually insignificant for wings,
but for fuselages and nacelles it is larger and becomes important. Correc- 7T 2 dp
tions may be calculated as follows:

/::iDB = - - A2t -- lb per ft of span
2 dl
Suppose that the static pressure variation along a jet is as shown in
Fig. 6:4 and that the model to be tested has the cross-section areas S as where t = body thickness and A2 = body-shape factor from Fig. 6: 6.
shown in Fig. 6: 5 . It will be seen that the variation of static pressure
from, say, station 2 to station 3 is P2 - P3 and that this pressure differential
acts on the average area (S2 + S3)/2. The resulting force for that segment
of the fuselage is therefore
/::iDE = (P2 - Pa) (

S2 +
2
S3)
~---------------------9'------------------------~~
•
4 6
Fineness ratio, + 8 10
Fig. 6:6
Cross- section area
* Or by plotting the local static pressure coefficient against body section area divided
Fig. 6:5 by wing area to get the buoyancy drag coefficient directly.
Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections 309
Allen and Vincenti in Ref. 6: 1 re- c::::=::::::~

1 v >
place A2t2 by tAc2 and hence get
dp 2
h
AD B
'",.
= - - Ac 2
- = - 6h
- Aa-
dp
8 dl ",. dl
(6:7)
where h = tunnel height, c = model
chord, and a = (",.2./48)(c/h)2; and
A= 16f1
-tt 0
¥.[(1 -
C
P)(1 + dY)JlA
dx
d~
c
T
(6: 8) . c=:=::::>
The terms x and yare the airfoil co-
ordinates, c its chord, and Pits no- I
r-- j_h
camber (basic) pressure distribution. h --------
Fig. 6:7 Values of A for a number of airfoils

are' in Fig. 6: 8; more are available in __l_______ --------
,,-------->
Ref. 6: 1, or by direct integration of the
0.6 I--I---'-~----r--~----r----, above equation. Reference 6: 3 may be
4 & 5 digit airfoils consulted if the integration is used.
66 Series Application of the buoyancy correction
65 is covered in example 6: 1.
64
63 6:4 Solid Blocking (Two Dimensions)
Fig. 6: 9 Image system for simu-
The presence of a model in the lating floor and ceiling.
test section reduces the area through
A. which the air must flow, and hence by Bernoulli's principle increases the
velocity of the air as it flows over the model. This increase of velocity,
which may be considered constant over the model for customary model
sizes, is called "solid blocking." Its effect is a function of model thickness,
thickness distribution, and model size, and is independent of the camber.
The solid-blocking velocity increment at the model is much less (about
one-fourth) than the increment one obtains from the direct area reduction,
since it is the streamlines far away from the model that are most displaced.
The average velocity in the lateral plane of the model is proportionately
increased, of course.
To understand the mathematical approach, consider solid blockage for
a right circular cylinder in a two-dimensional tunnel. The cylinder, which
II .
may be simulated by a doublet of strength fl = 2",.Va2 (Ref. 6: 39, p. 46),
O~--~~--~ __ ~~ L___~ ~
where a = cylinder radius, is "contained" by an infinite vertical series of
0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28
Thickness ratio, t / c
doublets of the same strength as the one simulating the model. The
axial velocity due to the first doublet (Ref. 6: 39, p. 73) is
Fig. 6: 8 Values of A for several airfoil families.
AV = t-t/2",.h2
308
310 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Correctt
so that Usually, the approximation that the displacement thickness i:
where V" is uncorrected velocity. of the boundary layer thickness works well, since itis inevitab
Since the velocity produced by a doublet {aries inversely with the boundary layer be turbulent. (For the laminar case, as a matter
square of the distance from the doublet, the doubly infinite doublet series one-third would be a good approximation for the displacement
may be summed as It is not possible to give an approximate value for the boun
thickness in a wind tunnel, since it varies with roughness, era
E
sb
= (L1V) = 2~..!_
•..:., 2
a2
2
Reynolds number, and Mach number. In one 8 by 12 ft tur

V,. total 1 1;1 h
inches thick.
2 2 2
Esb = (7T j3)(a jh ) The boundary layer displacement thickness, when it is desire
It is seen that a large 2-ft-diameter cylinder in a tunnel 10 ft high would figured from
f
act as though the clear jet speed were increased by 3.3 per cent. y u
0* = - dy
Now, the blockage due to a given airfoil of thickness t may be repre- o Vo
sented as that due to an "equivalent" cylinder of diameter t(..1.2)J,jl, and
with this approach the solid blocking for any two-dimensional body may where u = local velocity in boundary layer at a height y above t
be found from simple doublet sJmmation. Glauert in Ref. 6:2 wrote Y = boundary layer thickness, and Vo = freestream velocity.
the solid-blocking velocity increment as Several wind tunnels of the 7 by 10 ft general size seem to havt
layer displacement thicknesses of about t
to ! inch.
7T2 A. t2 t2 A fundamental source of error in the above solid-bloch
E = -...! - = 0.822..1. - (6:9)
sb 3 4 h2 2 h2 is the simulation of the body by a doublet or a doublet system.
Values of ).2 may be found in Fig. 6: 6. For an open jet the constant may be circumvented if the pressure at the tunnel wall is measi
becomes - 0All. in and model out, the resultant velocity increment compute,
Allen and Vincenti in Ref. 6:1 rewrite eq. (6:9) by introducing a as in image system theory used to compute the ratio between bloc]
eq. (6: 8), and A = 4).2t2/C2. Th~ir result is then wall and at the tunnel centerline. The new difficulty is in havin,
< enough wall for trustworthy pressure measurements. For a j
(6: lO)
sional tunnel the velocity increment at the tunnel ceiling or ftc
where A and a have the same values as in eq. (6: 7). The manner of using times that at the tunnel centerline.
this incr.ement will be held until a later time.
A simpler form* for the solid-blocking correction for two-dimensional 6:5 Wake Blocking (Two Dimensions)
tunnels .has been given by Thom in Ref. 6: 4. It has the merit of showing Any real body without suction-type boundary layer contro
the parameters upon which the correction depends a little more clearly a wake behind it, and this wake will have a mean velocity low
than eq. (6: 10). Thorn's solid-blocking correction is freestream. According to the law of continuity, the velocity,
wake in a closed tunnel must be higher than freestream in 0
Kl (model volume)
(6:11) constant volume of ftuid may pass through the test section (
Esb = c%
The higher velocity in the mainstream has, by Bernoulli's I
where Kl = 0.74 for a wing spanning the tunnel breadth and 0.52 for lowered pressure, and this lowered pressure, arising as the
one spanning the tunnel height. (A good approximation for airfoil model layer (which later becomes the wake) grows on the model, puts
volume is 0.7 x model thickness x model chord x model span.) in a pressure gradient and results in a velocity increment at th.
.~ ,-1 __ L ••• 1 "' __ L L! ... _ ...._ ...... "''''.\....; ....1... .;c .... 1.:... 1...... To cornnnte this wake effect we must first mathematicallv si
, .~\.
312 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections I 313
this equals the wake image effect and he suggests that the correction be J
I
v Velocity> V
~V c/h
€wb =- = -Cd" (6: 12)
V,. 2
The wake gradient effect, from eq. 67 of Ref. 6: 1 is
• ~Cdwb=A(J (6:13)
and is usually quite small.
Wake blocking may be neglected for the rare case of a two-dimensional
test section with open top and bottom.
Fig. 6:10
6:6 Streamline Curvature (Two Dimensions)
be emitted may be determined by The presence of ceiling and floor prevents the no~mal curvatu~e of the
free air that occurs about any lifting body, and=-relative to the straightened
D= pQV flow-the body appears to have more camber (around 1 per cent for
customary sizes) than it actually has. Accordingly, the airfoil in a closed I
In order to preserve continuity, a sink of the same absolute strength
wind tunnel has too much lift and moment about the quarter chord * at
should be added far downstream.
The simulated wake may be contained within the floor and ceiling by \ given a_ggleof attack, and, indeed, the an~~~!~tt~ck
_a ~ to? large as well.
I This effect is not limited to cambered airfoils, since, using the vortex
an infinite vertical row of source-sink combinations. The image sources
analogy, any lifting body produces a general curvature in the airstream.
produce no axial velocity at the model, but the image sinks will induce a
We may gain an insight into the streamline: curvature effect, and calcu-
horizontal velocity in the amount
late values as well, by assuming that the airfoil in question is s~ay and
~V = Q/h may.be approximated by a single vortex at its quarter-chord point .. ~he
2 image system necessary to contain this vortex between floor and ceiling
consists of a vertical row of vortices above and below the real vortex.
where h = spacing between sources. The image system extends to infinity both above and below and has
The factor l arises since half of the sink effect will be upstream and the alternating signs according to the logic of Section 6: 1. .Let us start by
other half downstream. Thus, an incremental velocity is produced at the considering the first image pair as shown in Fig. 6: 11.' It IS apparent that
model by the walls which should be added to the tunnel-clear results to they induce no horizontal velocity since the horizontal components cancel,
allow for "wake blocking." A useful form of the above statement is but, as will also be seen, the vertical components add.
From simple vortex theory, the vertical velocity at a distance x from
€wb =-
AV = Ted,. the lifting line will be
V'"
e/h w =-
r 1 x I'
=-
x
where r=-
v 27T .Jh2 + x2 .Jh2 + x2 27T h2 + x2
4
Thorn's p~per yields. the same relation for two-dimensional wake Substitution of reasonable values for x and h into the above equation
blocking. reveals that the boundary-induced upwash angle varies almost linearly
Recently Maskell (Section 6: 11) has examined the effect of the flow along the chord, and hence the stream curvature is essentially circular.
outside the wake and how its higher speed results in a reduced pressure '" The moment about the half chord is independent of the camber and has no curvature
over the rearward portion of the model. For the two-dimensional case effect.
314 / -Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections / 315
becomes
w 1 c2
alX =~ =- C
V 87T h
2 + (C/4)2 !
Assuming that (C/4)2 is small compared to h2, and again using
a = ;;(~r
we get AIX= (~)C!
The second pair of vortices being twice as far away will be roughly one-
fourth as effective, and the third pair one-ninth, so that for the images
above and below the real wing we have
6a
AlXse = "3 (1 - l + t - l'-6 .•• )cl
7T
6 7T2 1
=- -ac = -ac
7T312 I 27T I
since the alternating series shown above equals 7T2/12 when summed to
Fig. 6:11 infinity. The additive lift correction is
(6: 14)
The chordwise load for an airfoil with circular camber may be con-
sidered to be a fiat plate loading plus an elliptically shaped loading. * = -ac l
The magnitude of the fiat plate load is determined from the product of the and the additive moment correction is
slope of the lift curve (27T per radian) and the boundary-induced increase
in the angle of the tangent at the half-chord point because for circular Acmy< se = --a AC I se (6: 15)
camber the curve at this point is parallel to the line connecting the ends 4
of the camberline. The load is properly computed as an angle of attack Allen and Vincenti in Ref. 6: 1 spread the vorticity out along the airfoil
correction. chord instead of concentrating it at the quarter chord. The lift and mo-
The elliptical loading is determined by the product of the slope of the ment values of the simple analysis remain the same, but the angle of attack
lift curve and the angular difference between the zero lift line (i.e., the correction becomes
slope of the curve at the three-quarter chord point) and the chord line
57.3a '
(the angle at the half chord). The lift, pitching-moment, and hinge- Acxse = -_ (c,.. + 4cmy<,J (6: 16)
moment corrections are due to this elliptic component of the load. 27T
Considering the fiat plate loading first, we find that the upwash induced If the chord is kept less than 0.7 tunnel height (and it usually is), wall
at the half chord by the two images closest to the real airfoil is effects on the distribution of lift may be neglected.
Since there is no drag in theoretical two-dimensional fiow, there is no
w = r
2- ----'--
cf4 streamline curvature correction for drag.
'V 27T h + (cf4)2
2
6:7 Summary of Two-Dimensional Boundary Corrections
"I
II Since r = CCI Vj2, the angular correction needed for the nearest images The complete low-speed wall effects for two-dimensional wind tunnel
II
* See p. 110 of Ref. 6:39. testing are summed below for ease in use. The data with the subscript u
are uncorrected data based on clear stream q, with the exception of drag The case where a wing completely spans a free jet without lateral
which must have the buoyancy due to a longitudinal static-pressure restraining walls is not of much value in practice. Such a setup is rarely
gradient removed before final correcting. used except in small tunnels for preliminary tests. The spillage around
Velocity (from eqs. (6: 10) and (6: 12»: the wingtip makes the wing area less effective, so that the coefficients as
obtained should be increased. One test (unpublished) indicates that for
V = Vu(1 + E) (6: 17) c/h = 0.2, the measured lift was 18 per cent low. This amount should be
where E = ESb + Ewb' applied over and above the free correction with lateral walls.
Dynamic pressure (from expanding eq. (6: 17), and dropping higher-
order terms) is Example 6:1 Find the corrected data for the following two-dimensional
(6:18)
test:
Reynolds number (from eq. (6: 17» is Model 65-209 airfoil; test speed 100 mph; test section 2 by 7 ft; model
R = Ru(1 + E) (6: 19) chord 2.5 ft, standard sea-level air; ct.u = 4.0 deg; lift 61.30Ib;· drag
7.54Ib; moment about quarter chord -7.98 ft-lb ; tunnel longitudinal
For «, cl' and Cmv. (from eqs. (6: 14), (6: 15), (6: 16» we have static pressure gradient -0.02Ib per ft2 per ft. Neglect area reduction by
57.3a boundary layer.
ct. = ct." + -_._ (clu + 4cm~u) (6:20) From Fig. 6:8, A = 0.163, and from page 315, a = 0.0262. From eq.
27T
(6: 7) the buoyancy is
Cl = clu(1 - a - 2E) (6:21) 6(7)2
~DB = - - (0.163)(0.0262)( -0.02)
(6:22) 7T
= 0.0081b
For CdO (from the dynamic-pressure effect plus the wake gradient term)
The uncorrected coefficients are
we get
(6:23) - 61.30 _- 048
Clu - •
For the above, 25.58 x 5.0
a=::(tr C
dOu
= 7.54 - 0.008 = 0.00589
25.58 X 5.0
The case of the free two-dimensional jet (floor and ceiling off, but
wingtip walls in place) requires an additional factor that accounts for the -7.98
'I cmv." = = -0.025
downward deflection of the airstream as follows (both flow curvature and 25.58 x 5.0 x 2.5
downwash deflection are included): The corrected coefficients are
(6:24) ct. = 4.0 deg + (57.3)(0.0262) [0.48 + 4(-0.025)] = 4.09 deg

27T
(6:25) Cz = 0.48[1 - 0.0262 - 2(0.163)(0.0262) - 2(0.0893)(0.00589)]
= 0.472
~C~y.= - ;;(trcl (6:26) cao = 0.00589[1 - 3(0.163)(0.0262) - 2(0.0893)(0.00589)]
= 0.00577
These values should be added 10 the observed data.
Cm~ = (-0.025)[1 - 2(0.163)(0.0262) - 2(0.0893)(0.00589)]
It is noted that a drag correction is present here, and further that these
corrections are extremely large. Since the jet is free to expand, blocking + (0.0262)(0.472/4)
1
corrections are not necessary. = -0.0216
6:8 Experimental Verification of Two-Dimensional Wall Corrections

By testing models of several sizes at the same Reynolds number, data
l.6
were obtained that have yielded an excellent check on.the wall corrections
presented. These (from Ref. 6: 1) are shown in Fig. 6: 12, uncorrected,
/
and Fig. 6: 13, corrected. It is seen that the method given brings the data ,,/ 0
1.2
into beautiful agreement. ",/ to
/x
6:9 Buoyancy; Three Dimensions '" /
fO~
0.8
The philosophy behind the buoyancy correction has been covered in /
Section 6: 3. For the three-dimensional case the total correction (pressure- A/X
+ c/h=0.25
gradient and streamline squeezing effect) has been given by Glauert in X
/ " o c/h=0.50
0.4 c/h=0.80-
Ref. 6:2 as l:i X
tr 3 dp // '" clb= 1.00

D..D = - - At - (6:27)
B 4 3 dl o X
/ '"
A/
/
where A3 = body-shape factor for three-dimensional bodies from Fig. /
/
6: 14 and t = body maximum thickness. -0.4 /

-4 o 4 8 12 16
Example 6:2 Calculate the drag due to buoyancy for the model of a
Fig. 6: 5 when tested in a closed round tunnel of 9 ft diameter at 100mph. Fig. 6: 13 Data of Fig. 6: 12 corrected for tunnel-wall interference.
The static pressure gradient is -0.0261b per ft2 per ft.
1.6
10
8
1.2
6
M
-<
0.8 4
Cia
2
0.4
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
0
Fineness ratio, +
) Fig.6:14 Values of As.
" :-0.4
-4 0 4 8 12 16
Fig. 6:12 Lift characteristics for NACA 0012 airfoil section uncorrected for tunnel-
wall interference.
320 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind- Tunnel Boundary Corrections I 321
1. The volume of the body is 16.62 fta. Neglecting the virtual mass
1.10 r----,----r----.-----r---~
D..DB =- dp (volume) = (0.026)(16.62) = 0.43 lb

dl
2. From Fig. 6: 14 for an llt = 3.98, Aa = 2.2 (estimated), t = 2.26 ft
7T a dp
D..DB = - - Aat -
4 dl
~
= _ 7! (2.2)(2.26)3(-0.026)
4 ~ 0.98 t--==F-+7P-+---l----+.----I
~
= 0.519lb
As seen from Example 6:2, neglecting the virtual mass may change the
buoyancy drag as much as 20 per cent, but this in turn would be about
1per cent of the total model drag for models of ordinary dimensions.
6:10 Solid Blocking (Three Dimensions)

The solid-blocking corrections for thre.e-dimensional flow follow the
0.86 L:-__ L- __ l- __ .L____ L-_ __j
same philosophy described in Section 6: 4 for two dimensions. According
0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24
to Herriot (Ref. 6: 25), the body is again represented by a source-sink
Thickness ratio ic or ~
distribution, and contained in the tunnel walls by an infinite distribution I
of images. Fig. 6: 15 Values of K, and K3 for a number of bodies.

Summing the effect of the images, we have for the solid-blocking
velocity effect for a wing . 1.1
D.. V K1rl (wing volume)
€sbW = -
V,.
=
C
'!-i (6:28) B,l=2.0
---
LO I---
where Kl is the body-shape factor from Fig. 6: 15, and Tl is a factor I---
1.75
depending on the tunnel test section shape, and model span to tunnel _c.
width ratio, from Fig. 6: 16. ~
0.9
1.50
For bodies of revolution a similar approach results in
1.43 ~
D..V KaTI (body volume) 1.00
Circular
€sbB =- = %
(6:29) 0.8
V,. C
where Ka is the body-shape factor from Fig. 6: 15; T 1 is a factor depending
on the tunnel test section shape, and model span (assumed zero) to tunnel 0.7
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
widthratio from Fig. 6: 16. Model geometric span _ 2b
Thom's short-form equation for solid blocking for a three-dimensional Tunnel breadth -Jj
body is Fig. 6: 16 Values of'T1 for a number of tunnel types. Use bIB = 0 for bodies of
D..V~b K (model volume) (6:30) revolution.
-- = €sb = %
V.. C
322 f Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections ! 323
where K = 0.90 for a three-dimensional wing and 0.96 for a body of (see Fig. 6: 17); and finally the experimental agreement of theory and
revolution. (A good approximation for the volume of a streamline body practice leaves little to be desired. The complete wake blocking results
of revolution is 0.451d2, where 1 = length and d = maximum diameter.) for three-dimensional models are presented below.
Solid blocking for a wing-body combination is simply the sum of each The correction for wake blocking for streamline flow follows the logic
component as determined from the above relations. of the two-dimensional case (Section 6: 5) in that the wake is simulated by
The velocity ratio method (see Section 6 :4) yields the result that the a source of strength Q = D/pV, which is matched for continuity by
velocity increment at the wall of a round closed wind tunnel is 2.2 times adding a downstream sink of the same strength. However for the three-
that at the tunnel centerline for bodies of revolution, and about 2.0 for dimensional case the image system consists of a doubly infinite source-
typical airplane models. sink system spaced a tunnel height apart vertically and a tunnel width
For open jets the solid blocking may be taken as one-fourth the above apart horizontally. The axial velocity induced at the model by the image
values. Normally this results in a quantity that is negligible. source system is again zero, and that due to the image sink system is
6:11 Wake Blocking (Three Dimensions).
.
~V=JL
2Bh
Although for many years wind tunnel engineers have been satisfied with
The incremental velocity is then
wake-blocking corrections based on the single theory of simulating the
wake by a source at the wing trailing edge (Thorn, Ref. 6:4 and others)
EWb = -V
~v =-C
S
(6:31)
Maskell (Ref. 6: 49) has recently reported the necessity of considering the 4C u«
u
momentum effects outside the wake when separated flow occurs. These
effects are produced by lateral wall constraint on the wake, and result in
qwb = 1+ ~ C (6: 32)
lower wake pressure and hence lower model base pressures than would or qu, 2C u«
occur in free air.
There are three important contributions in Maskell's paper: The The increase of drag due to the pressure gradient may be subtracted by
demonstration that wake blocking yields results similar to those on the removing the wing wake pressure drag
same model in a higher-speed airstream (i.e., the wake does not vary A _ KITI (wing volume)
significantly along or across the model); second, the natural tendency uCDw - 3~ CDu (6:33)
C'
for the wake to tend toward axial symmetry (even for wings of AR = 10) and the body wake pressure drag
permits a single correction for essentially all three-dimensional models
~ _ KaTI (body volume) C
CDB - C% DO ... (6:34)
The values of K1, K3, and T1 are again from Figs. 6: 15 and 6: 16. The
values of eqs. (6: 33) and (6: 34) are usually negligible.
The wake blocking for separated flow is as follows: Maskell through
considerations mentioned above, added a term to account for the in-
creased velocity outside the wake and its consequently lowered pressure.
Dividing the total drag coefficient into a constant amount CDO, one propor-
tional to CL 2, and one due to separated flow CDs (see Fig. 6: 17) he obtains
the total wake-blocking correction EWbt as
. S 5S
EWbt = - CDO + - (CDt - CDi - CDO) (6 :35)
,2C 2C
CL2
r
; qc, S 5S .
- = 1 + - CDO + - (C Dt - C Di - CDO) (6: 36)
Fig. 6: 17 [Drag analysis for a lifting wing. \ qu 2C 2C .
. 324 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections I 325
For angles below separated flow, the last term, which is equal to CDs,
vanishes.
-
1.0
I - Reference 6: 49 should be consulted for bluff models which have a
.
Uncorrected
I {SIC = 0.13-.
sic =,0.07-... V substantial separated wake at ex = 0, for a correction based on base
/_ ~ ...... i-' pressure then becomes necessary.
0.9
P
jir"-'_, Figure 6: 18 shows how the new correction brings high drag data into
'!!?- La. beautiful agreement, and Fig. 6: 19 shows the variation of the "constant"
I '-corrected from something over t for high-aspect-ratio models on down to approxi-
0.8
mately 1.0 for two-dimensional models.
0.7
/ The total solid- and wake-blocking corrections may be summed
according to
!
(6: 37)
/ When all is lost as far as finding blocking corrections for some unusual
0.6
shape that needs to be tested in a tunnel, the authors suggest
f
uncorrected. sic == 0.07""/5
{SIC O.l~~ V
G'
] 0.5
J ~
_,.,t Corrected
Et
1 Model frontal area
=-
4 Test section area
(6:38)
rJ
0.4
} h~
Blocking applies to everything in the test section, of course, and hence
corrections to the free jet conditions must allow for the windshields and
0.3
V l/ struts or other items necessarily in the test section during test. If the image
system method of evaluating tare and interference is used, the blocking
contribution of the mounting system is automatically evaluated. That is,
O.2
/ ~
/ + sic
o sic
= O.13}cortected
= 0.07
putting the image system in increases the model drag by the tare and _
interference plus the wake and solid blocking of the image windshields
and support struts. When T and I are subtracted the windshield effects'
It / go with them.
On the other hand, when for some reason an image system is not to
O.
III V ItT
0 - It-
"'-'
!r,v-"'O'
i;J..
r-...
T,~
' "'
3
2 -:
~
'-0.0 2
5 10
urorrected
15 20
{Slc=O.l~~
I,Slc = 0.p7
~
25 30
.9,0rrected
~
35 40
1/
aO
o
"ication of the blocking corrections to data obtained with two sizes of a o I 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
1y combination. (Delta wing of A = 3.) llA
Fig. 6: 19 Variation of blocking factor with aspect ratio for nonlifting rectangular
plates.
.324 J 325 Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections I 327
Cps, ~n as where !J.(:I. is the additive correction required for upwash at the quarter
chord and '1'2 is the streamline curvature effect on angle.
: Emodel + struts + Ewindshields Values of 7'2 may be found in Figs. 6: 54 to 6: 59, using cj4 as the tail
frontal area to test section cross-sectional area length needed to determine '1'2'
ibly be used, unless errors of several per cent Another form of the same correction may be derived by assuming that
the 7'2 curves are linear for the short "tail length" of the wing streamline
'e a constant that can be evaluated with the curvature corrections. We then have
I. ' For tests without yaw, the strut blocking
ihield term. An alternative method is to !J.a:sc =''1'2 (5(SjC)CL

the windshields in, and use its values for
~l blocking only in the work-up. = _:_.s»: (5 §_ C (57.3)
0,7 ~6·.31) 4B d(ltfB) C L
ctions is customarily taken as negligible.
e ut\U5ua\ For a particular tunnel, both Band d'1'2j[d(ltjB)] will be known, so that
~e Dimensions)
0.6 !J.a:sc = kc(!J.a:)(57.3) deg
urvature for three-dimensional testing
for the two-dimensional case (Section
tJ and once k is determined no charts are needed to find !J.a:sc for various
~., 0.5
the variation of the boundary-induced models.
the variation turns out to be essenti- The additive lift correction is
~
the streamline curvature effect may
. arc airfoil. Similarly, the loading !J.CLsc = -!J.a:sc· a
the flow angle change between the
where a = wing lift curve slope.
ad based on the flow angle change
The additive correction to the moment coefficient is
i. But for the three-dimensional
from the simple system for two (6:40)
It should be noted that many tunnel engineers prefer to apply the
shown in Fig. 6: 3. Basically
correction entirely to the angle rather than to the angle and the lift. To
.ortex CD and trailing vortices
make the correction to angle only, '1' should be determined by using cj2
mula ted by the infinite system
as a tail length instead of cj4. The moment correction will then be
ndaries by the infinite lateral
~,ediagonal system. !J.Cm sc = +0.125 !J.a:sc (2) • a (6 :41)
em at the lifting line of the
and it may be found in the 6:13 General Downwash Corrections
Here as mentioned pre- Very early in the century experimenters using open-throat wind tunnels
"\0.02 ish along the chord and, found their tunnels giving very pessimistic results. The measured minimum
drag and rate of change of drag with lift were too large, and the slope of
sily handled as a "'1'2" the lift curve was too small. The minimum drag effect was largely due to
s, as in the two-dimen- the very low Reynolds numbers then found in the low-speed tunnels, but
he wing chord length. the other two effects were due to the tunifel boundaries. The discovery of
-y-induced upwash at a way to represent the walls mathematically led to a calculation of their
)f the amount at the effect. We may now _present the theory and numerical values of the
correction factors needed when a three-dimensional tunnel is used.
(6: 39) Consider the free-air streamlines caused by a pair of vortices such as
\
328 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel, Boundary Corrections / 329
are made by a uniformly loaded wing (Fig. 6: 20). 'These streamlines

1/1=0 extend to infinity in free air, but when the wing is enclosed in a round
duct, they become contained, the wall itself becoming a streamline
through which no fluid can pass. As in the two-dimensional case, the
problem becomes one of finding the mathematical device that will simu-
late the walls by making a streamline that coincides with the walls. If we
let the wing be small relative to the tunnel size, the problem becomes the
simplest of all boundary problems; a streamline with the same radius as
the tunnel test section is created by a pair of vortices placed out a distance
x = 2R2/b on each side of the tunnel (Fig. 6:21). They must have the
same strength as the wing vortices.
The streamlines due to the added vortices are shown in Fig. 6: 22.
(It will take but a moment for the student to trace Fig. 6: 20 and place it
on Fig. 6 :22, and to see for himself how the 1jJ = 0 streamline coincides
with the tunnel wall [Fig. 6:23].)
Another way to look at the effect of the added vortices is to consider
their velocity field at the wing, as shown in Fig. 6: 24. The upflow tends
to offset the downflow caused by the wing trailing vortices, and the wing
Fig. 6: 20 Field of bound vortices.
-~~¥~----i.e2
I
2
I
D c
I
I
I
I
~------- ~ R' ------~)~ I

2
Fig. 6:21 Location of added vortices, closed round jet.
Fig. 6: 22 Flow field of added vortices.

330 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections I 331
Substituting for I' we get
__ ~_IJ!A+B+C+D= 0 2
/,,"'- - .......... =
SV/7TR C
W
/
/ "" 8
L
-4f~
ind the induced angle due to the boundaries (let the tunnel cross-sectional
area be C) is
\
, /
I
The induced drag increment dueto the boundaries is
"'--+-//
\ /
!1C Di = !1rx.iCL I,
_ SIC C 2
- 8 L
Fig. 6: 23 Total flow field of both bound anti added vortices; 1p = o. Both these effects reduce the free-air induced angle and induced drag
attributable to a given C L, making the wing appear to have a larger aspect
ratio than it really has. The true values become (as in the development
then has too little induced angle and too little induced drag. The exact in Section 6: 1)
amount may be found as follows:
(6:42)
The lift of a uniformly loaded wing may be written
L =E 2
SV CL = pVrb and CD = CDu + u -S CL
.Il 2
(6:43)
2 C
where 0 = 0.125 for a round closed test section when the wing is small
so that the circulation I' = SVCL and has uniform loading.
2b But wings are seldom small and never have uniform loading. We shall
have to re-examine these assumptions and see whether they induce
The upwash at a distance r from a semi-infinite vortex is
serious errors.
W=-
r The factor 0, it develops, is a function of the span load distribution,
47Tr the ratio of model span to tunnel width, the shape of the test section, and
whether or not the wing is on the tunnel centerline. The factor 0 may be
and for two vortices at a distance R2j(bj2) this becomes . found for almost all conditions somewhere in this chapter, and eqs. (6 :42)
rb and (6:43) are general; once 0 is found they may be used to find the
W=--
87TR2 boundary effects. For most tunnels, however, only the o's for uniform
loading have been provided. This seems odd until one realizes that the
shed vortices rapidly roll up into a single pair of vortices which exactly
duplicate the trailing vortex pattern of uniform loading. They then have
a vortex span bv (which is given for a large number of wings in Fig. 6:25),
and it is proper to use the uniform loading correction. However, since
b; is developed somewhat downstream, it is suggested that it is more
reasonable to take an effective vortex span *
be = b ~ bv (6:44)
* Values from eq. (6:44) agree excellently with those suggested by Swanson and Toll
Fig. 6:24 The distribution of upwash due to the added vortices. in Ref. 6:5.
332 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections / 333
1.00 0.6
,
0.90
Taper
_I
...-
_-
ratro,
.' AT
1.00
0.5
»: .>:
----
0.75
:;; 0.80
:;r
o
-
=- ----- .J~~p.!!«-w.!DgU __ ---- 0.4
4l'~ <, 0.50
E
I'---
1:
>g
~ '" 0.70
<,
0.25
~-Iti0.3
0.60
i'---. r--. 0
0.2
/v
4 8 12 16 20 0.1
J
-l/
. Aspect ratio
Fig. 6:25 Values of the vortex span for elliptic, rectangular, and tapered wings.
o
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
b
for use at the wing. The values of 0 for elliptic loading are rarely used. 2R
Thus, in summary, to find 0 for a given wing, find be from eq. (6:44) Fig. 6:26
and use the proper 0 for uniform loading. For wings not covered in
Fig. 6:25, the approximation Lift distribution interference in a round closed tunnel is discussed by
b. = 0.9b Stewart (Ref. 6: 6), who finds that ratios of span to tunnel width greater
than 0.8 will indicate early tip stall. An interesting numerical example
will not result in a serious error. shows that, for a wing of AR = 7, span/tunnel width = 0.9, and CL =
If elliptic loading corrections are to be used, the geometric span b 1.2, an effective wash-in amounting to 1.44 deg is caused by the tunnel
should be used in computing k = span/tunnel width. walls.
The theory for open test sections will not be outlined other than to The designer of wind tunnel models cannot correct for this in the
. mention that the condition for a free boundary is that no pressures can model design since the effect of the walls varies with CL' The amount of
be supported (cp = 0, where cp is the velocity potential). For open jets, twist induced by a round closed tunnel on wings of elliptic plan form is
o normally has a negative sign. Values of 0 for open jets are given in the shown by Stewart to be
following sections.
The special effects of very large models are covered in the next two
sections.
6.Cl.i
«.
= 4R2[(1
b2
_ JL)-Yi
16R
_ 1-4
LJ
32R4
(6:45)
where 6.rxi = induced wash-in of wing due to wind tunnel wall inter-
6:14 Lift Distribution Interference (Round Jets) ference,.Cl.i= induced angle of attack = CL/7TAR, r = wind tunnel radius,
and b = wing span. A plot of eq. (6 :45) is shown in Fig. 6 :26.
Th~ variation of spanwise distribution due to. the walls of a closed-
throat wind tunnel is small unless the wing has large span. If this con- 6:15 Lift Distribution Interference (Elliptic Jets)
dition exists, the data become discouraging, tip stall starting earlier and Gavin and Hensel (Ref. 6: 7) have discussed the effect of the tunnel
being more severe than it actually would be in free air. walls on the span wise distribution of lift for closed elliptic jets with wings
334 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections /. 335
of aspect ratio = 8.0. Though the example discussed is very limited, \

further calculations using their method are possible. Their calculations \
may be summarized as follows:
1. At high .lift coefficients when the wing tips lie outside the focal
points of the elliptic jet, the variation of the induced ang~e.of attac~
along the span is no longer negligible, ThIS
amounts to apparent wash-in, which becomes
severe as the wing tip approaches the stall.
As a result, when the wing span approaches
~ the tunnel major diameter, determinations
/ of stall characteristics in the tunnel are con-
-~I==<;::::::::::::;:::t=:::::=:3~1 servative; i.e., the wing tips will stall at Fig. 6:29
higher angles in free air.
(Ref. 6: 9) following a method proposed by Rosenhead (Ref. 6: 10).
2. Other things being constant, tunnel-wall
They are both based on the ratio of span to tunnel diameter k = bf2R,
interference is less for lift distributions in
actual values being presented in Fig. 6 :28. Glauert's data have been
which the lift is concentrated toward the cen-
corrected to more modern units. .
Fig. 6:27 terline. That is, for untwisted wings, those
Owing to model length or mounting, it is sometimes necessary to place
with high taper ratios have tunnel-induced
the model with its wing not on the jet centerline. This places the trailing
upwash of smaller magnitude than wings ~ith low ~aper ratios. .
vortices closer to one wall than to the other, altering the flow pattern and
3. Tunnel-wall interference is less for wmgs of high aspect ratio, other
hence the proper value of b.' This condition has been examined by
conditions being held constant.. . Silverstein (Ref. 6: 11), who finds the values of b with a displaced wing of
4. For wings with normal lift distributions, the mean upwash fa~tor IS
uniform loading in a round jet to be as shown in Fig. 6: 30. The nomen-
a minimum when the wing tips are approximately at the tunnel foci.
clature is described in Fig. 6: 29.
6:16 Downwash Corrections for Circular Jets
The corrections for uniform loading in a circular jet have been com- 0.18 0.7
pleted by Kondo (Ref. 6: 8), and those for elliptic loading by Glauert , [/9.0.60
~
0.16
<0
~- 0.16 v:: ~
.:
,Log-,- / .J!! k =0.7 .... V A ~0.4and 0.5
lL- -
s::
Vv
.8 llnlforrn o
l\
u
t5 0.6 ~
~ 0.14 v ~ 0.14 .........:: ~
o
:e
e
5
u.
e 0.12
.-:::::: f(;: loading
8
z-
'"
-0
g 0.12
l"-
0.5
~ ~
~
0.4
'"
-0
c:
::;J
fJJ
~ 0.0
o
fJJ
0.10 0.10
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
o 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20
k=~ Vertical distance from centerline, 2~
Jet diameter
Fig. 6: 28 Valuesof.5 for a wingwith elliptic~oading.and fo~ one w~thuniform . Fig. 6: 30 Valuesof.5whena wingwithuniformloadingis displacedaboveor below
.loadingin a closedroundjet. For an openroundJet the Signof.5ISnegative. the centerlineof a closedroundjet. .5is negativefor the openjet.
-0.3 I 6:17 Downwash Corrections for Rectangular Jets
v Van Schliestett (Ref. 6: 12) has discussed basic rectangular jet correc-
I tions for very small wings, correcting a mathematical error that appears
~ -0.2
-§
or;!
§ -0.1 ~
v in TR 461 (Ref. 6: 13). His results are given in Fig. 6: 31.
The boundary corrections for wings of moderate span compared to the
tunnel width have been worked out for uniform loading by Terazawa
:e Q)
~
o
e:- 0
A ~
-..._
(Ref. 6: 14) and for elliptic loading by Glauert (Ref. 6: 15). Figures
6: 32, 6: 33, and 6: 34 give the values for b.
"0 '"c:
:>
Dl ~
r--- --f- A = Tunnel height
~ +0.1
.....,......
A
" Tunnel width
+0.2
I ~ Values of b for the square and duplex tunnel when the wing of uniform
<,
+0.3
o
/ 1 2 3 '"
4 5 6
-0.28
Tunnel jet width- height ratio, r

-0.26 r--....
Fig. 6:31 Values of <5 for open and closed rectangular jets, very small wings only.
A, closed tunnel. E, free jet. C, jet with horizontal boundaries only. D, jet with
r-,
'"
vertical boundaries only. E. jet with one horizontal boundary.'
-0.24
0.20 1\
0.18
....
'1
.§
~t~vI
q;.
'<:>
(5-
'0
.r;!
c:
o
t1
-0.22
- <,
~
\ .,.,
~ cJ'
\ ...
I!:! -0.20
~~';
"~ ~ \
'<:>
I 8
~ 0.16
'0
.,~
./
v il II e:-
'" I'-.Q;>
~\
---
"0
J"-...
-.
c:
~
o
V ~ / ~ -0.18
CD
<,
~ r--
Vv
~ 0.14 -=::
o
u
e-
t-...... 0/ II I"--- ~ <,
r-.... t'-
- ---
I--
'"
"0
g 0.12
i-.
l\. i--
~
/ -0.16
-r-- r--
CD
~
"- ~ -0.14
Me ~ vv
l.°l(squ~re)
-
0.10 .......
~
0.6 ./
...... V .',
0.5 -0.12
0.08
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 k = Effective span
Tunnel width
k_ Effective span
- Jet width
Fig. 6:33 Values of 0 for a wing with uniform loading in an open rectangular jet.
Fig. 6: 32 Values of 0 for a wing with uniform loading in a closed rectangular tunnel.
336
0.20
-0.26 I
II
0.18
J -0.24
/
'0
c5 0.16
V /
II
/
ti
:l
A=l
/
/ 01
1//
c: -0.22
o
=fl
e 0.14
_.. y ~- Y %~ °k<O
IV / v2'<:)'\
:sv 0;;;;;;;; -§
<, ~
1:' -0.20
ro
'0 <, ~
c:
o
/ v/./
~ 0.12
-,
QJ
/ [i/ V
CD
t: '
8
1:' -0.18
<, ro
r-, '0
c: , /~ ~
0.10 ::l
A=0.5 '" I'-.... ......

o
III
/ rd~
-0.16
0.08 10.5 and 0.6 ~~
~
o
-
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
j 0.7
k=~ ~
Jet width -0.14
Fig. 6: 34 Values for <5 for a wing with elliptic loading in a closed rectangular jet. r::-0.4"P
0.22 -0.12
o 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24
Verticaldistance 'from centerline, t
0.20 a
Fig. 6: 36 Values of when a wing with uniform loading is displaced above or below
~-
-§
~
c:
:B
0.18
/
rr f----
~~fC>~
the centerline of an open square jet.
span loading is above or below the centerline are found in Figs. 6: 35 to

6:38.
~ k 0.7
8 / £, ~ ~ 6:18 Downwash Correction for Circular-Arc Jets
1:' 0.16
ro
'0 0.6 -: __. .... The testing of panels as discussed in Sections 5: 7 to 5: 10 requires
c:
::l -0.5
~
o :::;- special corrections that mathematically simulate the tunnel boundaries
CD 0.4 l...-'
and the image wing which theoretically exists on the other side on the
0.14 i--O
mounting plate. This condition has been considered by Kondo (Ref. 6: 8)
for a test section whose original shape was round before the addition of
0.12 the mounting plate.
o 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 . 0.24 The variables are the wing area S, the area of the original circle before
Verticaldistance from centerline, t the plate was added So, the ratio of tunnel radius to tunnel height
Fig.6:35 a
Values of when a wing with uniform loading is displaced above or below
A = hjB (6:46)
the centerline of a closed square jet.
340 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections f 341
.. ......
1""- <,
1'-
be
/
I
.//'/
r-, r-, ~<'o" ~
-,
.... .... __ /
0
.9 ~
~I
'" "r-,. B
~~
r----... r-, ~iA.. <, -, \ Fig. 6: 39 A model b. in a tunnel whose boundaries are circular arcs.
<, '\ -, ['... [\ and the ratio of span to tunnel height
~ 1\ "'. \ ~
k = b./B
The additive corrections as usual take the form
(6:47)
j\ \ \ 1\ [\ D.(f..= ~(S/C)CL(57.3)
N o co <:t o
M M N
<0
N N
N
N N ~ <0
.....
o o o o o o o o o D.CD = ~(S/C)CL2
I I I I I I I I I
but a word of caution is necessary. In: Ref. 6: 8 some confusion exists in

0.16
- xl 1.0
0.14 L
,..... V
-e
/0.9
<0 ~ 0.12
;; ~
<>
/
"'I~ c:
.Q i---
...-
'"
.S ~ 0.10
~8\ .....
(\J
;::
r-, r-, f~O 8 0.8
- L
O~
~ Q)
<> e- I-'"
r-- r--- E '"
-0
~ ~ ~I\ 00 e g 0.08
l"-
I---- -, 1\ ' l\ °
o -<>'"
c:
al
./ VO.7
~ ~
\ , \ 1\ \
i--
'5 I--.
o~ <:t - 0.06
o• <>
0:e'" l"- t-- _...
1"'- 1\ \ ~
0.6
o
1\ 1\ o
1\
co
o
0.04
o , 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
N
N N ~ ~ ~ N
..... ..... o k = EffeCtive span
o o 000 o o o Jet height
g 'JOpe~ UO!l:l9JJO:lA.iepuno8
Fig.6:40 Values for 0 for a wing with uniform loading in a closed circular-arc wind
tunnel.
-0.09
j..-- 0.6 6:19 Downwash Corrections for Elliptic Jets
~ ~ ......... 0.1_
-e _..~ L
t--
The corrections for wings with uniform loading in an elliptic jet have
l5 -0.11 t--, '16' been completed by Sanuki (Ref. 6: 16) and those for elliptic loading by
t) j:-- r- L 'r-- Rosenhead (Ref. 6: 17).
~ / b....
c:
o
~ -0.13
o V
L
lL"
::::",-l"'l
~
K "\.
Sanuki bases his values for <5 (uniform loading) on the ratio of the minor
to the major axis of the jet A, and the ratio of the span to the major axis
k (FIg. 6: 42).
(.)
e ./ r-...
A = hlB (6:48)
"C
'" V '\
~ -0.15 \
al
k = helB (6:49)
-0.17 Values of b are shown in Figs. 6:43 and 6:44.

o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
The values for the wing not on the tunnel centerline (uniform loading)
k _ Effective span
- Jet height may be found in Figs. 6:46 and 6:47.
Fig. 6:41 Values of 15for a wing with uniform loading in an open circular-arc wind Rosenhead bases his values for b (elliptic loading) on the ratio of the
tunnel. axis containing the wing to the other axis of the jet A and on the ratio of
the span to the focal length blc. For presentation here, however, the latter
the definition of "wing area" and "tunnel area." The wing area to be has been reconverted to the ratio of span to tunnel width k = belB.
used is the actual wing area including the image area, and the tunnel area The values of b are shown in Figs. 6: 49 and 6: 50.
is the area of the original circle not including the image circle. Additional corrections for wings with uniform loading in 1 :.J"2 partly
Values of <5 for various values of k and A may be found in Fig. 6:40 for open elliptic test sections have been given by Riegels in Ref. 6: 42. In
closed circular-arc jets and in Fig. 6: 41 for open circular-arc jets. view of the improbability of using these values they are not presented,
It will be noted that these corrections are not strictly applicable to although their existence and derivation are of interest.
aileron tests, since in practice the "image" wing would have the control
surface deflected oppositely. See Section 6: 26. Further corrections for
0.16
circular-arc jets are given in Ref. 6: 30.
..,
~ 0.14 /
v
t)
9
~
c:
o
~e 0.12
C"-..., - f--__~
)."" L
V
8
e-
I:::::::
~
_......
:-- W
'"
"C
g 0.10 I~ ~ ~
al <;t"- 0.0 I--'"
r-,
I-- ~
0.08
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
k = Effective span
Jet width
Fig.6:42 Wing in an elliptic jet. Fig.6:43 Values of 15for a wing with uniform loading in a closed elliptic jet.
-0.12
)..= 1.0
I-- -0.9
-_- "11Il
.;
+:-....-
-0.14 ~ ....
N _:
;::
0$
~~ c
~ ...... ..... :-... <". Q)
u
Bu -I-- <, ....... °
<, ~-9b\'
E
~
c
o
U
e(5
-0.16
~y
/' V
.....
..- -
<,
"'~ ,/5)..
or\.
0, \..\ \.
00
0-
ci ~
e
c
co
<,
\ \ \\
~.
u
....-~ V -, So;
-0
~ -0.18
co
"0
c
r--
/ O~
~jJ-\ \ \ 0:E
>
Q)
::>
o
CD
-0.20
~
a
1\ \ 1\ \ I a
V (Y)
o
<0
N
cs
V
N
o
N
N
o
~
o
~
o
....
<0
~
_..... /' I I I I I I
o
I
o
I
g 'Jopej UO!P,WO:l J{Jepuno8
-0.22
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
k = Effective span
Jet width
Fig. 6: 44 Values of 0 for a wing with uniform loading in an open elliptic jet.
-r--- r-- I--

<,
<,
,,~~,
..... '-..... <"0
1\
~r-...... <,
$0°'\\
i\
-.
.5. '\
°\ \ \~
~---------------B--------------~~
o
N
o
~
000
~
~
~
.... \
\ 1\ \ \
\ ,
Fig.6:45 Nomenclature for wing displaced from centerline of elliptic jet. g 'JOpel UO!P,WO::l J{Jepuno8
346 J Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections / 347
-- r-,
-0.12
i
f-- >. -1 <circularjet)
B
-0.14
I~'
h
+
2c
Y
~I
+
I
-0.16
I--- I-- "'-0,&1
.-~
I.---
/'"
...... ...-
~
L~
./
-0.18
v
~ be
...-. /
~<:>
V /'
i---'
~
~
c -:0.20
V / /
o
~ /
V V /
Fig. 6:48 e
8 r> 7<:::>"?' ) /
~ -0.22
0.18 '"<::
-0
::J
o
J IA~
<:::>.
m V
r-, -0.24
V
) J
0.16 II
r-,
~
.> I
co
~ 0.14
[\ -0.26
v 11
\
I,
N
~
<::
e 0.12 t--
8
~
'"
r--- r-,
""t-""
r--
l\
~.........,
t-- >. = 0,67
-0.28
-0.30 7
J
7
II
-0
§ 0,10
~ o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0,8 1.0
o
m ~ k=~
Jet width
'\~~ t-- Fig. 6: 50 Values of a for a wing with elliptic loading in an open elliptic jet.
0.08
1'\ Q</
~ 1'- 6:20 Downwash Correction for Closed Octagonal Jets

Wings with elliptic loading -in octagonal test sections have been con-
0.06
o 0.2 0,4 0.6 0,8 1.0 sidered by Batchelor (Ref. 6: 18) and Gent (Ref. 6: 19). The conclusion
is that, for regular octagonal test sections (Fig. 6: 51), the corrections for
k = Je;~~~th
circular sections may be used, the maximum error being 1.5 per cent in 0
, 'Fig.6:49 Values of a for a wing with elliptic loading in a closed elliptic jet.
or well under 0.2 per cent in CD for the most critical case.
The octagonal test section formed by tempering the corners of a rec-
tangular jet has been discussed only for the case where a 7 ft by 9 ft
rectangular jet is reduced by 45-deg flat fillets whose vertical height
reduced the amount of side wall exposed by one half (Fig. 6: 52). The
than that at the wing. Thus, for instance, at a time when the walls are
reduc~ng the ~ing angle of attack by 2 deg, they could conceivably be
r~ducIng the t.aIlangle .of attack by 3 deg. This large discrepancy, propor-
tional to the lift coefficient, makes complete models in a closed test section
appear very much more stable than they would in free air, while in an
open jet the opposite effect is true.
. This problem has been discussed by Lotz (Ref. 6: 20), and the boundary- .
induced upwash velocity at a distance It behind the quarter-chord line
has been presented as
Fig. 6:51 Wing in an Fig. 6: 52
octagonal jet. (6: 50)
effect of these fillets is to make the basic rectangular jet more nearly where Wk = upwash velocity in the plane of symmetry at distance I
approach the elliptic jet. The wind tunnel boundary factor is hence behind the quarter chord (Wk does not vary greatly along the span), C =t
reduced. jet cross-section area, V = tunnel velocity, and 72 = downwash correction
The correction factors for both the 7 by 9 rectangular and the octagonal factor.
test section are shown in Fig. 6: 53. As may be surmised, the corrections Values of 72 for a number of tunnels are given in Figs. 6: 54 to 6: 59,
of the octagonal jet are essentially those of an elliptic jet of the same and values of a for the relevant model may be found in Sections 6: 16
height-width ratio. through 6: 20.
6 :21 Downwash Corrections for t~ Flow behind the Wing

1.2 r------,----,------,-------.
The method of simulating the boundaries by an image system in a
plane taken through the wing quarter chord perpendicular to the axis of
symmetry of the airplane has been covered in Section 6: 13. However, the
amount of velocity induced by a vortex increases rapidly as one moves from
the end of the vortex, so that, from the three-dimensional picture (Fig. 6: 3),
the amount of upwash at the tail of a model in a tunnel is very much more
0.14
..:
~ Rectangular jet
.!!!
c: 0.13
o
~ = 0.778 ....
""~ Octagonal jet ~ /

i=
8
e 0.12
0.778 \_
Y
'"
"0
\ /
-
C
=>
o
CD LV
0.11
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
k=~ 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Jet width
Tail length It
Tunnel width' 2R
Fig. 6: 53 Values of <5 for wings with elliptic loading in octagonal and rectangular
test sections with tempered corners. Fig. 6: 54 Values of r, for open and closed circular jets.
than that at the wing. Thus, for instance, at a time when the walls are
reducing the wing angle of attack by 2 deg, they could conceivably be
reducing the tail angle of attack by 3 deg. This large discrepancy, propor-
tional to the lift coefficient, makes complete models in a closed test section
appear very much more stable than they would in free air, while in an
open jet the opposite effect is true.
This problem has been discussed by Lotz (Ref. 6: 20), and the boundary-'
induced upwash velocity at a distance It behind the quarter-chord line
has been presented as
Fig. 6:51 Wing in an Fig. 6:52
octagonal jet. (6: 50)
effect of these fillets is to make the basic rectangular jet more nearly where wk = upwash velocity in the plane of symmetry at distance I
approach the elliptic jet. The wind tunnel boundary factor is hence behind the quarter chord (Wk does not vary greatly along the span), C =t
reduced. jet cross-section area, V = tunnel velocity, and T2 = downwash correction
The correction factors for both the 7 by 9 rectangular and the octagonal factor.
test section are shown in Fig. 6: 53. As may be surmised, the corrections Values of T2 for a number of tunnels are given in Figs. 6: 54 to 6: 59,
of the octagonal jet are essentially those of an elliptic jet of the same and values of <5 for the relevant model may be found in Sections 6: 16
height-width ratio. through 6: 20.
6 :21 Downwash Corrections for t~ Flow behind the Wing 1.2,---,-----,..-- __ ---, -,
The method of simulating the boundaries by an image system in a
plane taken through the wing quarter chord perpendicular to the axis of
symmetry of the airplane has been covered in Section 6: 13. However, the
amount of velocity induced by a vortex increases rapidly as one moves from
the end of the vortex, so that, from the three-dimensional picture (Fig. 6: 3),
the amount of upwash at the tail of a model in a tunnel is very much more
0.14
~-
.B
u Rectangular jet
~'" 0.13 i= 0.778 ....
o
Octagonal jet <, /
~
i=0.778\
5
u
z- 0.12 - '>
'"
"0
\ V
--
C
'"o
en _i.. V
0.11
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Span
0.5 1.0
k = Jet width
Tail length It
1.5 2.0
Tunnel width' 2R
Fig. 6: 53 Values of <5 for wings with elliptic loading in octagonal and rectangular
test sections with tempered corners. Fig. 6: 54 Values of 72 for open and closed circular jets.
1.2 3. From ,eq. (6:50) we have finally
/Closed jet
+ 0.39)(57,3)CL
1.0
v
~ - LlE = wk/V = (-0.187)(231/14lO)(1
= -2.45CL deg
0.8
/ -: V
"""-open jet This amount should be added to the measured downwash where down-
wash angles are positive and upwash angles negative. It is independent
of sweep.
""'0.6
/1
0.4 II
0.2
f .
o
f
o 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Tail length It
Tunnel width' If
Fig. 6: 55 Values of 7'2 for open and closed elliptic jets.
Some doubt exists about the validity of the downwash corrections for
open-throat wind tunnels as regards the values behind the lifting line
since they were derived for an infinitely long test section and not for one
about one diameter leng, This finite length does change (j and 7'2, but, for
wing corrections and corrections for streamline curvature, the change is
not serious. For stability corrections for complete models in open test
sections it would be in order to consult Ref. 6: 45 if the tail length is more
than 0.4 B, where B is the tunnel width.
Example 6:3 It is desired to measure the downwash angles 1.425 chords
behind a wing in the full-scale tunnel at Langley Field. A yawhead will
be used. How should the data be treated to reduce them to free-air
conditions? Wing dimensions: area 231 ft2; span 28.5 ft; taper ratio
0.5; MAC = 8.1 ft. Tunnel dimensions, 30 by 60 ft open elliptic jet.
The aspect ratio of this wing is a low 3.5. 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
1. From Fig. 6: 25 the vortex span of this wing is 0.78 x 28.5 = 22.2 ft. Tail length It
From eq. (6:44) the effective span is 25.35 ft. For a span-to-width ratio Tunnel width' B
of25.35/60 = 0.423, and a A = 0.5, we have from Fig. 6:44, (j = -0.187.
Fig. 6:.56 Values of 7'2 for several closed rectangular wind tunnels, wing on tunnel
2. From Fig. 6:55 using It/B = 1.425 x 8.1/60 = 0.192 we get 7'2 = cent~rhne, and horizontal tail on wing centerline. Values for A = 0.35 are by extrap-
0.39. olation.
/
Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections 353

1.4
1 ,I.
k=0.4,0.5~
1.2
-: ~
\
Z/ ~7
1.0 dV
~ ~
0.8
1;0/
-%71 jI
0.6 IfI
,~ V k=O.~~
0.5 / ~
0.4 /II ~ii;o ~

~
1/ -..- ~~ ~
/<"0.7
0.2
J ~
~
I
I/V/
~
o
o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Tail length _ It
Tunnel width - B
Fig. 6: 57 Values of 'Tz for two closed rectangular wind tunnels, wing on tunnel
centerline, but horizontal tail 0.1 b. above or below wing centerline.
(
A parallel correction may be worked out for the static stability as as a "loss in dynamic pressure. Though there is some loss in average
follows: dynamic pressure over the horizontal tail produced by the fuselage bound-
The moment coefficient about the center of gravity due to the tail is ary layer, it is far less than 20 per cent, and the correction is more properly
thought of as the result of the blanketing of the horizontal tail by the
qtSt1t (6:51)
Cmcgt = -- CLt fuselage and its boundary layer, and the resultant loss in lift across the
qSc fuselage, than as a loss in average dynamic pressure.
where the subscript t means "horizontal tail." The change of moment The amount that the wake is displaced by the tunnel boundaries may
coefficient due to the change of angle* at the tail is be found by calculating the induced velocities at several stations back of
the wing and by making a step-by-step integration, solving for the time
qtSt1t dC Lt 6. for each increment by dividing-the distance between stations by the tunnel
6.Cmcgt = ---d at
qSc at velocity.
The wake location is of great importance when considering tail buffeting
= qtStlt dCLt6.wk
due to wing flaps and dive brakes.
qSc da, V
Example 6:4 A rectangular wing of 6-ft span and 1-ft chord is tested
= qtStlt dC Lt ~ CLW'T20 (6: 52) _in a closed round jet (9-ft diameter) at 100 mph. Find the approximate
qSc da, C wake displacement caused by the tunnel walls 2 ft behind the wing quarter
The subscript W is added to point out that the wing lift coefficient is chord at CL = 1.0.
being used. Equation (6: 52) may be differentiated to give an additive 1. For this wing and tunnel (Eq. (6:44»,
correction directly as k = 0.629
6. dCmcgt = [~dCLtJStlt'T20~ (6:53) From Fig. 6: 28, 0 = 0.132.
dCLW q s«, Sc C From Fig. 6: 54, 'T2 = 0.475 for 1/2R = 0.222.
The term in brackets is usually evaluated as a unit during the first runs S
of a program by changing the tail incidence it (= at in this discussion),
2. wk = (j - CL(1 + 'T2)V
C
and it follows that every model should have a variable-incidence tail
whether the real airplane will have one or not. In eq. (6: 53) the tail lift
= (0.132)(6/63.8)(1.0)(1 + 0.475)(147)
slope should be=per radian and the additive correction to the pitching = 2.69 ft/sec
moment curve slope normally works out about +0.02 to +0.04. Since That is, the wall effect 2 ft behind the quarter chord is an upward velocity
the curve will have a negative slope for stability of -0.10 to -0.20 the of 2.69 ft/sec.
correction is seen to be very large. It is not uncommon for complaints to 3. The time required for a particle of air to travel from the quarter
be heard about applying this large correction, especially when measured chord to the station 2 ft farther back is
slopes are coming out less than estimated values, but flight tests have
amply demonstrated its validity. .
6.t = I!' = 0.0136 sec
If it is impossible to evaluate (qtlq)(dC Ltldat), the relation The average upward velocity during this period is (0 + 2.69)/2 =
1.345 ft/sec. Hence the displacement is
qt dC Lt = 0.1ARt (0.8)(57.3) (6:54)
h = V 6.t
q da, ARt + 2
may be used. This is the well-known approximate lift curve slope formula
= (1.345)(0.0136)
reduced by the factor 0.8. It is common to hear the factor 0.8 spoken of = 0.018 ft
* The
change referred to here is the difference between the boundary-induced angle This amount is probably negligible. For larger models, however, the
at the wing and that at the tail. wake correction must be considered. Greater accuracy in making this
(
356 Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections / 357
correction may be obtained by considering the process in a series of short power-off roll-up is not quite attained, and the image system must have
steps, summing up to get the total correction. added to it a stream function to allow for the slipstream. Generally it is
sufficient to use the power-off (normal span loading) value of 0 and the
6:22 Downwash Corrections for Wing-Bo~y Combinations power-on lift coefficients. .
Smith, in Ref. 6: 21, points out that the simple simulation of a round
closed jet by a pair of added vortices set out from the tunnel centerline 6 :24 Downwash Corrections for Swept Wings
is not realistic when a wing-body combination is in the tunnel, and a The determination of subsonic wind tunnel wall interference for swept
rather complex vortex pattern is then required. wings cannot be simplified as in the case of a straight lifting line (i.e.,
The effect of this new vortex pattern is to increase 0 (about 10 per cent straight wing configurations). Reference 6: 44 presents a method of
for most airplane models) so that an error of about 0.2 deg in the stall calculating the jet boundary corrections for swept wings in circular
angle and 1 per centin drag may thereby be incurred. A second effect is tunnels. The procedure involves finding the induced upwash angle at the
that the boundary-induced upwash, which for a wing alone tends to three-quarter-chord line of the wing. The jet boundary induces an effec-
make an early tip-stall, now makes for an early root-stall. It should hence tive camber of the circular-arc type and, according to thin airfoil theory,
be noted that stall observations of average-size models should be shaded . the effective angle of attack is the angle at 0.75C. This method requires
towards the tip (by about one degree) when the stall studies are evaluated. the use of charts to evaluate the boundary-induced upwash factor which
For the case of highly loaded, low-aspect-ratio missiles, the effect may depends on finding a "compensated" potential that satisfies the boundary
be more noticeable. The value of 0 may then be found from condition of zero normal velocity at the walls. The difference between
this potential CPe and the "uncompensated" potential CPu, which is for an
0= t6(FI + ;F2) (6:55) infinitesimal lifting element in free air, is the "additional" potential.
Differentiating with respect to z gives the vertical velocity, which allows a
determination of the tunnel-induced velocity factor F from (acpjaz)e -
where F __ 1_+_1__ 1 (acpjoz)u' After nondimensionalizing one gets F = Fe - F",. The charts
1 - 1 + PI 1 - PI (b./2r)2 - P1 give values of F for various values of ~, a, and 'YJ with
1
(6: 56) ~= longitudinal coordinate (xlr); r = tunnel radius,
(be/2Rl + PI a = lateral coordinate of lifting element (sir),
F _ 1 1 'YJ = lateral coordinate (ylr).
2 - P2 - (b./2R)2 + (b./2R)2
Pz
The weighted average angle-of-attack correction is then given by
-• • 1 1
+ ----"---: (6: 57)
P2 - (r/Rl P2 + (r/R)2
b..C/..; = 57.3C P(__l:I:'_)
L ~ a(2Y) (6:58)
where r = fuselage radius, feet; R = test section radius, feet; PI = Jo VCL 0.75 CLC b
b.~/2R2; P2 = b.~/2r2; be = wing effective span, feet (see eq. (6:44»;
and ~ = wing station, feet. where .z., = ~
VCL 4m
II
0 CLC
c!c (FH + F_,,) a(2S)
b
The above equations assume no dihedral, and wing and body on the
tunnel centerline. The final 0 is an average of 0 across the span weighted The correction for the induced drag coefficient is based on the upwash
for the local chord. at the twenty-five per cent chord and is calculated from
6:23 Downwash Corrections for Power-on Tests
The slipstream due to a thrusting propeller increases the lift over the (6:59)
inboard part of the wing, and to a minor amount changes the spanwise
load distribution. It also blows back the downwash so that the normal The entire procedure is too lengthy to be presented here, but working
Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections I 359
6:25 Downwash Corrections' for Flapped Models
Located at centroid When the flaps are down on a model the spanwise distribution of lift
of lift on segment
is changed considerably from the no-flap condition. It is a nice refinement
to make allowance for this change when computing the boundary correc-
tions. This is done by separating the lift due to the wing alone from that
due to the flaps. The wing-alone 0 is selected as outlined heretofore,
using be, and the flap-down 0 is selected using the flap span. It is not
necessary to consider roll-up of the flap vortices. The boundary correction
equations become
D.rxi = (owCLW + 0FCLF) ~ (57.3) (6:60)

C
D.Cm = (owCiw + °FCiF) ~ (6:61)

C
Doublet
lines 6 :26 Corrections for Reflection Plane Models
Fig. 6: 60 Field of wing represented by four-point concentration of lift with trailing
doublet lines. . The main purpose of testing reflection plane models is to get the largest
model size and hence the largest model Reynolds number. In turn, the
charts and examples for both complete wings and reflection plane model large model size may require special attention to wallcorrections, Another
(bipolar tunnel) are presented in Ref. 6: 44: In some instances the swept effect is that the reflection plane reflects, and under some conditions
wing corrections are not far off; one example, for a wing of 47.7 deg (aileron down, or vertical tail, for instance) an undesirable reflection for
sweep, 6.56 ft span in a 10 ft circular tunnel gave D.rxi = 0.905 CLand which special allowances must be made is obtained.
D.Cm = 0.0139 CL2• The corresponding straight wing values were D.rxi = Reflection plane tests are conveniently divided into four classes:
0.813 CL and D.Cm = 0.0140 CL2. Of course agreement this good is 1. Small symmetrical models (less than 0.6h) such as halves of flapped
not always found. , wings, or horizontal tails.
Wall correction for swept and yawed wings in rectangular tunnels may 2. Small unsymmetrical models such as 'aileron panels.
be found in Ref. 6: 28. The approach to the problem by this method is 3. Small vertical tail models where a reflection is not desired.
to represent the wing lift distribution by point concentrations oflift. From 4. Large reflection plane models of all kinds.
these points zero-span horseshoe vortices extend downstream (see Fig. The first three may be reasonably treated in the space available, but
6: 60). The problem then is to determine the interference flow caused detailed studies of large models will require consulting the work by
by the presence of these doublet lines. The working charts presented in Swanson and Toll (Ref. 6: 5).
Ref. 6: 28 allow the computation of the boundary-induced upwash along
the one-quarter- and three-quarter-chord lines. Three points «, fl, and y Small Symmetrical Models. The data for a small reflection plane
(as indicated in Fig. 6: 60) located at ±b/3 and at the plane of symmetry model which is half of a symmetrical model may be corrected by treating
may be chosen. A linear variation of w/VCL is assumed between fl and the upwash and blocking as though the entire model were in a tunnel of
o: (=y). Once these upwash angles have been plotted, eqs. (6: 58) and double the width. (See Fig. 6: 61.) The values of 0 for such a setup are
(6: 59) may be used to get the boundary corrections. . in Fig. 6: 32, and those for a circular-arc tunnel are in Fig. 6: 40. One
Note that both of the methods use the up wash along the three-quarter normally gets a slightly lower lift curve slope and slightly higher induced
chord to determine D.rxi. The induced drag correction is more correctly drag than in the complete-model, complete-tunnel case, owing to some
given by the upwash along the one-quarter chord. The span loading vortex shedding in the root boundary layer. When panel area and MAC
parameter CCl/CLC is most conveniently obtained from the charts in are used the final data are directly applicable to the airplane if the split
Ref. 6:46. is along the plane of symmetry with an added amount of span to allow
(
Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections / 359

6 :25 Downwash Corrections' for Flapped Models
Located at centroid When the flaps are down on a model the spanwise distribution of lift
of lift on segment
is changed considerably from the no-flap condition. It is a nice refinement
to make allowance for this change when computing the boundary correc-
tions. This is done by separating the lift due to the wing alone from that
due to the flaps. The wing-alone () is selected as outlined heretofore,
using be, and the flap-down () is selected using the flap span. It is not
necessary to consider roil-up of the flap vortices. The boundary correction
equations become
(6:60)
(6:61)
Doublet
lines
6 :26 Corrections for Reflection Plane Models
Fig. 6: 60 Field of wing represented by four-point concentration of lift with trailing
doublet lines. . The main purpose of testing reflection plane models is to get the largest
model size and hence the largest model Reynolds number. In turn, the
charts and examples for both complete wings and reflection plane model large model size may require special attention to wallcorrections. Another
(bipolar tunnel) are presented in Ref. 6: 44: In some instances the swept effect is that the reflection plane reflects, and under some conditions
wing corrections are not far off; one example, for a wing of 47.7 deg (aileron down, or vertical tail, for instance) an undesirable reflection for
sweep, 6.56 ft span in alOft circular tunnel gave D.(Xi = 0.905 CL and which special allowances must be made is obtained.
D.CDi = 0.0139 CL2. The corresponding straight wing values were D.(Xi = Reflection plane tests are conveniently divided into four classes:
0.813 CL and D.CDi = 0.0140 CL2. Of course agreement this good is 1. Small symmetrical models (less than 0.6h) such as halves of flapped
not always found. wings, or horizontal tails.
Wall co~rection for swept and yawed wings in rectangular tunnels may 2. Small unsymmetrical models such as 'aileron panels.
be found III Ref. 6: 28. The approach to the problem by this method is 3. Small vertical tail models where a reflection is not desired.
to represent the wing lift distribution by point concentrations oflift. From 4. Large reflection plane models of all kinds.
these points zero-span horseshoe vortices extend downstream (see Fig. The first three may be reasonably treated in the space available, but
6: 60). The problem then is to determine the interference flow caused detailed studies of large models will require consulting the work by
by the presence of these doublet lines. The working charts presented in Swanson and Toll (Ref. 6: 5).
Ref. 6: 28 allow the computation of the boundary-induced upwash along
the one-quarter- and three-quarter-chord lines. Three points «, (3, and y Small Symmetrical Models. The data for a small reflection plane
(as indicated in Fig. 6: 60) located at ±b!3 and at the plane of symmetry model which is half of a symmetrical model may be corrected by treating
may be chosen. A linear variation of w!VCL is assumed between (3 and the upwash and blocking as though the entire model were in a tunnel of
(X (=y). Once these upwash angles have been plotted, eqs. (6: 58) and double the width. (See Fig. 6: 61.) The values of () for such a setup are
(6: 59) may be used to get the boundary corrections. in Fig. 6:32, and those for a circular-arc tunnel are in Fig. 6:40. One
Note that both of the methods use the upwash along the three-quarter normally gets a slightly lower lift curve slope and slightly higher induced
chord to determine D.(X;. The induced drag correction is more correctly drag than in the complete-model, complete-tunnel case, owing to some
given by the upwash along the one-quarter chord. The span loading vortex shedding in the root boundary layer. When panel area and MAC
parameter CCI! CLC is most conveniently obtained from the charts in are used the final data are directly applicable to the airplane if the split
Ref. 6:46. is along the plane of symmetry with an added amount of span to allow
(
i rb o
1 1 Difficulties arising from the doubled increment of lift, drag, and mo-
ment have been covered in Section 5: 8, which must be consulted for
proper interpretation of the results.
I~ mm~l...-- __ ~j_ Small Vertical Tail Models. The small vertical tail models present a
number of additional difficulties since the degree of endplating given by
the fuselage and horizontal tail is very difficult to predict. One approach
is to consider the vertical tail a completely reflected symmetrical semi-span
wing and, after determination of the slope of the vertical tail lift curve
Fig. 6:61
from the complete model tests, to reduce the panel test data to conform.
Normally the vertical tail drag is of so little interest that an increase of
for the boundary layer displacement thickness. Sections 5:7 through
panel drag to allow for the reduced aspect ratio is not required.
5: 10 should also be consulted.
Another approach, and perhaps the best one, is to determine the slope
Small Unsymmetrical Models. When the model is unsymmetrical of the lift curve of the vertical tail from complete model tests and use the
(aileron deflected, for instance), additional troubles accrue since the hinge moment data from panel tests at the same lift coefficient. This
reflection will be symmetrical. Thus in this case the tunnel data include a neglects the difference of span loading for panel and actual vertical tail
small carry-over from the reflection and will show from one-tenth to installation. Still another alternative is to build a tail assembly model
one-fourth more increment of lift, drag, and pitching moment, yawing such as that shown in Fig. 6: 63. Here the model is large enough for high
moment, and rolling moment than they should, Since tunnel data will Reynolds number, and actual endplating is well simulated. The effects of
be high for ailerons because of the failure to simulate aileron cable stretch sidewash must be obtained from the complete model tests and incorporated
and wing twist, some engineers plot up the span loadings with ailerons into the data. The tail assembly model should have a fuselage stub nose
zero and deflected and reduce their measured data by the proper carry-over at least one MAC ahead of the tail quarter chord. (See Section 9: 12 for
increment. cases where the stub nose can introduce interference.)
The only time this effect can be misleading in comparing different
ailerons on the same basic panel is when one aileron has more span than
another. As seen in Fig. 6: 62 the reflection effects increase with span and
the aileron of greatest span yields the data most erroneously high.
Measured with reflection plane

Reflection plane
Complete wing data
Aileron zero
.,
Real
wing
Fig. 6: 62 Effect of reflection plane on panel with aileron down. Fig. 6:63
Large Models. The analysis for large models is complicated funda-

mentally because the boundary-induced upwash cannot be considered
constant along either the chord or the span. One is therefore justified in
- ----
w
Velocity <V
taking greater pains for the upwash corrections, but variation of the
blocking along the model almost never is large enough to be considered.
Besides the streamline curvature effects, the variation of boundary-
induced upwash along the span of the model tends to load up the tips.
- v Velocity> V
~
Some test section shapes do 'this to a smaller extent than others, or, if a
split fuselage is included, its effect usually compensates for the tip loading,
and standard wall corrections are satisfactory. (See Section 6 :22.)
6 :27 Jet Arrangements with Zero Corrections Fig. 6: 64 Propeller in a closed-throat wind tunnel.
Figure 6: 31 indicates that rectangular jets may have several arrange-
ments that yield zero boundary effects. Such arrangements include jets to the jet diameter and that an open-throat tunnel be employed. Under
with one horizontal boundary and a width-to-height ratio of 2.0, with these conditions no boundary corrections are needed.
two horizontal boundaries and a width-to-height ratio of 1.0, and with Unfortunately, for various practical reasons it is not always possible
two vertical boundaries and a width-to-height ratio of 0.5. But it must to adhere to the above stipulations. An approach to the wall corrections
be remembered that Fig. 6: 31 applies to very small wings only. for propeller tests in a closed-throat tunnel may be made as follows:
In practice, nearly every wing requires its own specific down wash cor- In a closed jet the propeller slipstream under conditions of positive
rection factor c5, and it is obvious that each wing would require its own thrust will have a velocity u greater than the velocity in the jet without
specific jet configuration in order to have zero boundary effect. the propeller V. Since the same volume of air that passes section x ahead
It happens that the downwash correction may be neglected for one of the propeller must pass section y behind it, it follows that the velocity
type of test-tests of wings or complete models in the tunnel for ground w outside the slipstream will be less than V. In free air, w would, of course,
effect. This type of test utilizes a ground board (see Section 5 :20) close to equal V. The lower-velocity outside air has a higher static pressure, and
the model to simulate the ground. The effect of the board is opposite in it follows that the slipstream also has too high a static pressure. This
sign to the boundary effect of a closed jet and practically cancels it out. reacts back to the propeller so that it develops the thrust that might
Data from tests of this type made with the wing within one chord of the be expected at a lower speed V'. The test should therefore be run at a
ground plane may be used directly without downwash corrections (Ref. speed above V in order to develop the proper forces for V.
6:22.) The amount of correction for this "continuity" effect may be found
The setup is similar to that of a wing far off the tunnel centerline. from
However, when one considers the wall effect of the three remote walls V' 740(1
(6:62)
(in a rectangular tunnel) by subtracting out the interference of the fourth V= 1 - =-2";-;:1:=+====2=74
wall which represents the ground and hence should have its "interference"
in, it develops that the effect of the remote walls is quite small and may where 74 = T/ pA V2, 0(1 = AI C, A = propeller disk area, C = jet cross-
be neglected as far as pitch stability is concerned. section area, and T = thrust.
Substantial effort is currently going into seeking jet arrangements with Values of V'/V may be obtained from Fig. 6:65. It is apparent that
zero corrections for V/STOL models. Thus far, no satisfactory solutions eq. (6: 62) will not work for negative thrust, since the correction becomes
have been found. infinite at 74 = -0.5 (CD = 1.0 or T; = -0.392). Although we are not
aware of any particular studies of the problem, it is probable that the
• 6:28 Boundary Correction for Propeller Tests wake-blocking corrections of Section 6: 11 would be satisfactory. Figure
Glauert (Ref. 6: 2) has examined the problem of testing propellers in a 6: 66 shows a rotating drag device in the wind tunnel of the Wichita State
wind tunnel and suggests that the propeller diameter be kept small relative University.
6:29 Downwash Corrections for Asymmetrical Loading
When the ailerons of a model are deflected, the down wash is no longer
symmetrical, and the effect of the jet boundaries becomes asymmetrical
also. The effect on the rolling moment is small and is frequently neglected.
Biot (Ref. 6 :23) shows that for full-span ailerons of customary model size
it amounts to about 3 per cent. Stewart (Ref. 6 :24) has considered the
correction to the yawing moment coefficient necessary for round jets.
He reaches the conclusion* that the total yawing moment correction may
be found from
(6 :63)
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
T where
PAY'
Fig. 6:65 The factor (6:64)

7T
and may be found from Figs. 6: 67 and 6: 68, wherein
- F (ba2R22
l
)]
-0.1 I
/
-0.2
/
~ /
r.;....
-0.3
/
/
V
Fig. 6: 66 Tests of a rotating braking device, image system installed. (Courtesy

-0.4
-0.5
- ~
~
./
Wichita State University.) o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

• x
Fig. 6:67
* Verified by W. L. Koch in a Caltech thesis, 1939.

0.18
Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections / 367
0.16 where
(6:65)
and may be found from Fig. 6: 68. Next,

0.14
I , 6.C
n3
= - C 2 Sbr F (a2 1)
a
Z 2 1T (2a2 - a 2) a R ' a
1 2
3 0.12 / where Fa(a2/R, ada2) may be found from Fig. 6:69.

r::: / The symbols not readily apparent are .
a1 = distance from wing centerline to inner tip of aileron.
V Q2 = distance
0.10
..,v b = wing span.
from wing centerline to outer tip of aileron.
R = tunnel radius.
0.08 -I--V The correction 6.Cn should be subtracted for a closed wind tunnel and
added for an open one. Further, 6.Cn3 should be omitted when both
ailerons are deflected. Though it may seem surprising that correction of
0.06 one aileron only is even mentioned, this is not an unusual case. When
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
two aileron designs are under consideration it is customary to build one
x
Fig. 6:68 into the right aileron and one into the left aileron, testing each separately.
The sign conventions for ailerons are such that down aileron is "plus,"
0.6 r-------r----,-----r--,----; regardless of whether the right or left aileron is under consideration. It
should therefore be mentioned, with the signs employed, which aileron
is being tested.
Stewart gives a numerical example, which may be readily checked, as
follows:
Suppose that the left aileron of a model with a 8-ft span is tested in a
closed round jet, 10 ft in diameter. The left aileron extends from 2 to
3.5 ft out. The wing area is 8 ft; the lift coefficient C L = 1.5; and the
rolling moment coefficient so developed is C, = 0.0300. Find the yawing
moment correction.
= 0.00069
6.Cn2 = CZC L a22:_ a12[F2(:;:) - F2(:;~) ]

a,
v: = (0.0300)(1.5) 8 [F (8)(3.5)2 _ F (8)(2)J
(3.52 _ 22) 2 (2 )(5 ) 2 (2)(52)
Fig. 6:69
= 0.00024
!1C
n3
= -C
!
2
(2
SbR F
2) 3
(a 2
,
a1)
momentum thrust of the jet sheet. The angle 8 is that angle through which
the slipstream or jet sheet is turned under static conditions.
27T a2 - al R a2
It may be noted that, in addition to the usual boundary effects, the
= -(0.0300l (8)(8)(5) F (3.5 _2_) , tunnel wall can cause premature stall by forcing the normally curved
\ 27T[(3.5)2 - 22] 3 5 '3.5 streamlines to become straight at the wall. This caused an adverse gradient
= 0.00008 to exist, with a resulting flow separation over the wing. Recent tunnel
!1Cn = 0.00069 + 0.00024 + 0.00008 = 0.00101 investigations at the Langley Center indicate that the walls should be at
least 4 or 5 propeller diameters away from the model for very low speeds
!1Cn should be subtracted from the observed yawing moment. or under static conditions. At higher forward speeds the model size
should be chosen so that the angle-of-attack correction obtained by
6:30 Corrections for V/STOL Testing
conventional wall corrections should not exceed 2 deg.
Although in many airplane tests we may get by with assuming that wall
corrections are constant across the span, the V/STOL model, unless 6:31 Summary of Three-Dimensional Boundary Effects
(Closed Test Section)
tested in a large test section relative to its size, frequently gets into a regime
where wall corrections seriously affect the data as a result of spurious span Data from a wing test in a closed three-dimensional wind tunnel may
loadings. This is particularly bad for rotors, which not only suffer from be corrected to free-air conditions according to the following relations: *
the variation of span loading due to the walls, but assume new and The corrected velocity is
undefined shapes. Hence despite excellent theoretical work by Heyson and V = Vu(1 + €) (6:70)
a number of others at the NASA (Refs. 6:47, 6:48, 6: 50, and 6: 51), there where € = Esb + €wb (6: 71)
is currently a desire to test in the largest tunnels available where wall
corrections will both be small and not vary across the model. Some The dynamic pressure, from eq. (6: 70), is
early suggestions for model size are given in Section 1: 18. q = qu(1 + 2€) (6:72)
Conventional wall corrections 'may be applied when the wing is pro-
viding a substantial part of the lift. Then, as indicated in Ref. 5: 19, they The Reynolds number, from eq. (6:70), is
are used only for that part of the lift due to circulation. For propeller- R = RuCl + €) (6:73)
",'y .to
~
~
driven and jet-flap models the corrections take the form .......
."..\.
...t
The lift coefficient, from eq. (6: 72), is j,,(-f oV'
S /'
!1IX = 57.3 b - C L(rJ (6:66) CL = CLu(1 - 2€) - 'T2!1IX' a (6:74)
C
The angle of attack, from eqs. (6: 42) and (6: 39), is
!1CD = b §_ C1<n (6:67)
C
"~re for propeller-driven types IX = IX" + [b ~ CL(57.3)] (1 + 72) (6:75)
CLen = CL - CT f_ sin (8 + IX) (6:68) The pitching moment coefficient, from eqs. (6: 72) and (6: 40), is
T
models (6:76)
'"'TAn = CL - C" _£_ sin (8 + IX) (6:69) The drag coefficient, from eqs. (6: 72), (6: 33), (6: 34), and (6: 43), is]
wVj
"./ft, CD = CDuCl - 2€) - !1CDW - !1CDB + b §_ CL2 (6:77)
''1lcient, wVj/qs. C
) ratio of resultant force to propeller * The boundary corrections have been added to the blocking corrections of Ref. 6:25.
Flw V, is the ratio of resultant force to t It is assumed that the buoyancy correction has already been applied.
370 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections f 371
Applying eqs. (6: 70) through (6 :77), it develops, is a very complicated Example 6:5 Correct the following data to free-air conditions:
procedure since the wake-blocking term contains the profile drag coeffi- Closed tunnel test section 7 by 10 ft.
( ~ient which (a) is not readily obtainable and (b) is a variable with angle Longitudinal static pressure gradient 0 per foot.
of attack. One may fight this procedure through, but a far simpler ap- Clear jet speed 200 mph (indicated).
proach is to assume the wake-blocking constant, and to run the tunnel at Boundary-layer displacement thickness 0.5 inch.
"blocked q." The running and work-up are then as follows: Model dimensions:
-1. Calculate « by eq. (6: 37). The minimum drag coefficient including Wing area 6.33 ft2, MAC = 0.897 ft.
bayonet and pitch strut drag should be used in eq. (6: 31). Wing span 7.3 ft, taper ratio 0.5, aspect ratio 8.4.
2. The blocked dynamic pressure is then Average airfoil section 65-012, wing lift curve slope = 0.088 per
degree.
qb = qu(1 + 2.::)
Fuselage maximum diameter 9.20 inch.
3. The tunnel is set at q", and the coefficients become Fuselage overall length 5.24 ft.
CL' = LiftlqbS Tail area 2.16 ft2.
Tail length 3.l ft.
IX = ()(u + ,6,1X
+ ,6,()(sc (6:42)
Tail aspect ratio 3.2.
= + (1 + 'T2) 0 ~ CL'(57.3)
()(u
Wing volume 0.817 ft3.
C Fuselage volume 1.208 ft3.
CL = CL' + ,6,CLsc Maximum frontal area 1.204 ft2.
The model is mounted on the MAC at 0.30e, and is on the tunnel
= CL'[I-'T20~(57.3).()(J (6:39) centerline. The horizontal tail is on.
Me~sures lift 302.llb, measured drag 46.6Ib, measured pitching mo-
_ Pitching moment
ment -63.6 ft-lb, ()(u = 5.0 deg.
A
Cm - - 0.25 uCLsc (6:40)
q.Sc The effective tunnel area is 7 x 10 - (0.5/12)(34) = 68.58 ft2. -
Drag - ,6,DB s: S 2 From Fig. 6: 16, 'T1 for biB = 0.73 and B/H = 1.43 is 0.881, and the
C D= +u-CL (6:27,-6:43) solid blocking for the wing is
qbS C
The streamline curvature corrections usually become negligible for . (0.989)(0.881)(0.817)
wings of high aspect ratio but are worth including for delta wings and '::SbW = (68.58)1.6
panel models. ....,
= 0.00125
The jet-boundary corrections for wing-body combinations, horizontal
tail on, and other special cases may be found in the appropriate sections.
From Fig. 6:15, using tlc = 0.146 and the NACA III shape, we have
The tunnel static pressure will be needed for pressure tests but will
Ka = 0.926. From Fig. 6: 16, using bjB = 0 and B/H = 1.43, we have
normally not be available from the static pressure piezometer ring because
'T1 = 0.863. The solid blocking for the body becomes
of model effects. Letting the subscript b indicate blocked conditions and
u the upcorrected (clear jet) values we may write (0.926)(0.863)(1.208)
Pu + tpV,,2 + !pVb
= Pb 2 '::sbB = (68.58)1.5
f. "
Vb = Vu + .::V" = 0.00170
Pb = P« - 2.::qu The wake blocking is
tely, no systematic study verifying the three-dimensional
, (similar to that of Ref. 6: 1 for the two-dimensional case)
'::wb = t(6.33/68.58)0.0720 (see p. 372 for CDu)
, . I
= 0.00166
372 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections ! 373
The total blocking is Using a "tail length" of MACf4 = 0.224 ft, * ItIB'= 0.0224, and k =
0.647, we get from Fig. 6:56 yields 72 = 0.078.
( E = 0.00125 + 0.00170 + 0.00166 Hence the corrected lift coefficient is
= 0.00461
CL = 0.466[1 - 2(0.00461)] - (0.078)(0.117) 6.33 (0.466)(57.3)(0.088)
(Equation (6:38) yields E = 0.0043.) 68.58
As a matter of interest, Thorn's short-form solid blocking is = 0.460
E = (0.90)(0.817) + (0.96)(1.208) The corrected angle of attack is then

sb (68.58)% (68.58)~ IX = 5.0 + 0.117(6.33/68.58)(0.466)(57.3)(1 + 0.078)
= 0.0033 = 5.34
The slightly higher solid blocking of Thorn's method (0.0033 as com- The pitching moment coefficient corrected for blocking and wing stream-
pared to 0.0030) almost exactly compensates for neglecting the pressure line curvature is
gradient effects and ends up with essentially the same drag.
The uncorrected coefficients are Cmtr = -0.0852[1 - 2(0.00461)] + 0.25(0.00198)
= -0.0838
C = 302.1 = 0.466
Lu (102.2)(6.33) The corrected drag coefficient is
C = 46.6 = 0.0720 CD = 0.0720[1 - 2(0.00461)] - 0.00009 -.0.00012 + 0.117 6.33 (0.460)2

o« (102.2)(6.33) 68.58
= 0.0734
C = -63.6 = -0.0852
mtr (102.2)(6.33)(1.152) From eq. (6: 52)(using eq. (6: 54) for a tail lift curve slope), we have
The pressure gradient drag due to the wing is Ceq. (6: 33»
~C c = (0.1)(3.2) (0.8)(57.3) 2.16 3.10 6.33 (0.117)(0.71)C
~C _ (0.989)(0.881)(0.817)(0.0720) m gt 3.2 + 2 6.33 0.897 68.58 L
DW - (68.58)1.5
= 0.0254CLW
= 0.000090
= 0.0117
~C _ (0.926)(0.863)(1.208)(0.0720)
DB - (68.58)1.5 and the corrected pitching moment coefficient becomes
= 0.000123 CmCgt = -0.0838 + 0.0115 = -0.0721
The corrected dynamic pressure becomes The above includes the fair assumption that all the lift is due to the
q = (102.2)[1 + 2(0.00461)] wmg.
From Fig. 6:25 with AR = 8.4 and AT = 0.5, bvlb = 0.775. By eq. 6:32 Summary of Three-Dimensional Boundary
(6:44),be = 6.47 ft, and from Fig. 6:32, using k = 0.647 and A = 0.7, Corrections, Open Test Section
we have 0 = 0.117.* There is little solid- or wake-blocking effect for open test sections since
* The body effect of Ref. 6: 21 increases 15 by 10 per cent. Since it produces a change the stream is free to expand as need be. The previously reported wing
in rJ. of only 0.06 deg at CL = l.0, and a change in drag of 0.0003 at CL = 1.0, Its
I I inclusion is not worth the extra trouble. * See P: 327.
I
corrections then reduce to (c) 12 ft elliptical closed jet, 2-to-l breadth ratio. (d) 12 ft square closed jet
(e) 12 ft by 8 ft rectangular, closed jet. .
v= Vu (6:78) 6:7 A propeller of 4-ft diameter is to be tested in a round closed tunnel of 9-ft
q = qu (6:79) . diameter. What tunnel speed is needed to simulate a free-air speed of
100 mph, if a thrust of 200 Ib is developed at 1000 rpm?
R = R; (6:80)
o: = tJ.u + c'J §_ CL(57.3)(1 + 'T2) (6:81)

C
CL = CLu - 'T2~tJ.· a (6:82) 6: 1 H. Julian Allen and Walter G. Vincenti, Wall Interference in a Two-Dimensional-
Flow Wind Tunnel with Consideration of the Effect of Compressibility, TR 782,
CmU = Cmu" + 0.25'T2 ~tJ. . a (6:83)
1944.
S 6:2 H. Glauert, Wind Tunnel Interference on Wings, Bodies, and Airscrews, R&M
CD= CDu+ c'J-CL
2
(6:84) 1566, 1933.
C 6:3 Ira H. Abbott, Albert E. Von Doenhoff, and Louis S. Strivers, Jr., Summary of
Airfoil Data, TR 824, 1948.
The sign of c'J will be negative so that the downwash corrections will be
6:4 A. Thorn.Blockage Corrections in a High Speed Wind Tunnel, R&M2033, 1943.
subtractive. For the case of wing and body and wing-body and horizontal 6:5 Robert S. Swanson and Thomas A. Toll, Jet Boundary Corrections for Reflection
tail, Sections 6: 21 and 6: 22 should be consulted. Plane Models in Rectangular Wind Tunnels, TR 770, 1943.
6:6 H. J. Stewart, The Effect of Wind-Tunnel-Wall Interference on the Stalling
6:33 Boundary Corrections for Control Surface Hinge Moments Characteristics of Wings, JAS, September 1941.
6: 7 J. R. Gavin and R. W. Hensel, Elliptic Tunnel Wall Corrections, JAS, December
Little information has been released on boundary corrections for con-
1942.
trol surface hinge moments. It is apparent that the small size of such 6: 8 K. Kondo, The Wall Interference of Wind Tunnels with Boundaries of Circular
surfaces on complete models makes hinge-moment corrections quite Arcs, ARI, TlU, 126, 1935.
unnecessary. Larger models, such as those used for reflection plane 6:9 H: Glauert, The Interference of the Characteristics of an Airfoil in a Wind
tests, have their hinge moments increased by solid jet boundaries in a Tunnel of Circular Section, R&M 1453, 1931.
6:10 L. Rosenhead, Uniform and Elliptic Loading in Circular and Rectangular
manner similar to the increase of pitching moment. The increase of hinge
Tunnels, PRS, Series A, Vol. 129, 1930, p. 135.
moment due to the walls is of the order of 8 per cent for a 30 per cent 6: 11 A. Silverstein, Wind Tunnel Interference with Particular Reference to Off-Center
flap on a large reflection plane model. Positions of the Wing and to the Downwash at the Tail, TR 547, 1935.
6: 12 G. Van Schliestett, Experimental Verification of Theodorsen's Theoretical Jet-
Boundary Correction Factors, TN 506, 1934.
6: 13 T. Theodorsen, Interference on an Airfoil of Finite Span in an Open Rectangular
Problems
Wind Tunnel, TR 461, 1931.
6: 14 K. Terazawa, On the Interference of Wind Tunnel Walls on the Aerodynamic
6:1 Calculate the drag due to buoyancy for a three-dimensional Rankine Characteristics of a Wing, ARI, TIU, 44, 1932.
ovoid, fineness ratio 4.0. The maximum thickness is 2 ft, and the slope of 6: 15 H. Glauert, The Interference on the Characteristics of an Airfoil in a Wind
the static-pressure curve is -0.008 lb per sq ft per ft. Tunnel of Rectangular Section, R&M 1459, 1932.
6:2 Same for a similar two-dimensional ovoid in the same tunnel. 6: 16 M. Sanuki and I. Tani, The Wall Interference of a Wind Tunnel of Elliptic Cross-
6:3 Calculate the increase of velocity (solid blocking) for a 65,316 airfoil, 2-ft Section, Proc. Physical Mathematical Soc, Japan, Vol. 14, 1932.
chord, if tested in a closed rectangular jet 8 ft wide and 4 ft high. 6: 17 L. Rosenhead, The Airfoil in a Wind Tunnel of Elliptic Cress-Section, P RS,
r.
6:4 Calculate the effective twist due to the tunnel walls on a tapered wing of Series A, Vol. 140, 1933, p. 579.
6:18 G. K. Batchelor, Interference in a Wind Tunnel of Octagonal Section, ACA 1,
span 8 ft, AR = 8, tested in a round closed jet of 9-ft diameter at CL = 1.0.
January 1944.
6:5 A wing has a 10-ft span. The root chord is 3 ft, and the tip chord is 1.5 ft.
6: 19 Betty L. Gent, Interference in a Wind Tunnel of Regular Octagonal Section,
6:6
Using Schrenk's method, find the span load distribution.
The wing of problem 6: 5 is to be tested in the following tunnels; find the
ACA 2, January 1944. I I
6:20 I. Lotz, Correction of Downwash in Wind Tunnels of Circular and Elliptic
value of 6 for each. (a) 12 ft round, open jet. (b) 12 ft round, closed jet. Sections, ™ 801, 1936.
6:21 C. Branson Smith, Wind-Tunnel-Wall Corrections for Wing-Body Combination, 6:44 James C. Sivells and Rachel M. Salmi, Jet-Boundary Corrections for Complete
lAS, April 1949. and Semispan Swept Wings in Closed Circular Wind Tunnels, TN 2454,1951.
6:22 1. G. Recant, Wind Tunnel Investigation of Ground Effect, TN 705, 1939. 6: 45 Abe Silverstein and S. Katzoff, Experimental Investigation of Wind-Tunnel
6:23 M. Biot, Correction for the Measured Rolling Moment of a Wing in a Circular Interference on the Downwash behind an Airfoil, TR 609, 1937.
Wind Tunnel, ZFM, August 1933. 6:46 John De Young and Charles W. Harper, Theoretical Symmetric Span Loading
6:24 H. J. Stewart, A Correction to the Yawing Moment Due to Ailerons for Circular at Subsonic Speeds for Wings Having Arbitrary Platform, NACA TR 921,1948.
Wind Tunnels, lAS, June 1939. 6: 47 Harry H. Heyson, Linearized Theory of Wind Tunnel Jet Boundaries Corrections
6:25 John G. Herriot, Blockage Corrections for Three Dimensional-Flow Closed- and Ground Effect for VTOL/STOL Aircraft, NASA TR R-124, 1962.
Throat Wind Tunnels with Consideration of the Effect of Compressibility, TR 6:48 Richard E ..Kahn and Rodger L. Naeseth, Tunnel Wall Effects Associated With
995, 1950. V/STOL Model Testing, AGARD Report 303, 1959.
6:26 Robert S. Swanson, Jet-Boundary Corrections to a Yawed Model in a Closed 6:49 E. C. Maskell, A Theory of the Blockage Effects on Bluff Bodies and Stalled
Rectangular Wind Tunnel. NACA ARR, February 1943 (Declassified). Wings in a Closed Wind Tunnel, ARC R&M 3400, 1965.
6:27 Bertram J. Eisenstadt, Boundary-Induced Upwash for Yawed and Sweptback 6:50 Edwin E. Davenport and Richard E. Kuhn, Wind-Tunnel Wall Effects and
Wings in Closed Circular Wind Tunnels, TN 1265, 1947. Scale Effects on a VTOL Configuration with a Fan Mounted in the Fuselage,
6:28 S. Katzoff and Margery E. Hannah, Calculation of Tunnel-Induced Upwash NASA TN D-2560, 1965.
Velocities for Swept and Yawed Wings, NACA TN 1748,1948. 6: 51 Kalman J. Grunwald, Experimental Study of Wind-Tunnel Wall Effects and
6:29 Edward C. Polhamus, Jet-Boundary-Induced-Upwash Velocities for Swept Wall Corrections for a General-Research V/STOL Tilt-Wing Model with Flap,
Reflection-Plane Models Mounted Vertically in 7 by 10 Foot, Closed, Rectang- NASA TN D-2887, 1965.
ular Wind Tunnels, NACA TN 1752,1948.
6:30 James C. Sivells and Rachel M. Salmi, Jet Boundary Corrections for Complete
and Semispan Swept Wings in Closed Circular Wind Tunnels, TN 2454, 1951.
6:31 Robert S. Swanson and Marvin J. Schuldenfrei, Jet-Boundary Corrections to
the Downwash behind Powered Models in Rectangular Wind Tunnels with
Numerical Values for 7 x 10 Foot Closed Wind Tunnels, Wr-L-711, 1942.
6:32 James C. Sivells and Owen J. Deters, Jet Boundary and Platform Corrections
for Partial Span Models with Reflection Plane, End Plate, or No End Plate in a
Closed Circular Wind Tunnel, TR 843, 1946.
6:33 Rudolph W. Hensel, Rectangular.Wind Tunnel Blocking Corrections Using the
Velocity Ratio Method, TN 2372, 1951. .
6:34 G. I. Taylor, The Force Acting on a Body Placed in a Curved and Convergmg
Stream of Fluid, R&M 1166, 1928.
6:35 B. Gothert, Wind Tunnel Corrections at High Subsonic Speeds Particularly for
an Enclosed Circular Tunnel, ™ 1300, 1952.
6:36 J. H. Preston and A. R. Manning: Calculations of the Interference on a Thin
Symmetrical Aerofoil with Hinged Flap Spanning a Closed Wind Tunnel,
R&M 2465, 1951.
6:37 J. M. Evans, Wind Tunnel Interference on Lateral Stability Derivatives, ACA 33,
March·1947.
6:38 W. J. Duncan, A Simple Approach to Wind Tunnel Constriction Effect, Aircraft
Engineering, June 1949.
6:39 Alan Pope, Basic Wing and Airfoil Theory, McGraw-Hili, 1951. .
6:40 Clarence L. Gillis, Edward C. Polhamus, and Joseph L. Gray, Jr., Charts lor
• Determining Jet-Boundary Corrections for Complete Models in 7. x 10 Foot
Closed Rectangular Wind Tunnels, WR-L-123, 1943.
6:41 E. B. Klunker and Keith C. Harder, On the Second-Order Tunnel Wall Con-
striction Correction in Two-Dimensional Compressible Flow, TN 2350, 1951.
6:42 F. Riegels, Correction Factors for Wind Tunnels of Elliptic Section with Partly
Open and Partly Closed Test Section, ™ 1310,1951. .
6:43 S. Katzoff, Clifford S. Gardner, Leo Diesendruck, and Bertram J. Eisenstadt,
Linear Theory of Boundary Effects in Open Wind Tunnels with Finite Jet
Lengths, TR 976, 1950.
The Use Of Wind Tunnel Data / 379
used is generally a company secret. The literature reveals only a handful

Chapter seven of papers on correlating wind tunnel and flight results. Three sources
available are Millikan (Ref. 7: 1), Hockman and Eisiminger (Ref. 7: 2), and
Hills (Ref. 7: 3). These papers should surely be consulted for serious
work on this facet.
Any flight test and wind tunnel correlation always suffers from a great
number of unknowns. The tunnel data suffer from inexact or unknown
The use of wind tunnel data Reynolds number extrapolation, possible uncertainties in corrections to
the data such as tare and interference and wall effects, errors in duplicating
the power on effects with fixed-pitch propellers, omission of manufac-
turing irregularities and small excrescences, and insufficient deflections of
One of the top airplane designers in Great Britain has been credited the model under load. The flight test data suffer from the pilot techniques,
with the statement that he "could go on designing airplanes all day long accelerations due to gusts, errors in average center of gravity locations,'
if he had not also to build them and make them fly," and his point is surely and unknowns of propeller efficiencies. Considering the impressive room
well taken. Data may easily "be taken all day long"-as long as they are for disagreements, the generally good agreement found is remarkable.
not used to design airplanes. We will take up, in turn, each of the important aerodynamic quantities
Indeed, the very subject of extrapolating wind tunnel data to full scale usually measured in the tunnel and say what we can about their use.
will probably elicit a grim smile from aeronautical engineers who see this First, however, we must consider the boundary layer, for the understanding
page. The aerodynamicist disparages the wind tunnel engineer; the of scale effects is essentially the understanding of the boundary layer.
wind tunnel engineer thinks the aerodynamicist wants too much; and if
any poor soul is assigned the combination of jobs, well, one is reminded 7:1 The Boundary Layer
of the classic experiment of crossing a hound dog and a rabbit wherein the Owing to viscosity of the air, the air very near the wing is slowed
offspring ran itself to death. gradually from some local velocity a short distance out to zero right at
Probably the nearest approach to the truth lies in the fact that wind the wing. The region in which this velocity change takes place is called
tunnels are very rarely called upon to test exact models of items that may the boundary layer, and the velocity gradients in the boundary layer very
be flown. Though this offers a magnificent "out" to the wind tunnel largely determine whether the drag of a body is x, or IO», A boundary
engineer, it is not meant that way. Reynolds number effects on small items layer in. which the velocities vary approximately linearly from the surface
are too great even if they could be accurately constructed; hence the is called laminar; * one whose velocities vary approximately exponentially
small excresences are left off the models. In many cases the aerodynam- from the surface is called turbulent. Their drag values based on wetted
icist who plans on adding these items selects the lowest possible drag area (approximately double wing area) are given by
values with the net result that he underestimates their interference and
overestimates the performance of the airplane. The cure for this situation
CD laminar = 2.656/.JRN (7: 1)
is to consolidate these items and minimize their effect. Room for im-
provement can surely exist when examples can be cited of airplanes that CD turbulent = 0.910/(loglORN)2.58 (7:2)
pave no less than twenty-two separate air intakes and over thirty remov-
able inspection panels. Of course, the effects of small protrusions can be and plotted in Fig. 7: 1 along with a drag curve of a 23012 airfoil.
tested in the full-scale tunnel on the actual airplane itself, provided the The boundary-layer thickness, defined as the distance from the surface
wingspan is not too great. to the point where the velocity in the boundary layer is 0.99 times the
Unfortunately undesirably little correlation between flight test and wind
tunnel data is available. This lack is attributed to the dual reasons that * Both laminar and turbulent flow may be demonstrated simply with a cigarette held
very still in still air. The rising smoke column will be smooth (laminar) for about
after flight test there is rarely time to back up and correlate with the wind 10 inches.and then will turn turbulent. Talking or any other tiny disturbance will also
tunnel, and that, even when it is done, the success or failure of the methods make the laminar flow become turbulent.
378
380 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The Use Of Wind Tunnel Data / 381
0.02 boundary layer. Here then is a case where we have too much laminar
-_ - A I I II flow, and the resultant drag is excessively high, corresponding to a point
NACA23012
0.01 ~~ C A in Fig. 7: 1 and the way the boundary layer behaves on a 23012 airfoil
at a Reynolds number of 300,000.
B
tJ 0.005 f"'-.. Turbulent boundary layer
rt-
I I I III
- Returning to Fig. 7: 2b, which corresponds to a higher Reynolds
number, we see that the transition point has moved forward according
I'
to item 3, and now we have the maximum laminar flow and minimum
........ drag. This corresponds to point B in Fig. 7: 1, and a 23012 airfoil at a
~
0.001
t--
Laminar boundary layer
I II J 111-11-1 " <,

t---,...
Reynolds number of 650,000.
The still higher Reynolds number illustrated in Fig. 7: 2c fails to show
10 5 a decrease of drag, even though both laminar and turbulent drag decrease
Reynolds number with increasing Reynolds number, since there has been a great increase
Fig. 7: 1 Plot of CDO min versus log RN (from TR 586).
in the region of turbulent flow. This is point C in Fig. 7: 1. (RN =
1,200,000.)
Further increase in Reynolds number yields a reduction in drag coeffi-
velocity just outside the boundary layer, is given by
cient although the transition has now reached the minimum pressure
point and its further motion is resisted by the falling pressure gradient
0laminar = 5.2JI2/RN (7:3)
from the leading edge to that point.
0turbulent = 0.371/(RN)Ji (7:4) Since the pressure pattern of every airfoil is unique, and since the same
may be said of every airplane design, it is apparent that tests made in the
where I = distance from body leading edge and RN = Reynolds number Reynolds number range where laminar separation is developed will be
based on I and freestream velocity. exceedingly difficult to interpret for full scale.
Several important phenomena are known about the boundary layer. The effects can be profound on essentially all qualities of interest-
First, both its drag and its thickness are related to the Reynolds number. forces, stability moments, and hinge moments. Obviously, it behooves
Second, laminar flow, having far less drag, has less energy with which to the tunnel engineer either to provide wind tunnel Reynolds numbers equal
surmount roughness or corners and it hence separates from a surface
much more easily than does turbulent flow. Third, the maintenance of a
laminar Turbulent
laminar boundary layer becomes more difficult as the Reynolds number boundary
(its length) increases. Fourth, laminar flow is encouraged by a pressure layer
gradient falling in the direction of flow, or by being thinned by artificial

means such as suction through a porous surface or sometimes by cooling.
In the light of these actions we may examine how a flow can be changed
widely under conditions of changing Reynolds number.
Assume that the wing shown in Fig. 7:2 is in a stream of such turbu-
lence that laminar flow will change to turbulent at a Reynolds number of
• 1,000,000, and further assume a model size and velocity such that the
Reynolds number of the entire flow length shown in 7: 2a is 1,000,000.
We note two items: first, the laminar flow in is unable to negotiate the
curve of the airfoil ami excessive separation is evident;" and, second,
transition takes place before 1,000,000 since the flow downstream of the
maximum thickness has a rising pressure gradient that discourages laminar
c (c)
* Also see Fig. 1: 10. Fig. 7: 2 Effect of increasing Reynolds number on boundary-layer flow.
382 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The Use. Of Wind Tunnel Data I 383
where Dg = nominal grit size (Table 7: 1)
R = minimum Reynolds number per foot in the freestream flow,
and
K = a constant depending on the tunnel turbulence.
(Use K = 400 if data are lacking.) The grit size is identified by number
in Table 7: 1.
Table 7:1 Commercial Carborundum Grit Numbers
and Corresponding Particle" Diameters"
Grit Number Nominal Grit Size (inches)
10 0.0937
12 0.0787
14 0.0661
16 0.0555
20 0.0469
24 0.0331
30 0.0280
36 0.0232
46 0.0165
54 0.0138
60 0.0117
70 0.0098
80 0.0083
Fig. 7: 3 Model showing transition strips. The strip around the fuselage nose is 90 0.0070
clearly seen. The others, around the inlet and along the wing leading edges, are less 100 0.0059
prominent. (Courtesy Ryan Aeronautical Corp.) 120 0.0049
150 0.0041
180 0.0035
to flight (a procedure rarely possible), or to somehow make the model
220 0.0029
boundary layer duplicate that of the full-scale craft. This is accomplished
by adding a small strip of roughness at about 5 per cent chord point of the
wings and tail, and some at the 5 per cent length of the fuselage (Fig. 7: 3). . R~sults of a st~dy .made to determine the required grit size are presented
Properly installed, the roughness, called a "transition strip," will change In FIg: 7:~. WIth In~reases in grit size to about 0.003 inch, the drag
the boundary lager from laminar to turbulent, and unrealistic laminar coefficient Increases quite rapidly. This is interpreted as an indication that
separation will be avoided. a completely turbulent boundary layer has not been established downstream
The common type of transition strip consists of carborundum grit Of.the.tra~sition s.trip. Above a grit size of 0.004 inch, the rise of drag with
stuck on the model surface. ·One simply masks off the i to !-inch-wide gnt SIze IS considerably smaller and is constant. This indicates that
strip with tape, sprays or brushes on a light coat of lacquer or shellac, transitio~ .is co~plete and that the increasing drag is a p\essure dragon
and then sprinkles a light coat of grit on the wet area. The diameter of ~h~tr~nSItIon strip .. In this case, the grit size that should be used for testing
the grit is notjarbirrary, but is governed by the turbulence existing in the IS indicated to be between 0.003 and 0.004 inch. One method that has
tunnel according to the relation (Ref. 7: 9) been. used to obtain the drag at zero lift from results such as those in Fig.
7:4 IS to extrapolate the data with fully established transition (grit sizes
D = 12K above 0.003) back to zero grit size as indicated by the dashed line. See
(7: 5)
9 R also Ref. 7:9.
The Use Of Wind Tunnel Data / 385
0.019
J l
in dra? coefficient due to extension of the laminar layer. For example,
J 0 0
co extension of the laminar layer from 20 to 60 per cent at RN =; 2000000
g If)
..... 8 6
N Z reduces the drag coefficient from 0.0073 to 0.0048. In fact it is Just 'this
~ 0.017
N
0- ~~
extensi.on .of laminar flow that reduces the profile drag of the laminar
--- --V~
N 0 Z
o Z 0-
"'-.,
<:
'w
flow airfoils to values much less than the "conventional" ones. Some
gen~raI-obser:rations concerning scale effect on minimum drag for these
~ 0.015
o
sections are In order because of their greater extent of laminar flow.
/
o
bO
Over the lower r~nge. o~ Reynolds numbers (up to RN = 9 X 106) a
e
Cl gradual decrease In mrrnmum drag occurs. This reaction is attributed
0.013 ,../ to the thinning of the boundary layer. At the higher Reynolds numbers
o 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008
the drag increases steadily at least up to RN = 25 x 106 because of the
Grit diameter, in.
forward m~vement o~ transition. ?f course, again airfoil geometry
Fig. 7: 4 Results of a transition study using a series of grit sizes. (Redrawn from (camber, thickness, thickness form) influences the general behavior but
data courtesy of Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory.)
the. scale effect is due primarily to the relative strengths of the two inter-
Three items concerning artificial transition are of interest: the proper actmg boundary layers. Comparison tests of two different airfoils of
location for it, the sense or nonsense of building a smooth accurate model different families can be most deceiving if the testing is done at low
and then gluing "rocks" on it, and how to tell when it is needed. Reynolds numbers. For example the 653-418 airfoil displays much larger
Considering the last point first, transition is needed when something profile drag than the 0012 section at low Reynolds numbers whereas at
happens when it is added, and is not needed when nothing happens when full-scale conditions just the opposite is true. The 6 series' section has
it is added. While this may seem of little help, the need for transition is extensive laminar separation in the low Reynolds number range; the 0012
negligible for models whose shape or roughness precludes laminar flow has far less sep~ration region and hence has lower drag.
in the first place. This type of model includes such things as tests of trees . In extrapolatmg drag coefficients, it is necessary to make due allowance
(Section 9: 11), shingled roofs, or other items where smooth flow is a If the Reynolds number of the tunnel data is the "effective" Reynolds
virtual impossibility. These will make their own transition at very low numbe~. Th.is proc~dure is necessary because the part of the drag associ-
Reynolds numbers. ated wI~hskin fra~tJOndecreases with increasing Reynolds number. Thus
The proper location for the roughness, as stated earlier, is at the 5 for a given effective Reynolds number the friction coefficients are larger
per cent stations of wings, tails, and fuselage, even though the full-scale . than at a numerically equal test Reynolds number. The difference be-
vehicle may have much more extensive laminar flow than 5 per cent. The tween measured drag and the actual drag at the equivalent free-air
reasoning here is that the skilled aerodynamicist is able to interpret the Reynolds number may be read from the turbulent drag curve of Fig. 7: 1.
data (particularly drag data-and other effects are small if the flow is An example is given.
tripped early) if he knows the extent of laminar flow on the model through Example 7:1 The drag of a wing is measured at a test Reynolds
tripping, and on the full-scale aircraft from considerations of computable numb~r Of.3,000,000 a~d a turbul~nce factor of 2.0. The measured drag
pressure distributions. The grit is not added at the wing or tail maximum coefficient IS 0.0082. Fmd the equivalent free-air drag coefficient.
thickness (where full-scale transition is most likely to occur) because it 1. As RN. = TF X RN
tends to make the model slightly thicker than it should be.
Finally, both the drag and the pressure distribution of the areas with RNe = 2.0 X 3,000,000 = 6,000,000
turbulent flow are more useful if the surface is accurately made. 2. From the turbulent drag curve of Fig. 7: 1, CD = 0.0073 at RN =
Figure 7: 5 shows the drag coefficients corresponding to different 3,000,000 and 0.0066 at RN = 6,000,000.
amounts of laminar and turbulent boundary layers at various Reynolds
f1C D = 0.0073 - 0.0066 = 0.0007
numbers. Zero form drag is assumed. In this chart are shown the theoret-
ical minimum wing drag of 100 per cent laminar flow and the decrease 3. The measured drag is theref~re too high by 0.0007, and CD = 0.0082
- 0.0007 = 0.0075.
386 Low..#pe~d Wind Tunnel Testing The Use Of Wind T~~<.pata 387
7:2 Scale Effect on Drag

Although one might argue that the difficulties of measuring drag are
less important than stability and control (because drag affects perform-
1.2
1.0
1
x
r
R N = 8,400,000
3,470,000
ance, but not safety), the simple truth is that whether or not a plane is
ever built depends very much on the drag data obtained in the wind
tunnel, and how well one can make potential customers believe it.
0.8
I
x
The first conclusion (from Fig. 7: 1) is that, even though comparison
tests between objects may be made with fair accuracy, a test Reynolds
number of 1,500,000 to 2,500,000 would be needed (for a 23012 airfoil)
if extrapolation is intended. This necessitates a 1t- or 2!-ft chord at
"'''I
Co) 0.6
/
100 mph or equivalent. An ameliorating condition is that, if a low
Reynolds number separation exists and is cured by some change, the
probability that it will arise at a higher Reynolds number is extremely
0.4
{
small. i
If a tremendous effort is made to maintain true profile on the full-scale
0.2
airplane, tunnel wind drag extrapolated to the net Reynolds number (by
the aid of Fig. 7: 5) should be only slightly optimistic owing to the drag
of the flap and aileron cutouts, control surface inspection doors, and tank ~
o
filler cap covers, etc., not represented on the model. o 0.01 0.02 0.03
eDT
-- -
Fig.7:6 Plot of CL2 versus CDT for an NACA 23012 at two Reynolds numbers.
0.010
r-- I JJ,Iceni J.rnmar bound
. The effects on the minimum drag of the complete airplane are more
difficult to handle. There are truly an immense number of small items
0.005
<,
--..... - --
r-...
r--... ..........
,_
ary layer 0
-
20- I---
40 - I-- -,_
r-
on the full-scale ship that cannot be represented at model scale. Whether
they undercompensate or overcompensate for the drag reduction ex-
pected from higher Reynolds number is any man's guess. Frequently
<: <,
t--....
-I'-- 60-
,_ r-- -l- the tunnel engineer assumes that the two exactly compensate, but he
r-, would hate to guarantee better than ±0.0010 in Cn' .
c
'E
r-,
80 - r- -l- Similarly, the rate of change of drag with lift, usually considered as
~ 'I'- r9o-- r-
t.l 0.0010 the change in span efficiency factor e, should not change for straight
wings.* For instance (Fig. 7:6), it has been observed that, when CL2
100 .......
0.0005
<, for a given airplane is plotted against the total drag coefficient CDT, the
--.....
...... graph is nearly a straight line. Further, since we may write+
1
e = ---r=======:===
2
. (7 :6)
J(dCD/dCL )7TAR
0.0001 it becomes apparent that the slope of the line dC D/dC L2 may be us~d to
105
Reynolds number . * e for swept. wings is not as tractable as for straight wings. Sometimes' the tip stall
IS reduced by higher Reynolds number in a manner that increases e, and other times e
Fig. 7: 5 CDO min versus RN for various percentages of laminar flow. Zero form is reduced.
drag assumed. t Frequently e is defined as the square of e as given in eq. (7: 6).
388 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The Use Of Wind Tunnel Data I 389
3. Estimate CL max (full scale) from Fig. 7: 10, Ref. 7: 4, or other
0.04 Estimated CDO min sources, and extend CDO until it is horizontal at CL max' The increased
0.Q3 at R N = 20,000,000 curvature of the CDO curve should be moved to an increased CL in a
0.02 manner similar to that described in Section 7: 3.
... ----.
4. Decrease C Do min (tunnel) by the CD change in wing drag from tunnel
rJ
Reynolds number to full scale. See Fig. 7: 1. (This is the controversial
0.01
step. Some engineers make no change to tunnel C Do min because manu-
facturing irregularities on the actual ship may increase the drag as much
0.005 as increased Reynolds number decreases it.)
5. Add Cm back in to get the final extrapolated drag curve. In this
step use values of CL up to CL max (full scale). .
Special attention should be paid to the extrapolation of CD at CL max'
In many cases the tunnel engineer neglects the drag increase that accom-
panies the increase of CL max with Reynolds number, and predicted glide
107
Reynolds number
ang~esnear CL max are then considerably above the attained values. -
Fig. 7: 7 Plot of eDT versus log RN. The methods outlined above for getting full-scale values from tunnel
data are successful only when applied by experienced aerodynamicists.
find e. (See also Section 5: 5.) Fortunately the slope of this line is prac- In closing we may state that, though the low-drag "bucket" found in
tically independent of Reynolds number, and a wind tunn~l t~st may the tunnel may be a bit optimistic, the shape of the drag curve up until the
hence be used to determine full-scale e. A plot of the 23012 airfoil at two CL max effects predominate seems to follow closely the drag obtained in
Reynolds numbers is given in Fig. 7: 6. flight.
As we have noted, the determination of the amount the CL2 versus
C DT curve is moved over (i.e., the scale effect on CDO miD:(ShiP») wit~
increasing Reynolds number is not so simple;. in fact, no dlre~t rule IS 2.0 1 1
known. If similar tests have been completed III the past and flight tests
made, perhaps the comparison may yield the t::.CD necessary. For an
v Extrapilated CLmox
1.6
~--C--II---+--- _---±-~---If-----+-=-=-=-.......
4------f
entirely new ship, the minimum drag may be measured at several ve~oc- Dextrapoloted"" l~~"'" _-_""-~FI'nal C .
>~CDi
r
_..o'" Dextrapolated
ities, and a plot of Cno min versus log RN may be made. The straight // _,£ ...
line that usually results from such a plot may be extrapolated to find the 1.2 v ./} ~'/'"
approximate full-scale C Do min (Fig. 7: 7). .

Another method, particularly for components, consists of convertmg
. CDOtunnel CDi- V
the tunnel test point to a skin friction coefficient by the equation
0.8 ~-~IIW-~
l 1/L---I----+----+-----I----+-------4
./~ CD tunnel
C, = CDO X (Sjwetted area)

and spotting this point on a plot of C, versus RN. The point is then ;Iv!
I ,1
extrapolated along the turbul~nt ski.n fr~ct~on curve .to t~e full scale 0.4~--~1~"~------+------+------+-----~-----4-.r---~
Reynolds number. The resulting skin friction coefficient IS then con-
verted to a t::.c DO' I
r
I
A third method of extrapolating total ship to full-scale Reynolds OL- __ ~_L L_ _L L_ _L ~~ __ ~
number is as follows (See Fig. 7: 8): o 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28
CD
1. Plot CD versus CL, tunnel data.
2. Subtract Cm = CL2j7TAR from the Cn plot to obtain CDO(tunnel)' Fig. 7: 8 Extrapolating airplane drag curve to full-scale Reynolds number.
390 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The Use Of Wind Tunnel Data I 391,
7:3 Scale Effects on the Lift Curve C L max at Reynolds .numbers below 8,300,000 for a large group of airfoils
and enables the engmeer to estimate possible Reynolds number effects on
The effect of Reynolds number on the lift curve is indeed profound, and
new airfoils.
often quite unpredictable. We will first discuss the work of Jacobs (Ref.
The method is to read the C L max at RNe = 8,300,000 and the stall
7: 4) on the NACA forward thickness airfoils, and then treat the newer
type fr~m Table 7 :2. Then the increment (usually negative) is selected
profiles. from FIg. 7: 10 and added to the high Reynolds number C L max to get
The Forward Thickness Airfoils. In TR 58Q (Ref. 7: 4), Jacobs indicates
Table 7:2
that variations in lift curve slope caused by increasing Reynolds number
are very small, but in general the lift curve will be straightened up, the Airfoil Scale Effects Airfoil Scale Effects
slope will increase slightly, * and the stall will become more abrupt. (See NACA on CL max NACA on CL max
Fig. 7: 9.) Lift curves already straight at the lower Reynolds numbers 0006 A 23006 A
will be extended at higher ones. It follows that C L max and the angle at 0009 Bo 23009 C2
which it occurs are increased. The amount of the increase of both angle 0012 Co 23012 D2
and CL max is of paramount value to the tunnel engineer. 0015 Do 23015 Dz r
The method outlined in Ref. 7: 4 makes it possible to determine the 0018 Eo 23018 E2
0021 E1 23021 E2
0025 E2
0030 43012 D4
43015 D4
2212 c, 43018 E4 I 1
2409 B2 63012 Ds
2412 C2 63018 E7
2415 D2
2418 E2
4406 Aa
4409 B4
4412 C4
4415 D4
4418 E4
4421 E5
C?L max at the ~esired Reynolds ~umber. Unfortunately this seemingly

simple method IS of lessened value III most practical cases for two reasons:
first it concerns section cl max values when wing C L max values are usually
n~ed~d.; and, second, the tunnel engineer will probably not find the desired
airfoil in Table 7 :2. Though a method considering local downwash and
OL- -L~ _L ~------~------~
local Reynolds numbers
. exist (Ref. 7: 6) that enables the wing C Lm= as
-8 o +8 +16 +24 +32 well as the location of the first stalled area to be determined it is useless
Angle of attack for infinite aspect ratio, "'0 without full information about the effect of Reynolds number on the
Fig. 7: 9 Effect of Reynolds number on the lift curve. particular airfoil in question.
The way around the problem is largely empirical. Many tunnel engi-
* At very low values of the Reynolds number, about 150,000, the lift curve again
neers have had sufficient experience correlating tunnel data with flight
steepens, and dCL/dex may then exceed 27T/radian.
392 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The Use Of Wind Tunnel Data ! 393
x
E
number obtained by added turbulence are satisfactory for maximum lift
c measurements.
<I o
~- -0.2 ~ ~~ I:::!-- 7 t:::- E:E::: f; In Ref. 7: 3, agreement on CL max within ±0.1 was found when data
F6
'u from 1,500,000 were extrapolated to 26,000,000 by Jacobs' method.
..,.:::::: ~ ~~ ~~ I-- .J._ ::::
~ ~ ~
~ -0.4
8
~ -0.6
~o Type B
~
t;::;;; --3
1
....0- ......
;::::f:?' Type D LOW-Drag Airfoils. The effect of scale on the lift characteristics of the
6 series of laminar flow airfoils has not been as thoroughly investigated
E
:::;J
E
'x
E 0 6.lj..
I="
.... 7
~
~5~
8
6
+-.
- l- t-
as for the other airfoils previously discussed. Fortunately some data on
Reynolds number effects are available in Ref. 7: 8 for a number of 6
~ 4 f- j:::::: §~I:=:: series sections up to RN = 25 x 106• Although the effects vary with
.9 ·R ~
ti
-0.2
F7 ~ 1== ~ ~ ~ I;;.; I- ~ E::::: r-
~ 2 thickness form, thickness, and camber, some general remarks can be made.
Q)
III -0.4 F5=

~ 0
The angle of zero lift and the lift curve slope are virtually unaffected by
.s
~ -0.6
~3-
~
~2 ~
~ t? Type C f-- TypeE scale, but the effects on maximum lift follow one of two general trends
~ I--' '/
c:
'"
s:
U -
~l-
0 f-- T depending on the airfoil thickness ratio. For thickness ratios of 12 per
cent or less there is little effect over the lower Reynolds number range
0.4 0.6 2 3 4 5 6 8.3 0.6 0.8 1 2 3 4 56 8.3
Effective Reynolds number, millions (up to RN = 6 x 106). Increasing Reynolds number produces a rapid
increase in c! max to a more or less constant value, which then decreases
Fig. 7: 10 Effect of Reynolds number on CL max'
slowly on up to RN = 25 x 106• Turbulent separation beginning at the
trailing edge seems to be responsible for this.
tests so that they feel qualified to estimate t1CL max due to Reynolds
number. Most of their estimations run around t1CL max = 0.15 for the
I
range from a tunnel test at RNe = 1,500,000 to full scale RN = 6,000,000. --------------- .l... ........__
Estimated full- scale CLmo• /",- i ....,
They then proceed as follows (Fig. 7: 11) :
/" I
1. The straight part of the lift curve from tunnel data is extended with / I
/ I
the same slope. / I
2. Through the value of CL max (full scale) as estimated, a horizontal ----------4-- __~
Test CLmo• / I
line is drawn. . / I
I I
3. The curved portion of the test lift curve is then raised until it has the t I
proper value of CL max and shifted laterally until it joins the straight part I
I
of the constructed full-scale lift curve. I
I
The net result is a full-scale lift curve having the proper value of zero I
I
lift, slope, and CL max, but probably having an angle of maximum lift I
that is too great and a stall that is too gentle. These two deficiencies are I
not serious, however, and the engineer has at least something with which I
I
he can work. I l.
Since the speed of the airplane is reduced for landing, it is sometimes I

I
possible to obtain tests at landing Reynolds number in a tunnel of moder- I
ate capacity. I
Maximum lift coefficients measured in different wind tunnels agree I
much better when based on "effective" Reynolds numbers (see Section a
3: 14) than when based on the test Reynolds number. Increased Reynolds Fig. 7:11
394 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The Use Of Wind Tunnel Data I 395
0.02
For the thick sections the trend is toward a continual increase in C! mcx
o RN = 700,000
with increasing RN. The large-scale effect exhibited by an 18 per cent o RN=I,SOO,OOO
thick airfoil seems to be related to the rapidly changing condition of the
o b.o RN=3,900,000
RN=7,000,000 ~
boundary layer at the leading edge. Any new airfoil tested at fairly low ()
Reynolds number will present a difficult task of estimating its behavior

at much greater Reynolds numbers.
-I~
..,S
-0.02
...+!
? _.-..r
v
..J.O..
-I\....('roo
~
7:4 Scale Effects on Flap Characteristics
We are usually justified in expecting a little more from a flap full scale -0.04
than is found in a tunnel at low Reynolds number, provided that the o 0.2 0.4 0.6 O.S 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
basic airfoil does not suffer extreme effects itself. In a number of fairly
typical examples flight turned up about 0.2 more flap lift coefficie~t inc~e- Fig. 7: 13 Effectof Reynoldsnumberon a 66,2-215 (a = 0.6) airfoil.
ment than did the tunnel. Figure 7: 12 illustrates a tunnel range III which
the flap increment was unaffected by scale. because of the windmilling propeller present in the power-off flight
measurements. Usually the tunnel-flight discrepancy is in the direction
7:5 Scale Effects on the Pitching Moment Curve of slightly more stability of the airplane than was predicted in the tunnel.
The static longitudinal stability of airplanes having airfoils with for- But the extrapolation of pitching moments when the airfoil thickness
ward thickness (such as the 23012, etc.) seems to change little from typical is well rearward (such as in the 65 and 66 series airfoils) is far more difficult
tunnel Reynolds numbers of around 1,000,000 up to flight values of to handle. The pitching moment variation of the 66,2-215 (a = 0.6)
around 20,000,000. Indeed, the power-on tests made at 500,000 in the airfoil is shown in Fig. 7: 13 from tests made in the British compressed-air
tunnel seem to agree a little better than those made with power off, perhaps tunnel and reported in Ref. 7: 3. Obviously, the extrapolation of even
the data made at 1,800,000 would be a very difficult job. Nor were
3.2 trippers of much value here, and satisfactory tests were accomplished only
by going to high Reynolds numbers.
2.8 ....
~.----~ ,-- ",

.-- 7:6 Effect of Scale on Longitudinal Stability and Control
-,- -
NACA23021 ,
2.4 - with split flap , In general the longitudinal characteristics will not be seriously different
deflected 75· o-
...... ~ from those indicated by tunnel tests. Frequently one finds the model
-
NACA23012
with split flap
/ neutral point a little farther forward than full scale when power is off,
2.0
-<r
~~ ,/
deflected 60· and in pretty fair agreement with power on. The elevator needed to trim
x NACA0012 .~ <,
rarely varies more than 2 deg from that indicated by the tunnel. Some
E
rJ
1.6 I--- with split flap
1.2
deflected 60·
~ ..-
23021
.........
:: __ .a-
y ~ I-::": """ --'p other characteristics as determined by wind tunnel and flight tests of a
two-engine propeller-driven fighter bomber may· be of interest, even
O.S
~ <00: though they cannot be taken as typical; they are given in Table 7: 3.
Table 7:3
t.
Parameter Wind Tunnel Flight Test
0.4
dChlda. «(JE = 0°) -0.0014 -0.0011
dChld(J -0.0044 -0.0044
dIE/doc 0.45 0.41
E:ffective Reynolds number
Fig. 7: 12 Effectof Reynoldsnumberon CL max, flapsdown. Ch = hinge moment coefficient,(J = control deflection.
396 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The Use Of Wind Tunnel Data / 397
7:7 Effect of Scale on Directional Stability and Control 7:2 Marion T. Hockman and Robert E. Eisiminger, The Correlation of Wind-Tunnel
and Flight Test Stability and Control Data for an SB2C-I Airplane, lAS January
The directional stability in flight in a number of instances has been 1948. '
seriously less than indicated in the wind tunnel, necessitating a redesign 7:3 R. Hills, Use of Wind Tunnel Model Data in Aerodynamic Design, lRAS,
of the vertical tail. The reasons for this difference are not fully understood. January 1951.
In a number of airplanes the rudder was not powerful enough to yaw the 7:4 Eastman N. Jacobs, The Variation of Airfoil Section Characteristics with Reynolds
Number, TR 586, 1937.
Table 7:4 7:5 F. B. Bradfield and D. L. Ellis, The Use of Model Data in Aeroplane Design,
lRAS, August 1939.
Parameter Wind Tunnel Flight Test 7: 6 H. A. Pearson, Span Load Distribution for Tapered Wings with Partial Span
Flaps, TR 585, 1937.
dCn/d6R -0.00126 -0.00085 7: 7 James M .. N~ssen, B. L. ~adeburg, and W. T. Hamilton, Correlation of the Drag
d'P/doR -0.787 -1.39 Characteristics of a Typical Pursuit Airplane Obtained from High-Speed Wind-
dCh/d'P -0.0010 -0.0005 Tunnel Tests, TR 916, 1948.
dCh/doR -0.0037 -0.0027 7: 8 Laurence K. Loftin, Jr., and William J. Bursnall, The Effects of Variations in
dCnld'P (free) -0.00125 -0.00045 Reynolds .Number between 3.0 x 106 and 25.0 x 106 upon the Aerodynamic
Characteristics of a Number of NACA 6-Series Airfoil Sections, NACA TN 1773,
December 1948 (also reissued as TR 964).
ship into rudderlock on the model, but did so in flight. Catastrophies
7: 9 A. L. Braslow and E. C. Knox, Simplified Method for Determination of Critical
have been avoided only because rudderlock flight tests are always made Height of Distributed Roughness Particles for Boundary-Layer Transition at
quite gradually and with full expectancy of trouble. The comparative Mach Numbers from 0 to 5, NASA TN 4363, September 1958.
values in Table 7: 4 are from wind tunnel and flight tests of a two-engine
fighter-bomber, propeller driven.
7:8 Effect of Scale on Lateral Stability and Control

The agreement between flight and tunnel tests on the lateral parameters
seems to be generally satisfactory. The disagreement between tunnel and
flight for aileron power is expected from considerations of cable stretch
Table 7:5
Slope Wind Tunnel Flight Test
dc1id6a 0.00175 0.00144

c, max/oa 0.023/18° 0.022/200
dCdd'P 0.00128 0.00076

sc.uc; -0.688 -1.69
and wing 'flexibility. The values listed in Table 7: 5 are from wind tunnel
and flight tests of a two-engine fighter-bomber, propeller driven. Though
they are normal values they cannot be taken as typical for all airplanes,
t. •
of course.

7: 1 Clark B. Millikan, J. E. Smith, and R. W. Bell, High Speed Testing in the Southern
California Cooperative Wind Tunnel, lAS, February 1948.
Small Wind Tunnels I 399
Many experiments concerning wind tunnel boundary corrections are
Chapter eight suitable for the small tunnel. These, too, are unaffected by Reynolds
number.
A. further use of ~mall tunnel is in the study of flow patterns. Such
studies are accomplished by sketching the behavior of tufts which are
emplaced all over the model. These drawings require both a skilled
artrst and a lot o! ~unnel time. So little is known of proper shaping for
Small wind tunnels the best flow that It IS not at all unusual for this type of test to be performed.
The progress of the stall over a wing may be unchanged by Reynolds
n~mber, although the entire stall is unusually delayed on the full-scale
airplane.
In order to avoid the impression that useful wind tunnels must have a Two tests for military airplanes that could be performed in a small
large jet and a speed of 100 mph or more, it seems pertinent to discuss tunnel include jettison tests of the drop-type external fuel tanks and tests
some uses of smaller tunnels. A 30-inch tunnel was used by Van Schliestett of the flow from gasoline dump valves. Both these actions frequently
in the program presented in TN 506 (Ref. 6: 12), and a still smaller tunnel develop unforseen complications.
was used by Merriam and Spaulding (Ref. 3: 1) in their outstanding It should be noted that the expression "unaffected by changes in
calibrations of pitot-static tubes. Other examples could be given of Reynolds number" must not be taken too broadly. By this is customarily
successful programs carried out with the most inexpensive equipment. mea~t that rea.so~abl~ changes in Reynolds number produce little effect,
The fundamental advantage of a small wind tunnel is traceable to the and III turn this implies that the range under consideration will be free
economics of tunnel operation. Small tunnels cost less to build and less from movement of the transition point, i.e., above RN. = 2,500,000, or
to run. Though economy in operation is frequently neglected in tunnel ~ransition pOi?ts. ar.tifically fixed (see Section 7: 1). The absence of change
proposals, it should not be, especially when it is realized that the electricity III e and otz.J,. IS limited by these stipulations. Pressure distributions at low
cost alone of some tunnels exceeds $100 an hour! angle of attack and the slope of the lift curve seem almost unaffected on
A further advantage of a small tunnel is the small size of the models down to RN = 200,000. There are few accurate data below a Reynolds
and the consequent saving in construction time. Small size may be a number of 200,000 on which to base further discussion.
disadvantage, it is true; but those who have shaped a solid mahogany
block 6 by 4 feet know well what is meant. 8:2 When Reynolds Number May Be Ignored
The most successful tests made in a small tunnel are, obviously: (1) . Tests wher.ein any variations of results due to Reynolds number are
those unaffected by Reynolds number and (2) those where any change Illconse~uentlal embr~ce both qualitative tests and tests wherein the taking
due to Reynolds number is inconsequential. of data IS secondary, i.e., where tunnel testing is being used for instruction
purposes .
. 8:1 Tests Unaffected by Reynolds Number
Qualitative tests are those that are expected to lead either to more
The tests most completely free from Reynolds number effects are those test~ng ?r to a.bandonment of the project. They include the testing of
embracing pressure readings. Such experiments as static-pressure surveys radical Ideas WIth a searching attitude for something promising.
and the aforementioned pitot-static calibration are in this group. The
value of pressure distributions around airfoils is well known and has 8:3 The Small Wind Tunnel for Instruction
l
been given renewed attention by a greatly increased interest in boundary Almost no type of testing is performed in a large tunnel that cannot be
layer flow and in airfoils in general. Individual companies have been duplicated in a small tunnel, the possible exception being tests of powered
tending to design their own airfoils. The small tunnel can play an im- models. Hence a small tunnel is invaluable for instruction.
portant part in this work. The many criteria (see Section 4:21) that are Many schools have a small wind tunnel, not unlike that shown in Fig.
determinable from pressure surveys are within reach of nearly all wind 8: 1, for the use of undergraduates. The jet size is from 14 to 30 in.
tunnels. square (Fig. 8: 2) and the dimensions are such that a space 14 ft by 30 ft is
398
Small Wind Tunnels / 401
2. Read angle of flow at 2-inch stations across jet. Plot flow inclination in
kIi
degrees against station.
3. Determine the turbulence.
4. Read static pressure at tunnel centerline from plane of jet to exit cone at
3-inch intervals. Plot static pressure against station.
5. Read dynamic pressure at tunnel centerline for various pressures in the
settling chamber. Plot dynamic pressure against settling chamber pressure.
6. If available parallel the pitot input into a pressure transducer of suitable
range (±O.5 psi should be adequate). Connect transducer to a recording oscillo-
graph and take trace at each q setting. Plot galvanometer deflection against Vi
andq.
Experiment 2. Balance Alignment and Aspect Ratio
Tunnel condition: Balance in.

Apparatus: Two wings of similar profile and chord but different aspect
ratio, 4 and 6.
Tests: l. Install wing of AR = 6. Read L, D, M from below zero lift to
stall.
2. Invert model and repeat.
\ 3. Same for wing of AR = 4.
4. Plot all data, and make alignment and boundary corrections. (Final data
Fig. 8: 1 A small wind tunnel. (Courtesy Zumwalt and Darby.)
include tare drag and interference, but with models of about 3-inch chord the
evaluation of these effects is extremely difficult.) Note on plots (XZ.L., dC L/doc
sufficient for the tunnel and motor ', Twenty to twenty-five horsepower CL max, Cao min' Cmo,ac.
will provide 100 mph in the test sectIOn. h 11 Experiment 3. Tailsetting and Downwash
Walls for the test section may be made so that they may b~ w 0 y or
partially removed, thus making it possible to _perform tests with open or Tunnel condition: Balance in.
closed jet and to study asymmetrical boundanes. . 1 Apparatus: Model with horizontal tail having variable incidence.
Man of these smaller tunnels do not use a slx-compone~t ba ance. Tests: 1. Read L, D, M from zero lift to stall with tail off.
The ne~essity for completing a test in the .usuallabo:atory period of 3 to 2. Repeat with tail on, elevator zero, and tail incidence -8 deg to 8 deg.
3. Plot (X against Cm, and down wash € against oc. Determine octail and tail
4 hours recludes as complete a test as might be deslre~. .
SUitaJe experiments for instructional purposes are listed below somed incidence for CL = 0.2.
of these, as indicated, provide an opportunity. to intro~uce the stu ent to Experiment 4. Static Longitudinal Stability
he more sophisticated instrumentatlOn that IS frequently used.
some 0f t 1 F if any tunnels Tunnel condition: Balance in.
Most of these require about 3 hours to comp ete. ew, 1 ,
. it i to be taken for granted that a closed test Apparatus: Model with removable tail and movable elevators.
use an open Jet anymore, so 1 IS
Tests: l. Run model from zero lift to stall reading L, D, M. Tail off.
section will be employed. 2. Repeat with tail on and elevators 0, -5 deg, -10 deg, -"15 deg.
3. Plot Cm against CL for each elevator setting and Cm against <5.. State
Experiment 1. Jet Calibration
dCmJdCL' Also plot·C L against (x.
Tunnel condition: Balance out. . If a sting-type balance is available, this is a good experiment to use it on.
Apparatus: Pitot-static tube, yawhead, turbulence sphere, 2 mlcromanom- Gage output can be channeled into one of several types of readout devices such
eters, meter stick. ..' PI t t as Brush recorder, regular strain gage readout equipment, or oscillograph.
T' . 1 Read dynamic pressure at 2-mch stations across Je~. 0 per cen Balance calibration should be included as part of this experiment.
Jests. . . I . t station
variation in dynamiC pressure from centerlme va ue agams .
-j -
numbers. As soon as sufficient angle is reached, the lower surface has

smooth flow, and the increased detachment on the upper surface is not
enough to overcome the great drag reduction on the lower surface.
The unexpected and important effect of proper transition is shown in
Figs. 8: 3 and 8 :4, where the proper boundary layer conditions result in
one-third of the drag of a conventional profile.
~_1_% --==-=-=-==------ 2
In summary, then, models for small tunnels should, to avoid hopelessly
confusing the student and giving him a false impression of the utility of
r-I~'___--
0.20c_'
tunnels in general, be designed for the Reynolds numbers at which they
will be run, 12 per cent Clark Y wings or the similar NACA 4412 sections
L ----~ 3 being suitable in the range 150,000 to 200,000.
Model builders will need a more thorough discussion of low-Reynolds-
number aerodynamics, and they may consult Ref. 8: 1 and seek information
.C
~7%r=
from the Low Speed Aerodynamic Research Association in England.
Reference
<:.': 8: 1 Alexander M. Lippisch, Wing Sections for Model Planes, Air Trails, April and
Fig. 8:3 May 1950.
----r---,---,
0.20 ..------r-- ........
CL
Fig. 8: 4 Performance of the five profiles shown in. Fig. 8: 3 at Reynolds numbers of
30,000 to 45,000; AR == 6.0. (From an unpublished paper by Seredensky.)
HV"',C,v"UUtl(;UI o ses VJ 1ne rr ina 1unnet / 41}7
Chapter nine for nonaer?nautical models are normally not well defined, and approxi-
~ate solutions must be. used. When the situation compares to nothing
~n the w.all correction IIte~ature the authors suggest increasing the clear
Jet velocity used for reducing the data according to eq. (6: 38).
One should be sure to include both the area of the model on the balance
and any other blockage areas in the tunnel.
Nonaeronautical uses of Tare and i~terfer~nce can be discussed only in the light of a particular
the wind tunnel setup, and quite typically non aeronautical tests are on a ground plane and
need not be supported at all. When a support is used the principles in
Chapter 4 may be followed.
Obtaining representative flow conditions is hard for nonaeronautical
A large and fertile field for extending the utility of wind tunnel testing in tests because for the most part they embrace things adjacent to the ground
general is that concerning non aeronautical projects. This area, although or sea. In t~rn, the velocity gradient is almost never known * (if it is, it
far more diligently pursued now than a few years ago, still offers almost can be duplicated through the use of flow control screens), and one is
endless opportunities for tunnel use. The list of problems amenable to forced to accept the tunnel boundary layer as representative of what is
wind tunnel work embraces academic studies, such as the flying range of wanted. An alternative is to' use a ground plane. This at least has the
insects or the growth of a hailstone, as well as immensely practical prob- merit of reducing the boundary layer thickness. But the flow under the
lems covering static loads on buildings and other structures, dynamic ground plane must be monitored because model changes can change
loads on bridges and smoke stacks, air pollution, wind power generation, the perce?tage of tunnel air going beneath the ground plane, and hence
aerodynamics of ships, cars, and trains, meteorology, evaporation, thermal that passing over t~e model. The use of image models is not justified;
phenomena, animal flight, and others. ?or may. models ~h~ch are supposed to be run close to the ground be run
This chapter outlines the manner of conducting many of these tests III free arr '. Klemm III Ref. 9: 1 gives the following data from drag tests of
and of reporting the data. It should be of interest to engineers and a locomotive:
scientists in the relevant fields, as well as to operators of low-speed Model Drag
wind tunnels with idle time. Configuration Coefficient
9:1 General Testing Procedures Model in free air 0.55

Model with mirror image 0.49
The non aeronautical engineer has little or no idea of the complexity
Model with stationary ground board 0.38
of running a wind tunnel test, and hence the cost. .Every effort should be
Model with moving belt 0.36
made to acquaint him with the situation and, as always, to hold costs
down. The tunnel operator should insist on some sort of report. It is
Most nonaeronautical devices are sharply irregular and hence their
usually preferable for the customer to furnish models, for it is harder to
flow patterns are independent of Reynolds number. For those that are
get the wind tunnel model shop to open up tolerances for typical non-
smooth, roughness should be added ahead of the maximum thickness
aeronautical requirements than it is to get a carpenter shop to close them. See Section 7: 1).
The wind tunnel operator may find himself in the strange world of
Models for wind loads tests are almost invariably mounted on a turn-
bidding on a job instead of simply stating charges per hour. This in turn
table to permit orientation for wind from all directions. .
leads to many changes; the petty annoyance of stopped-up pressure
leads now takes on an entirely new significance. . 9:2 Wind Loads on Buildings and Signs
As regards the tests, nonaeronautical engineers are usually totally un-
The highest natural wind ever actually measured at sea level was 175
aware of the need for wall corrections. They usually know nothing about,
mph at Chetumal, Mexico (Yucatan Peninsula) on Septerriber 20, 1955.
evaluating tare and interference through the use of dummy systems, or
about working hard to obtain true flow conditions. The wall corrections * See Section 9 :2.
406
408 Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Nonaeronautical Uses Of The Wind Tunnel / 409
f
I
• the proposed building are known, they may be duplicated in the tunnel
and the data used with confidence.
If nothing is known about the proposed surroundings, for instance,
for mobile buildings which may be placed anywhere, tests made with the
model directly on the tunnel floor will be conservative in that the meas-
ured loads will be larger than those in real life where wind gradients
exist.
Neglect of large drag forces on certain building structures can lead to
serious consequences. One example comes to mind where two persons
:_t.. sought shelter in a small shed covering a "juke box" that was located in
an amusement park. The structure was equipped with dutch doors which
were open, and the wind gusts accompanying the thunder storm over-
turned the house and injured the occupants. Tunnel tests on a model of
the structure revealed that the doors-open condition resulted in large drag
forces that overturned the shed at less than 20 mph. Needless to say, the
amusement park was sued for damages. With just a minimum of tunnel
test results one could avoid such incidents by designing for more than
'--I just dynamic pressure loads. Pocock in Ref. 9: 2 quotes measurements
I which yield wind gradients of ZYi for flat open country, ZO.3 for wooded
country, and ZO.S for large cities (Z is the height in feet).
Fig. 9: 1. A model of the Houston air-conditioned stadium in the McDonnell Low- Buildings are almost always sharp-cornered and hence tests are inde-
Speed Wind Tunnel.
pendent of Reynolds number. Those with rounded or cylindrical roofs
(gymnasiums, quonsets, and the like) should have their flow "tripped"
A still higher velocity, but with lower dynamic pressure was a steady (see Section 7: 1) if there is a probability of too much laminar flow.
188 mph with gusts up to 230 mph measured at the top (6288 ft) of Mt. Eaves that jut out and have high pressures under them and low pres-
Washington, New Hampshire, on April 12, 1934. Estimated velocities of sures on top are particularly vulnerable to wind, as are simple smooth
400 to 500 mph may occur in tornados. It is therefore not surprising that "triangle on a box" roofs. Pressure data are the normal source of in-
much attention is paid to wind loads, and structures of all types should be formation, and orifices should be placed close together near corners
designed to withstand the highest dynamic pressure expected in the par- where local values may go as low as -6q. Very small changes are usually
ticular region. Failure may take the form of loss of cladding, collapse effective in correcting poor (high-load) flow, but they may not be aesthet-
of the structure, or removal of the roof. Measured loads are also needed ically acceptable.
to formulate or modify building codes. (See Fig. 9: 1.) The size of a large sign on a roof (called a "spectacular" in the adver-
The most serious obstacle to producing accurate wind loads on a build- tising world) is usually limited by building code, even though slots
ing is knowing the wind gradient to which it will be subjected. Should invisible from the street could reduce its drag area.
such be known, it may be duplicated in the tunnel by placing graded flow A novel wind tunnel test for building involves determining the flow
control screens on the tunnel floor ahead of the model. The senior around possible heliport sites, and of course their suitability.
~.
author has used house screen with good success, sometimes mounted on
hardware cloth for added strength. The most downstream screen should 9:3 Wind Loads on Structures
be several feet upstream of the model to allow the turbulence made by Wind loads are the predominant design criteria for many modern
the screen to die out, and enough' surveys of the flow must be made to structures such as television towers, long-span bridges, and radar dishes.
assure that a gradient is produced without separation. An alternative is Such loads are most reliably predicted by balance measurements rather
large-scale roughness on the tunnel floor. Indeed, if the surroundings of than pressure integrations. Scale difficulties usually dictate testing a section
Nonaeronautical Uses of The Wind Tunnel f 411
Data given in Ref. 9: 4 suggest that perforated structures such as trusses
be corrected for blocking by reducing the measured drag according to
CDtrue = CDroeasured [ 1 + 4"15(S)2J-1

C (9: 1)
where s = solid area of truss, ft2,

C = nominal tunnel test section area, ft2.
Although the above relation is not rigorous, it gives reasonable results.
Its correction is somewhat larger than that of eq (6: 36), since it is for the
two dimensional type of flow experienced by the setup shown.
Model size should be kept such that a 30 per cent error in the correction
will still result in a drag correction within the accuracy desired for the
data.
9:4 Unsteady Aerodynamics

The wind can produce structural oscillations in several ways, not all of
which can be duplicated in the wind tunnel.
Simple Oscillations. All natural and man-made structures have a
natural frequency at which they will oscillate unless critically damped.
The natural frequencies of many items (trees, signposts, etc.) are close
enough to those of wind puffs that it is not unusual for a failure to result
from a second puff's catching a structure deflected from a previous puff. 'I
This sort of failure is not amenable to wind tunnel study and is only
mentioned for completeness.
Aeolian Vibrations. Long, singly supported structures such as smoke-
Fig. 9: 2 Sectional model of a TV tower mounted on a roof balance in a two- stacks and towers have a frequency to oscillate in a direction normal to
dimensional tunnel. (Courtesy National Physical Laboratory.)
the wind and at their natural frequency. The condition arises from the
shed vortex street: the most recently shed vortex (a in Fig. 9: 3) has the
of a long-span structure rather than a model of the c~mplete b.ridg~ or predominant effect, inducing an asymmetrical flow over the tower and
tower, and better results will be obtained if the metncal portion IS a a side force that bends the stack sideways in the direction of Va' As the
segment between two nonmetrical segments in order to reproduce vortex moves downstream and its induced effect at the stack diminishes,
end conditions.
A test setup (from Ref. 9: 4) is shown in Fig. 9: 2. The .width of. the
truss members was increased a judicious amount to allow for Ice accretion.
The model was mounted on a roof balance and spanned the height of
the tunnel except for clearances at floor and ceiling. Corrections for the
b
tunnel boundary layer were then made by making measure~ents for ~he v
entire section (model plus two boundary layers) and then with ~ portIOn
made nonmetrical (! model plus one boundary layer). The wind loads
over the middle section corrected for end and boundary layer effects
were then computed by subtracting the differences between th.e two se~s
of data adjusted for the relative percentage made nonmetncal. This Fig. 9: 3 The downward component V. from vortex a is greater than the upward
component V~(not shown) from the more distant vortex b.
system will not work if the model is cut at its middle for the second run.
Nonaeronautical Uses Of The Wind Tunnel / 413
the stack moves toward its undeflected position. At resonance, the next
shed vortex induces a flow that encourages the movement to return, pass We shall consider the above types of unsteady aerodynamic effects on a
center and continue in the new direction. This motion occurs on stacks, number of structures in the following sections, noting that oscillations
TV towers, arid transmission lines. Typically the oscillations increase may also be categorized as
beyond the critical speed but reach a limit and decrease to zero when t~e 1. aerodynamic instability, where the movement has only a single
exciting frequency gets far beyond the natural frequen~y. Su~h an oscil- degree of freedom;
lation is called Aeolian although sometimes the term IS restncted to the 2. flutter, more than a single degree of motion; and
case when the structure has a high natural frequency ~10 t.o 100 ~ps) 3. buffet, where the motion arises from the wake of a nearby structure.
and displacements are small. The humming of power lines IS Aeolian.
Ideally, to duplicate the full-scale motion the model should be similar
Galloping. A third type of motion arises ~hen a body has a negati:e to full scale in shape and the following characteristics should correspond:
slope of the lift curve, and motion across a wind then produces .aforce III
the direction of the wind. This is not unusual for bluff bodIe~ whose a. Reynolds number, p VII u,
b. Structural damping, bs'
in-wind side becomes unstalled with a small angle o~ attack. (F~g. 9 :4),
c. Stiffness, Sip V2,
and Bernoulli-type flow then is able to act. Gallopmg. oscIlI~tI?~s are
usually violent and must be damped structurally, a near impossibility, d. Density ratio, o] p.
Breathing. Sometimes large-diameter stacks and other stru~tures will Fortunately, complete compliance with the above conditions (which
distort at some natural frequency such that the flow pattern IS chan~ed would require essentially a full-scale model) is not necessary, as discussed
toward that frequency. This is different from motion of the body with in the following sections.
In the above
very little distortion.
I = characteristic length, ft,
S = modulus of elasticity, lb/ft",
V = velocity, fps,
u Os = logarithmic decrement of oscillation,
p = air density, slug/ft3,
C' C a = structural material density, slug/ft3,
fl = air viscosity, Ib-sec/fts,
(a) 9:5 Bridge and Smokestack Oscillations

Bridges and smokestacks are subject to Aeolian oscillations, and since
the failure of the bridge across the Tacoma narrows, essentially all new
bridges have been tested in wind tunnels. Although the first tests em-
ployed a wind tunnel with an exceptionally wide test section and a model
of the complete bridge, it has been found that testing a section of the
bridge in a more normal tunnel is adequate. The test employs a .section
of the tunnel mounted free to oscillate normal to the airstream and to
pitch.
L The sharp-edged construction of bridges precludes Reynolds number
troubles, but stacks should have roughness added along a line from 30
(b) to 60 deg from the incoming wind direction if the test is below a Reynolds
Fig. 9: 4 Downward lift, L, produced at positive angle of attack through unstalling number of about 400,000. The similarity rules become those for density
the separated part of a blunt shape. ratio, alp; structural damping, bs; and for bridges, maintenance of equal
VINB, where V is velocity, in feet per second; N is cycles per second;
414 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Nonaeronautical Uses Of The Wind Tunnel I 415
Fig. 9: 6 A circular section cylinder model with three-start helical strakes mounted
in the wind tunnel. (Courtesy National Physical Laboratory.)
Figure 9: 5 Wind tunnel experiment on the buffeting of bridges. (The sectional model of spring-mounted sections employing both wire, stranded wire, and
of a suspension bridge in the foreground is in the wake of the sectional model of a
wires with simulated ice accretion. Here some galloping has been devel-
massive railway bridge.) (Courtesy National Physical Laboratory.)
oped, but apparently only small deflections have occurred. Far more
interesting are the electrical effects, which include observations of every-
and B is some typical dimension, usually bridge width, in feet. The spring thing from substantial increases of galloping when the current is turned
constants of the model are adjusted to bring the VINB ratio into equality on to powered transmission lines which galloped for days during no wind
with that of full scale, and the axis of rotation must also match full scale. conditions! Here is a fertile field for research.
Under the above conditions one can vary the tunnel speed and note
whether resonance occurs during the correspondingly probable wind 9:7 Smokestack Flow Tests
velocities. In a few cases bridge buffet has been introduced by the wake Smokestacks are used to reduce the local concentration of combustion
of a nearby bridge (Fig. 9: 5). When Aeolian or buffet oscillations occur or process products, and to provide a draft for a furnace. In practice their
they are usually cured by the addition of saw-teeth or spoilers added in exit velocities vary from a few feet per second to a~ high as 100 feet per
such a manner as to prevent the structure from emitting discrete vortices. second, their height from a few tens of feet to as much as 600 feet. Smoke-
Cures for stacks have included spoilers (called "strakes") wound helically stacks are tested in wind tunnels in an effort to assure adequate perform-
around the stack (Fig. 9: 6). Spoilers may worsen galloping, but fortu- ance before construction, or to cure poor performance after construction.
nately bridges and smokestacks rarely have this motion. Four conditions should be duplicated:
9:6 Transmission Lines 1. The ratio of the stack exit velocity to that of the wipd velocity, or
Transmission lines exhibit both Aeolian and galloping oscillations. better; the momentums per cubic foot if the stack and wind have different
The Aeolian singing is understood, usually occurs at from 10 to 100 temperatures.
cycles full scale, and is suppressed by dampers. 2. The buoyancy effect of the actual gas.
Galloping produced by wind loads is reasonably well understood, but 3. The meteorological conditions (it would be nice to have a temperature
unfortunately very large deflections (of say 100 diameters) are not un- gradient in the wind tunnel).
common and are hard to accommodate in a tunnel. Test have been made 4. The local wind conditions as produced by nearby buildings.
Items (1) and (2) differentiate stack flow from point source flow as used
in mathematical models. Reynolds number does not seem to be impor-
tant. If the flow as seen in the tunnel appears unsatisfactory, the stack
height and efflux velocity may be increased. Ship smokestacks may in
addition have local changes made to the stack exit. In rare cases ad-
ditional air jets near the exit have been tried.
The data to be taken consist of photographs and/or material deposition.
Because of the turbulent character of the flow, single photographs are not
satisfactory for determining the envelope of the flow. Time exposures
produce a fuzzy boundary. Most successful is a series of short exposures
on the same film.
A satisfactory smoke may be made by heating kerosene, or actual steam
may be used. (See Section 1: 7.)
Deposition studies may be made by painting the model with white lead
acetate and adding hydrogen sulfide to the smoke. The stench is unbear-
able, but science comes first. Figure 9: 7 shows the effect oflocal conditions
on flow from a smokestack, and Fig. 9: 8 shows the improvement made on
flow from a ship's smokestack by changes to the exit shape. The bibliog-
raphy of Ref. 9: 1 gives sources for much more data on smoke studies.
9:8 Testing Automobiles and Trucks
Fundamentally automobiles are tested for eight criteria: stability, lift,
drag, ventilation, noise, dirt, cooling, and windshield wiper action. The
first three may be performed with models (Fig. 9:9); the last five require
full-scale tests (see Section 1': 18).
I No particular criteria for lateral stability have been developed, other
than that the car should be as insensitive as possible to gusts. Yawing
the car in the tunnel duplicates a skid, but not a gust which has a sub-
stantial gradient. In one case at least, lateral instability found in the
tunnel did not occur under full-scale conditions, possibly for this reason.
Rear-engine autos normally have poorer aerodynamic stability, since their
centers of gravity are apt to be more rearward than those of front-engine
cars.
The lift generated by automobiles can become serious at very high
speeds, and test drivers report lifting of the front wheels to where the direc-
Fig. 9: 7 The influence of nearby buildings on smoke flow as duplicated in a wind tion of travel becomes independent of the steering wheel. This can be
tunnel. In both setups the efflux velocity is equal to the wind velocity and the stack disconcerting and is to be avoided. Large tail fins can increase the low-
height is 1.S building height. In (a) the building is downstream of the stack; in (b), pressure zone over the rear wheels and tend to lift them.
upstream. (Courtesy National Physical Laboratory.)
Drag is currently secondary to appearance, although at 100 mph it
absorbs two-thirds of the horsepower. Correlation with tunnel results
seems to be within 5 per cent. The rotation of the wheels, which should
be duplicated in the tunnel, accounts for a few per cent of the drag.
s.' .
---
Fig. 9: 9 Corvair in the
_--
Convair wind tunnel.
Depending on the model scale, matching road speed might require as

much as 6000 rpm. Most of the drag of a car comes from the relatively
blunt front ends.
Car models are usually wood and clay, and accuracy to ;2 to 1:16 inch
seems adequate for models a few feet long. Changes made with automotive
clay usually survive 50 to 100 hours of tunnel test.
A fine example of a case where wind tunnel tests were used to great
advantage was reported by Schlichting in Ref. 9: 8. Here the fuel con-
sumption of a severely squared-off bus was decreased substantially by
paying attention to tunnel tests (Fig. 9: 10). The same reference gives the
following auto drag figures:
Drag CoefficientBased on
Configuration Frontal Area
Flat plate normal to wind 1.0
Vehicleaerodynamicallybad 0.8
Still fairly bad 0.6 4_
Fig. 9: 8 Influence of funnel design on the smoke plume over ship's superstructure, Fairly good (Volkswagen) 0.4
wind tunnel test. (a) Plume from original funnel. (b) Plume from modified funnel. Nearly optimum 0.2
(Courtesy National Physical Laboratory.)
, Ventilation, noise, dirt, and cooling require tests of the full-scale car,
and unless special steps are taken the noise made by the car will be
indistinguishable from the tunnel noise.
Nonaeronautical Uses Of The Wind Tunnel I 421
3.0,.-----r----r---..,----,----,----,
Plan view of
bus shapes
(~------'I~
------' --==--
-c
.2
~
:;;
0-
24
~'"
;:;:
Drag
Speed, mph
h 0.4
Fig.9:10 Increase of gas mileage obtained by rounding front of Volkswagen bus. l:l
---
...;
(Redrawn from Ref. 9: 8.)
Wind tunnel tests of autos are usually quite independent of Reynolds

c
-~
u
::E
o
u
Q)
Q)
o ./
~
~
r-. -
number (at least from 0.2 to 4.0 x 106) and hence may be conducted OJ
E:
o
with model cars in small (say 3 by 4 [t) tunnels and at low speeds. Usually I- -0.4
the models are mounted with the wheels touching a small ground plane- -20 20 60 100 140 180 220
-Angle of attack, a, deg
small to reduce the boundary layer. One might consider having two or
three model lengths of ground plane ahead of and behind the model, and Fig. 9: 11 Presentation of data from elliptic dish-type radar antenna. CD includes
support drag. .
at least two laterally. The plate is big enough if static pressure ports on top
and bottom show small difference (say 1 or 2 per cent q) between model all designs the sharp edges of the dish preclude effects due to Reynolds
on and off. Most aerodynamicists would prefer a moving belt below the number. Some antenna data are shown in Fig. 9: 11. The drag shown
car, and for small tunnels a simple belt sander will do. includes that of the supporting structure and is therefore high in com-
9:9 Testing Radar Antennas parison to that for the dish only.
The familiar dish-type radar antennas are frequently tested in wind 9:10 Wind Power Generation
tunnels because (a) their saucer shape results in high drag loads, (b) their Few aerodynamicists look at wind power systems such as windmills
mounting on top of typically flimsy structures make them wind sensitive, without feeling that they could do better, and in truth they could. But
and (c) the torque for rapid azimuthal tracking must be well defined. with essentially unlimited power available the problem of using it is more
Indeed, in some installations (particularly in snow country) these loads one of constructional ingenuity to keep cost down than of aerodynamic
are so great that the antenna is totally enclosed in a sheltering str~cture. efficiency. A recent contribution to the problem is the proposal of Andreau
For wind tunnel tests the antenna model should be mounted In the in France to use the rotating blades as a suction device to provide useful
tunnel on top of the same structure it will see in the field-s-trailer, antenna air at the base of the installation. This arrangement becomes more
stand, or small house-and measurements of drag, side force, and torque attractive as the size of the installation increases.
should be made every ten degrees or so from -10 deg to + 190 deg. Doubtless concern in this area will increase as growing populations
Data may be put in coefficient form by using the dynamic pressure, n:axi- require the use of more remote and arid lands. As a matter of interest
mum projected frontal area, and dish diameter or span. For essenttally
4U I Low-~peea wina runnel 1 estmg Nonaeronautical Uses Of The Wind Tunnel ( 423
13,000 windmills provide water from underground cenotes in the City
of Merida, Mexico.
Testing windmills in a wind tunnel requires the wake-blocking correc-
tions of Section 6: 11. The analysis in Section 5: 19 demonstrates that a
maximum of only 59.4 per cent of the stream power is even theoretically
available. Further data are in Refs. 9:2, 9:3, and 9:4.
An entirely different application of wind power generation is the gener-
ator supplied on many single-engine jet planes. This back-up is needed
to supply power for lowering flaps and landing gear in the case where a
flame-out occurs and a sufficiently large accumulator cannot be supplied.
Even with the limitation of eq. (5: 11) substantial power (of the order of
4 hp(ft2 at 100mph and 32 hp(ft2 at 200 mph) is available. Tests of
generators of this type should be made with the proposed environment,
not with the generator held in a duct so that bypass flow is not possible.
9:11 Testing Landscapes and Trees

. Landscapes have been tested in wind tunnels for a variety of reasons.
Sometimes the problem is to seek a safe path for aircraft, as for instance
in the tests of the Rock of Gibraltar shown in Fig. 9: 12. In other cases
models alterations are sought to relieve smoke, fog, or dust problems.
1
Fig. 9: 13 Setup for making drag tests of an actual tree in the large open-throat wind
tunnel at the NPL. (Courtesy National Physical Laboratory.)
Certain valleys have been tested to determine the best location for soaring.
Possibly mountain-locked areas such as Los Angeles may be studies for
smog relief. In essentially all cases scale models of the landscape may be
tested without concern for Reynolds number effects. Expected wind
gradients as discussed previously should be provided.
The loss of money tree crops, such as Christmas trees; fast-growing
pines, or orchards and the like is as distressing as the shade and beauty
lost when ornamental trees blow down. Accordingly serious tests of trees
in wind tunnels have been made both to determine those most resistant'
to winds and to find the arrays most likely to survive windstorms. Fraser
in Ref. 9: 7 found that a rather wide group of firs, pines, and spruces so
deflected with velocities that their drag varied with the first power of
the wind speed (see Fig. 9: 13) and could be approximated 'by
Fig. 9: 12 Wind-tunnel tests of the Rock of Gibraltar, made to determine the safest
approach paths to the landing field in its lee. (Crown Copyright Reserved.) D = 1.441V + 0.029VW - 0.328W + 7.426 (9:2)
Nonaeronautical Uses Of The Wind Tunnel / 425
Fig. 9: 14 Orchard simulated by hardware-cloth trees. (Courtesy National Physical

Laboratory.)
where D = drag, lb, Fig. 9: 15 Submarine all-movable control surface mounted on simulated hull. Note
W = tree weight, lb, that only the after portion of the hull is simulated. (Courtesy U.S. Navy Bureau of
Ships.)
V = velocity, knots.
This drag resulted in an overturning moment which fitted well with the
assumption that the drag acted at half the tree height, and, in turn, this submarine hull is employed. The test setup shown in Fig. 9: 15 showed
moment matched well with the physical moment needed to uproot the a reduction in drag when the 0015 airfoil section controls were added.
trees. Figure 9: 14 shows an array of trees simulated with hardware cloth The buoyancy effect was finally traced (by means of pressure belts on the
for the study of the effect of a road through an orchard. hull portion) to a change in the local pressure distribution which was not
realistic.
9:12 Testing Underwater Vehicles The underwater towing device shown in Fig. 9: 16 was tunnel tested to
There are many underwater devices whose characteristics may be determine its hydrodynamic and stability characteristics. The counter-
determined in the wind tunnel. For those intended to operate entirely rotating propellers of the model were operated during tests so that both
submerged there will be no free surface to worry about and the test need power-on and power-off data were obtained. Subsequent full-scale
not be run at equal Froude numbers for model and full scale, although underwater tests confirmed the wind tunnel results.
equal Reynolds numbers would be desirable. Submarine control surface
9:13 Testing Sails and Ships
design has been based largely on data obtained from panel models
mounted on the tunnel floor. More recently, flow conditions have been Sails have been tested in wind tunnels in limited numbers over the years.
better simulated by mounting the surfaces on at least a portion of the Added impetus has recently been given to such tests by the construction
submarine hull, and the results have shown this sort of setup to be de- of the Southampton University tunnel in England especially for such
sirable. However one should make sure that a sufficient portion of the work. In general, sail tests embrace measurements of side force, drag,
care to duplicate model detail, such as ships' railings, ventilators, mast
detail, etc., are not warranted, but studies to reduce aerodynamic drag are.
Tests of speed boats are primarily to find a body shape that has mini-
mum nose-up characteristics. Here the model is tested through a range
of pitch angles about the stern, and the angle at which the aerodynamic
moment overcomes the moment due to gravity and thrust about the
stern is determined. The current wide, flat-bottomed speedboats can
survive only a few degrees of nose up before they become unstable.
9:14 Testing for Evaporation
The growing need for studying transpiration from plants and evapora-
tion from open' bodies of water has resulted in the construction of wind
tunnels in which the moisture content of the air and its temperature may
be controlled. Tunnels of this type are in Japan, at the University of
Nottingham in England, at the Colorado A & M College in the United
States, and elsewhere. They are all low-speed- tunnels employing con-
trolled air exchange.
Transpiration tests are full scale in that the weight of moisture removed
from actual plants is studied. Electric lights or other heaters are used
for temperature control.
Evaporation is of interest both to agronomists who are concerned with
the loss of water from storage areas and channels and to process engineers
who have drying problems. Both types of tests have been explored in
wind tunnels.
Fig. 9: 16 Testing an underwater towing device. (Courtesy U.S. Navy Bureau of Evaporation tests employ open bodies of water and the surroundings
Ships.) are changed to study the increase or decrease of evaporation. Evapora-
tion, as one might guess, depends on the surface area, the relative dryness
yaw, and roll on a model mounted on the tunnel floor or on a ground of the air, and the effective wind velocity. This last term is the "catch,"
board. A better setup is to simulate a wind gradient such as that found since the effective velocity may vary from a fraction of one per cent to
over water: V "" Z~, where Z is the height in feet, is a good approxi- perhaps a few per cent of the nominal velocity, depending on the type of
mation. Sail material should be varied during a test to see what effect, boundary layer formed by the air over the water.
if any, arises. Material roughness and porosity will probably be out of The use of an evaporation constant N has been proposed. It is given as
scale, and several variations of each should be tried for comparison.
Ship tests have been somewhat more extensive. These usually embrace (9: 3)
a floor or ground plane model cut off at the waterline, with measurements
made of side force and drag only, although yaw and roll would be of where W = weight of water evaporated per square foot per second,
interest. Again, a wind gradient should be provided as above. A = area of water, ft2,
Both sail and ship model tests should have their data corrected for wake x = distance measured from upstream edge of water, ft,
and solid blocking. The models should be kept small enough that at C, = saturation water concentration at the average~temperature of
90 deg yaw bow and stern remain no less than half a ship length from the the air over the surface, Ib/ft",
tunnel walls. If a ground plane is used, the difficulties discussed in. Sec- Co = water vapor concentration of the ambient air, Ib/ft2,
tion 5: 20 should be evaluated. Reference 9: 6 indicates that extreme p. = molecular diffusivity coefficient for water into air, ft2/sec.
• J
418 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing. Nonaeronautical Uses Of The Wind Tunnel f 419
The constant N has been found to be a function of Reynolds number
whether the boundary layer is laminar or turbulent, and for a circular
body of water is found from
N = 0.256Ro.S7 (9 :4)
where R = V*x/ve,
V* = mean apparent shear velocity at the downstream edge of the
\
~ water surface, fps. I
Again, V* is only a fraction of the ambient velocity.

Since test velocities approximate those of real wind, and Ve is the same
for model and full scale, wind tunnel tests of evaporation suffer from
scale effect. A series of speeds may be used and extrapolation then essayed.
9:15 Testing for Snowdrift Patterns

Many people in the southern part of the country do not realize the
yearly cost of snow removal and many in the northern part do not realize
the savings possible by wind tunnel studies of ameliorating changes
(preferably before but sometimes after construction) which reduce local
drifting about access areas.
Drifting snow can block doorways and roads and may even inactivate a
facility completely. Fortunately, the problem can be studied in a tunnel
with good correlation to full scale. Snow patterns that might take years Fig.9:17 Testing for drifting snow. (Courtesy New York University.)
(in the arctic) to accumulate may be duplicated in a few hours. Work of
this nature has been done at New York University, the University of the extent that the fall velocity may be varied by changes in the particle
Michigan, and several other places. Generally a very long test section is density.
needed so that the boundary layer growth is very slow in the area of 5. Particle Froude number, PJ.g!!____.,
~------:----~-.---.
interest (see Fig. 9: 17). where g = acceleration of gravity, ft/sec2•
Scaling parameters that we would like to match include Selecting a model scale of lo, we find that the test velocity becomes 0.316
full-scale velocity. The fall ratio may be maintained by using borax
1. Scale factor, d/L
(Na2Bp7)' whose density providentially yields the right value and whose
where d = diameter of simulated snow particle, inches, coefficient of restitution is 0.334-lower than ice, but possibly close to
L = length of a full-scale reference dimension, inches. snow-and whose diameter may be controlled to be lo that of snowflakes.
The tunnel will not yield the natural boundary layer depth, but may
2. Coefficient of restitution, e
be controlled to approximate it. A point of interest is the phenomenon
This concerns the rebound distance/drop distance, and is 0.555 for ice. known as "saltation," which concerns quiescent snow that is picked up
by an airstream. In a tunnel this has been found (for the above simulated
3. Particle velocity Vp/V
snow) to occur at! 11 m~ithout snow falling, and at lower velocities
where V" = velocity of simulated snow particle, fps, when snow is faU%
V = velocity of real snow particle, fps. Data for snow tests are obtained in the form of photographs and depth
contours. One substantial contribution from tunnel tests is the technique
4. Fall velocity, V,/V
of reducing drifting by erecting a building on piles with fa free space
where VI = free fall velocity of simulated Snow particle, fps. Here we beneath. This has been applied in arctic building. Strom in Ref. 9: 9 has
have one of the rare instances where we may "scale gravity" -at least to an authoritative discussion of the snow simulation problem.
430 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Nonaeronautical Uses Of The Wind Tunnel / 431
9:16 Testing for Soil Erosion Since live models are expected to be quite small, no special wind tunnel
The ~ind erosion of soil is interesting to the agronomist largely from techniques are needed, should tests be desired. The authors suspect that
the standpoint of reducing the removal of topsoil. The magnitude of this they will produce more hilarity than useful data.
problem illustrated by the fact that some 200 to 300 million tons were
lost during the duststorm of May 12, 1934in the midwest. Numerous wind 9:18 Man-Powered Aircraft
tunnels have been built to study this effect. They are usually of the low-speed Man-powered airborne vehicles are not strictly nonaeronautical, but
type arid have test sections from 6 to 10 diameters long. they do fall into a separate category. Human-powered vehicles are defi-
A second interest in erosion lies in the damage a dust-laden stream can nitely "low speed" (20 mph) and present a most challenging aerodynamic
do. In the desert part of our country windshield life rarely exceeds three design problem. The low-speed tunnel can be most helpful in the develop-
years, and both windshield life and that of the automobile paint can be ment of such vehicles. A recent project at the Georgia Institute of Tech-
reduced to a few minutes in a severe sandstorm. Of new interest is the nology made good use of a small (30 inches by 30 inches) tunnel to
augmented damage (of the order of 2.0) which a dust-laden blast from determine the best wing end plate shape and size; the final wing design
an atomic explosion can cause. Here the mechanism is different from the incorporated the tunnel test results. The full-scale Reynolds number of
natural dust pick-up described below. The thermal radiation from the such craft is about 1 x 106, which can easily be duplicated in most low-
fireball of the explosion reaches out beyond the shock wave and by ex- speed tunnels. In this case model test results are directly applicable to
plosively evaporating the moisture in the soil surface ejects the dust up- full scale, provided that no surface roughness problems arise. However
ward, where it is then caught by the following blast wave. A supersonic a boundary layer tripper may be employed on the tunnel model, since it is
wind tunnel to study the effects of dust at high speeds has been constructed doubtful that the full-scale vehicle would have laminar flow. Consider-
at the Sandia Corporation in New Mexico. able work is being performed now to develop an aircraft that can fly a
The mechanism of natural soil pick-up is less well understood. Sub- figure 8 closed course with 1 "manpower." Since about t hp is required
micron particles will not erode from a smooth surface in a wind of gale to fly such vehicles, it is imperative that minimum drag be achieved; the
velocities, but mixed with 5- to 50-micron grains they become highly low-speed tunnel can also prove useful in obtaining the effect of structural
erodable. Fundamental studies ofJarge-scale grain loads have been made deflections on the aerodynamic characteristics. For a human-powered
using strain-gage-mounted grains. vehicle one strives for the lightest possible design rather than the lightest
The important area of wind tunnel testing for soil erosion is not to be practical design, and hence deflections may be a source of trouble.
entered lightly, and the authors suggest first consulting the soil test
references in Ref. 9: 2. Much of the correlation with full scale is 9:19 Testing for Gaseous Mixing
encouragmg. The area of gaseous mixing includes a wide variety of problems such as
ensuring proper constituent mixing in chemical plants, the diffusion of
9:17 Testing Insects and Birds poison gas for military situations, and the suppression of contrails. These
tests require special tunnel setups which must be determined for each
Over the years a great number of wind tunnel tests have been made of
case by the tunnel engineer, and which accordingly mayor may not require
natural fliers, alive, frozen, and simulated. Initially experimenters were
a special tunnel. Reference 9: 10 gives an example of a mixing problem.
seeking mysterious and incredibly efficient devices that nature's creatures
were supposed to have. No such things have been found; nor are they
needed to explain natural flight. The high landing angles of some birds References and Bibliograpby
have been ·duplicated with highly latticed "wings,and bird power has been
estimated to be in line with demonstrated performance. Differences 9: 1 A. Klemin, A Belt Method of Representing the Ground, JAS, I, 186, October
which remain may be explained by the sculling action of feathers reported 1934.
by some observers. 9: 2 P. J. Pocock, Non-Aeronautical Applications of Low-Speed Wind Tunnels,
Techniques,.AGARD 313, 1960.
Live insects have been somewhat more cooperative than birds, and 9: 3 K. Emslies, Industrial Uses of Wind Tunnels with Particular Reference to Wind
have flown in tunnels for close observation. Machines, English Electric AX 265, 1960.
,9:4 C. Scrutin, The Use of Wind Tunnels in Industrial Aerodynamic Research, NPL
Aero 411, 1960.
9:5 R. W. Gerdel and G. H. Strom, Wind Tunnel Studies with Scale Simulated
Chapter ten
Snow, U.S. Army Snow, Ice and Permafrost Research Establishment, July 1960.
9: 6 Experiment Tank Committee of Japan, Investigation into the Sea-Going Qualities
of the Single-Screw Cargo Ship Nissei Maru by Actual and Model Ship Experi-
ments, Shipbuilding Research Association of Japan, Report No.1, August 1954.
9: 7 A. I. Fraser, Wind Tunnel Studies of the Forces Acting of the Crowns of Small
Trees, Report of Forest Research, London, March 1962.
9:8 H. Schlichting, Aerodynamic Problems of Motor Cars, AGARD Report 307,
October 1960. Testing helicopters
9:9 R. W. Gerdel and Gordon H. Strom, Scale Simulation of a Blowing Snow
Environment, Proceedings, Institute of Environmental Sciences, 1961.
9: 10 Wilfred T, Rouleau, Suppression of Condensation Trails, Carnegie Institute of
Technology, ASTI AD 110252, 1956. 10:1 General
The better understanding of the helicopter that has been achieved
during the past few years points to a new era for rotary wings. The vertical
take-off capability of the rotor drive (without the near-erosive blast of
the VTOL aircraft) has, until' recently, been saddled with poor L/ D and
consequently high cost per ton-mile. Increased power has proven to be
no cure-all, since the forward-tipped rotor, limited by compressibility
losses to tip speeds below M = 0.9, runs out of sufficient propulsive thrust
to obtain high speed while still supporting the weight of the aircraft. In-
creased solidity helps, but is limited. However, using auxiliary wings to
reduce the lift the rotor must provide, and adding thrusting units to reduce
the needed propulsive force, yield the implication of efficient aircraft with
both vertical take-off and good (say -300 kts) cruising speeds. The
ultimate in this area would be the stowed rotor airplane. It remains to
be seen (and makes a busy time for the tunnel engineer) which of the
VTOL arrangements will win out-rotors, tilted slipstreams, or tilted
engines. Possibly each will have an area of advantage.
Returning to the problem of testing helicopters, consider their many
flight paths. They may fly straight up, climb at a number of angles, fly
level, and descend either with or without power. In' encompassing this
range the rotor varies in acting like a propeller, like a yawed propeller,
and finally somewhat like a porous disk. Yet throughout the entire
range the rotor disk is essentially horizontal. Thus to truly simulate both
the aerodynamic and the gravitational forces on a rotor in flight we
would require a model that remained fixed while the wind tunnel revolved
about it. Only the Rhode-St.sGenese tunnel (Section 1: 16) is capable of
such a maneuver. Fortunately, however, the exact simulation of the
rotor is not required for good testing results since the gravity forces are
normally small compared with the centrifugal ones. We may therefore
in general use a typical wind tunnel for rotor testing. An open test section
433
Testing Helicopters / 435
is to be preferred to reduce wall effects, but from a practical standpoint,

since few such tunnels exist, most tests are run using a closed throat and
models small enough in diameter to be considered free from wall con-
straint. It is also desirable to run with the rotor plane of rotation essenti-
ally horizontal to avoid having blades tumbling over their hinges during
starting, but again the available yaw tables in most tunnels generally
result in vertical rotor planes and careful starts. The two types of arrange-
ments are shown diagrammatically in Figs. 10: 1 and 10:2, while one
of the country's most powerful test rigs is shown in Fig. 10: 3. The
r,
Fig. 10: 1 A rotor test stand which is simply adapted to most wind tunnel setups but
keeps the rotor in a vertical plane.
,,
- test setup that has the rotor horizontal for starting and part Fig.l0:3 A 1000-hp rotor test rig in the United Aircraft 18-ft wind tunnel. (Courtesy
Sikorsky Aircraft Corp.)
436 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Helicopters f 437
parameters for helicopter work which may prove new to the tunnel scale of the model. The wood blade works well, however, and the metal
engineer include the following: leading edge is convenient to use as a tie-in to the metal hub. Mass
1. The relation between forward speed and rotor tip speed u, which balances' for achieving static balance may be built into each blade tip,
may be defined as with, of course, a secure locking device.
However, the actual blade twists during flight, and when it is possible,
The advance ratio, fl =~ (10:1) usually when larger models are employed, a built-up model will be used-
QR especially designed so that its dynamic characteristics match those of the
full-scale craft, and realistic aeroelastic deformations and vibratory
or tip-spee d rati
The e ti ratio, fl = V cos oc
-Q-R- (10:2) stresses are obtained.
The performance of a rotor is helped aerodynamically by root cutaway,
where V is.the forward speed, fps; Q is the rotor angular velocity, radian inverse taper, and twist, and the model designer may be expected to.
per sec; R is the blade radius, ft; and o: is the angle of attack, defined as produce such designs despite their difficulty.
the angle between the plane of symmetry of the rotor and a line perpen- The model should be equipped with adequate flat surfaces for leveling
dicular to the flight path, positive rearward, in deg. and angle measurements, some type of hinge lock to be used during
The advance ratio varies from 0 for vertical flight to about 0.1 for 10w-. balancing, and an ample supply of spare parts .. Blade angles should be
performance helicopters on up to perhaps 1.0 for very high performance measured with their slack taken out in the direction of low pitch, since
craft. they will be so held during operation by the centrifugal torque that
A succession of fl values may be obtained, obviously, by varying the develops (see Ref. 10:1).
rotor rpm, the tunnel speed, or both, but it may be advantageous to
employ a synchronous rotor drive motor and vary only the tunnel speed. 10:3 Preparations for Testing
This procedure eliminates the need for measuring one variable, and is In addition to the customary dimension checking of the rotor model,
protective in the sense that the sudden feathering of the blades will not two additional checks are required before running tests. The first of these
result in overspeeding. It also tends to approach the manner in which a is the evaluation of the torsional constants so that the torsional deflections
rotor is actually run. that arise when any similarly shaped body is rotated may be computed.
2. The solidity (J = bcR/nR2 = bc/nR; (J will probably run from This "dynamic twist" varies with the blade angle as well as with the rpm
0.07 to 0.10. Here b is the number of blades, c is the blade chord in feet, and cannot be eliminated. The only alternative is to evaluate it and make
and R is the blade radius in feet. allowance for it when presenting the data. Even a solid metal blade suffers
3. The parasite drag ratio f/nR2. This ranges from, say, 0.0125 for from this effect and would, as previously mentioned, complicate the setup
relatively "dirty" designs to 0.005 for future cleaned-up high-speed designs by destroying the balance about the blade quarter chord.
(jis the drag area, ft"). The second "extra" check is a run to determine whether the blades are
sufficiently similar to "track," i.e., to follow in the same path as the
10:2 The Rotor Model preceding one. A simple procedure for determining tracking is to rub a
The design of a model rotor presents some difficulties not encountered little colored chalk on each blade tip, a different color for each blade, and
with the usual wind tunnel model of an airplane. The hub and hinge allow the tips to strike a piece of paper when they are rotating. A spread
design and construction can usually be worked out in a satisfactory of t-s inch is reasonable for a 5-ft rotor.
manner, but some inherent difficulties arise with the rotor blade repre- .There is more possibility that a rotor will fail duringttesting than that
sentation. For one thing, it is common practice in rotor design to have airplane models will fail, and owing to the large centrifugal force, on the
the blade statically balanced about its quarter-chord line. Such a balance blades special precautions should be taken to minimize the danger of
rules out the homogeneous blade and requires either a built-up blade or a flying parts, some of which may have the same energy as a "forty-five"
solid wood one with a metal leading edge. For most model sizes the built- pistol bullet. Yet, at the same time, the shielding must not turn the open
up blade is not practical, both because of the small size of the skin, ribs, test section into a closed one.
etc., and because of the exaggerated effect of the skin wrinkles due to the Possibly the best solution for shielding is i-inch hardware cloth so placed
438 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Helicopters I 439
that all equipment is shielded, and bullet-proof glass shields for the per- measuring equipment may then become in order for lift and drag, or,
sonnel. It is in order to note that it is not adequate to shield only the better, thrust and H-force, since the latter make the data more useful
plane of rotation since the progress of a failure may easily twist the rotor to the helicopter aerodynamicist.
through 90 deg before the final failure occurs. The customary safety net Torque may be measured in a number of ways, and again the tunnel
should be adequate for the protection of the wind tunnel fan. balance will in all probability not have enough accuracy. Indeed, con-
siderable work-up of the data would be required even if the accuracy
10:4 Special Rotor Instrumentation were sufficient. In some cases the characteristics of the drive motor are
For a rotor test, the usual measurements are lift or thrust, drag or such that it may be calibrated before the test and a plot of input kilowatts
H-force, torque, roll, pitch, instantaneous flapping angle, instantaneous against torque constructed. Sometimes the motor may be floated and
lag angle, rpm, and the various vibration frequencies. The loads are torque measured with a strain gage on a torque arm. All the methods
rarely large, and the needed degree of accuracy * and se~s.itivityp~obably mentioned so far would make the data include any changes in friction
will not be met by the tunnel external balances. AUXIliarystram gage in the drive system 'and not yield pure rotor torque. The best procedure,
when it is practical, it is to use a floating gear torque nose similar to
the devices for measuring the torque of an airplane propeller. An oil
spray lubrication should be used to avoid the wide temperature-change
effects inherent in grease.
Disk insulated The instantaneous measurement of the flapping angle may be accom-
from shaft plished with good accuracy by means of the apparatus shown in Fig. 10:4.
Basically it is as follows: a commercially available wax-covered paper
Removable waxed disk, upon which lines are marked showing the number of degrees from
paper disk
a reference line, is clamped to an insulated disk that is fixed. A pointer
on the blade hub is made large enough to clear the disk by about /-6 inch.
When desired conditions are reached, a high-tension circuit is closed, and
the sparks made from the pointer to the insulated disk punch holes in
the waxed paper. After the effects of a tare run are added to account
for the centrifugal loads to the pointer, this system yields accuracies of flap-
ping angle to within ±O.I deg. A plot for one type of rotor is shown in
Fig. 10:5.
Measuring the rpm of a rotor (if a synchronous drive motor is not
employed) requires special equipment since the usual tachometers cannot
yield the accuracy of ± 1 rpm frequently needed. Special tachometers of
this accuracy can be purchased, but most of them are quite expensive. If
Aluminum pointer the test can be arranged to use certain particular rpm's, an exceedingly
accurate tachometer can be constructed from materials usually found in
Rotor blade any laboratory. Such a tachometer is shown in Fig. 10: 6. Its principle
is as follows: A contact (A) is arranged on the rotor shaft so that a neon
light (B) flashes each time the circuit is closed, that is, once a revolution.
In front of the neon light, and illuminated by it, is a marked disk (C)
Fig. 10:4 An apparatus for measuring the flapping angles of a rotor. (Courtesy rotated at a fixed speed by a synchronous motor (D). To one side is an
Georgia Institute of Technology.) ordinary tachometer. If the flashing of the light is synchronized with the
* About ±0.05 lb in thrust and ±0.003 ft-lb in torque is needed in a typical 10-ft rpm of the disk, marks on the disk will appear to stand still.
tunnel setup. Consider the case when the synchronous motor turns 900 rpm, and
440 f Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Helicopters f 441
there is a single mark on the disk. If the neon light makes the mark
appear to stand still, and the tachometer reads (as closely as can be deter-
6 /' ~ mined) 900 rpm, the rotor speed is quite exactly 900. If, however, the light
flashes more rapidly, so that the single mark appears twice, then the speed
I 1\ is exactly 1800rpm. By making several annular rows, each of a different
number of equally spaced marks, almost any rpm can be measured. In
\
(/)
QJ
QJ
actual practice, numbers instead of marks are used, and a list of numbers
~4
-0 that will appear to stand still and the rpm they then represent is employed
<Ii
or
\ in the operation procedure. The tachometer is needed to get close to the
tiD
c speed since, in the example above, the appearance of one mark could
'"
00
.g_ 2 !J I~ mean 225, 450, or 900 rpm. A little thought will reveal that four annular
c.
'"
iJ: I \ rings on the synchronous motor disk having 4, 5, 6, and 7 marks each
will yield a "stopped" ring nearly every 25 rpm from 900 to 1600 if the
o \ ro-cr 1 synchronous motor turns at the rate of 900 rpm.

The accuracy of this strobotachometer is linked directly to the accurac)
with which the line frequency is maintained. In most cities this is not a
source of appreciable error.
o 100 200 300 400 It should be mentioned that the usual tuft studies 'may be made on
Azimuth angie, 1/1, degrees
rotor blades, but in all probability it will be more desirable to photograph
Fig. 10: 5 A record taken by the apparatus shown in Fig. 10: 4. them than to approach them closely enough for visual observation under
stroboscopic light. For this type of photography, instantaneously flashing
Rotor shaft apparatus is commercially available. The centrifugal force on very light
streamers does not appear to be serious enough to affect the value of
A
these tests if the model is run at the customary rpm's (Fig. 10:7).
Another technique, developed by the NASA, employs balsa dust to
make the flow visible. With this setup balsa dust is introduced into the
Marked disk airstream with a strong light illuminating the field through a slit. Figure
circuit
Synchronous
10: 8 shows the success of the method.
motor
10:5 Testing Procedure
One of the most critical periods in rotor testing is the initial run-up to
full rpm. During that time the blade motions of the rotor are usually at
a maximum since enough centrifugal force has not yet arisen to hold the
blades to small deflections. It would be desirable to have the hinges
locked by remote control until the full rpm is reached.
Usually it is good practice to bring the rotor up to, speed before the
Strobotach tunnel is turned on, and to leave it running at the end of a run until the
tunnel airstream has died down. This procedure cannot, of course, be
Fig. 10:6 Diagrammatic sketch of the strobotachometer developed at the Georgia
followed when very high blade angles are being run to simulate high
Institute of Technology. forward speeds because rotor drive power may be inadequate or rotor
strength considerations may make static thrust an impossible state. A
solution here is to bring the tunnel wind up gradually and add the rotor
Fig. 10:7 Tuft study of a propeller-driven rotor in the static thrust condition. The
turbulence caused by the propeller is clearly visible. The tufts were easy to see in the
original negative but have been darkened by hand for reproduction. (Courtesy Georgia
Institute of Technology.)
power after the windmilling has commenced. Testing a rotor model for
a particular helicopter parallels powered-model testing for an airplane.
That is, in order to save taking a mass of useless data, each value of the
thrust must be aligned with the particular flight condition, consideration
being paid to the power available from the engine. Usually the test pro-
gram is carefully worked out beforehand, and several points are taken
near a desired one in order that final exact data may be obtained by
crossplotting.
Fundamental rotor research need not follow such a program. In
general, blade angles can be varied in selected steps, and the lift, drag,
I
and torque (or thrust, H-force, and torque) can then be read through a Fig. 10: 8 Observation of the flow through a coaxial helicopter rotor using the balsa-
range of IY.. High blade angles correspond to the ascent conditions dust method. Top: Rapid thrust increase. Bottom: Steady hovering flight. (Official
and need only be tested in the negative IY. range; low blade angles are photograph, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.)
needed only in the high IY. range. If the model has remote collective pitch
change, the normal testing procedure would consist of setting a desired
shaft angle, rotor speed, and forward speed, and taking the data in fixed
increments of collective pitch from a value corresponding to zero lift to
the maximum vibratory stress allowable.
Tunnel engineers should warn neophyte helicopter aerodynamicists
against attempting to get too much from two-dimensional tests of pro-
spective rotor airfoil sections. Data of this kind have not proven very
satisfactory for rotor tests, for once in a helpful direction, since apparently
the centrifugal forces on the boundary layer, simulated only by rotation,
tend toward increasing CL max- and rotors typically develop more maxi-
mum lift "than they are supposed to." Compressibility effects are as
expected, and a serious increase in horsepower per pound of lift occurs
when the tip speed exceeds M = 0.9.
10:6 Tare, Interference, and Alignment
The tare, interference, and alignment are not as easily evaluated in a
rotor test as they. are in an airplane or wing-alone program. Ordinarily
no attempt is made to determine the tare of the rotor supports other than
by themselves. This procedure neglects the effect of the active rotor on
the support. Customarily it is convenient to remove the rotor and, with
the wind on, read the various components, including torque, and use
these data for the tares.
The interference of the rotor drive windshield may be evaluated by
means of a dummy shield as shown in Fig. 10:9. In' the particular setup
shown, no measurable effect of the windshield on the free-air rotor flow
was detected. Although this single program is by no means conclusive,
it is probably not in error to assume that the effect of a support stand of
0.1 rotor diameter located 0.2 rotor diameter from the plane of rotation
will be small. In Figs. 10:2 and 10: 9 are shown methods wherein second
supports may be added. As is customary with such setups, the assump-
tion is made that the second support has the same effect on the data as
the first; i.e., they have no effect on each other. Fig. 10:9 A setup 'for determination of the windshield interference on a rotor's
performance. .
The mean alignment of the tunnel airstream for a particular rotor
probably may best be determined from tests of a wing with equal span.
Runs that would parallel the wing normal and inverted runs do not seem the rotor solidity is brought in Ref. 10: 2 and coefficients then become
to have much promise since blade settings of sufficient accuracy do not CD DR
seem possible. (10:3)
a pnR2(QRfa
10:7 Reduction of the Data CL LR f
(10:4)
Rotor or helicopter data may be reduced in anyone of a number of ways. a pnR2(QR)2a
Rarely, is the same system used as for airplane coefficients: division by
CQ QR
qS for the forces (where S = -rt R2), and by qSR for the torques andmo- -= (10: 5)
a pnR2(QR)2a
ments. More typically, the coefficients are formed .by dividing by 11
p7TR2(QR)2 for the forces and p7TR2(QR)2R for the moments. Sometimes where DR' LR, and QR are rotor drag, lb (negative for propulsion), lift,
44fJ / Low-Speed Wind Funnel Testing Testing Helicopters / 447
lb, and torque, lb-ft, and 0 is the angular velocity of the rotor, radians/sec.
Removal of the subscript R and use of the complete helicopter forces and
moments is, of course, another method.
One notes the parallel of using p instead of p/2 in a manner similar to
that used in forming Tc for propellers.
10:8 Boundary Corrections For Rotor Testing

We have seen how the vortex pattern of a wing may be simulated by an
appropriate distribution of sources, sinks, and vortices, and contained
within the free or closed jet by the proper added systems. It would seem
that the same procedure would be in order for rotor systems, but un-
fortunately the vortex pattern varies widely with flight condition. Al-
though no completely general boundary corrections have been calculated
for rotors, there are some special cases discussed under the different "rotor
states" listed below.
Hovering Flight. No boundary corrections are needed for hovering

flight. There should be, however, no. obstruction such as balance or walls
closer than 1.5 rotor diameters "above" and "below" the rotor. Ground
effect, when desired, may be deliberately simulated by a ground board of
2.5 rotor diameters or more (Fig. 10: 10).
Horizontal Flight. The experimental data of Ref. 10:2 and 10:3

indicate that standard wall corrections for wings may be applied to rotor
tests except for very low advance ratios or low "skew" angles corre-
sponding to very low forward speeds. The advance ratio, fl, is defined
as in eq. (10: 1), while the wake skew angle is
x = tarr+ - fl/ A, deg (10:6)
where A = rotor inflow ratio given by
A = V sin ex + Wo
(10:7) Fig. 10:10 Testing a rotor for ground effect. (Courtesy Georgia Institute of Tech-
OR nology.)
where Wo is the vertical induced velocity at the center of the rotor, fps. such that some air is entrained from outside the tunnel stream (free jet)
Note that X varies from 0 deg in hovering flight to nearly 90 deg at high does not represent any real condition and should not be tested.
forward speeds. Thus for advance ratios greater than 0.10 or wake skew
Vertical Ascent. Vertical ascent is the same as the case of a thrusting
angles greater than approximately 75 deg, one may apply conventional
propeller, and the boundary corrections are then properly zero in an open
equivalent wing corrections. In calculating the boundary-induced upwash,
jet. The corrections for propeller data as given in Section 6: 28 should
the rotor diameter and disc area should be used.
be used if the test is run in a closed jet. '
Inclined Climbing Flight. The boundary corrections for the condition Vertical Descent. A rotor in vertical power-off descent in a tunnel
of climbing flight are not known. The condition of model power and size stream develops a flow similar to a porous disk perpendicular to the
448 / Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Testing Helicopters / 449
stream, and the boundary corrections are then properly zero. The three- around the nose. Since there may be no reference area, data may be
dimensional wake-blocking corrections would be used if the test is made presented as lift force/q, drag force/q, and moment/q for comparison
in a closed jet. purposes, or divided by the proposed rotor disc area in addition. Main-
Vortex Ring Stage. The gap between the thrusting flow pattern of tenance of a level fuselage and attention to flush mounting or streamlining
vertical ascent and the drag pattern of vertical descent is covered by a the appendages can materially reduce fuselage drag. Further data may
mixed flow known as the vortex ring stage. It too should need no be found in Refs. 10:5 and 10:6.
corrections if run in an open jet.
It is interesting to note that slow power-on vertical descent may be
simulated in the tunnel, but so far because of power requirements it References and Bibliography
remains outside the ability of some helicopters.
10: 1 Wilbur C. Nelson, Airplane Propeller Principles, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
10:9 Testing Helicopter Fuselages 1944, p. 60.
10:2 Evan A. Fradenburgh and John P. Rabbott, High Speed Helicopter Research,
Helicopter fuselages are tested by themselves (Fig. 10: 11) to evaluate American Helicopter Society Eighteenth Annual Forum, May 1962.
the forces and moments to be expected and the effects of the myriad 10:3 Victor M. Ganzer and William H. Rae, Jr., An Experimental Investigation of
appendages usually found. These include carry brackets, skids, antennas, the Effect of Wind Tunnel Walls on the Aerodynamic Performance of a Heli-
copter Rotor, TN D-415, 1960.
floats, and armament. It is also desirable to obtain minimum download.
10:4 Harry H. Heyson, Jet Boundary Corrections For Lifting Rotors Centered In
In many cases the rotor is left off (even though the downwash strikes Rectangular Wind Tunnels, TR R-71, 1960.
part of the fuselage) but the hub is left on and rotated. References 10: 5 10:5 Julian L. Jenkins, Matthew W. Winston, and George E. Sweet, A Wind Tunnel
and 10: 6 found no variation in drag due to rotor hub speed. Investigation of the Longitudinal Aerodynamic Characteristics or Two Full
Data will need to be corrected for blockage, buoyancy, stream angu- Scale Helicopter Fuselage Models with Appendages, NASA D-1364, 1962.
10:6 Gary B. Churchill arrd Robert D. Harrington, Parasite Drag Measurements of
larity, and support strut interference. Models should have transition
Five Helicopter Rotor Hubs, NASA Memo 1-31-59L, 1959.
--
Fig. 10: 11 Determining the characteristics of a helicopter fuselage.
rotor hub is left on. (Courtesy Wichita State University.)
Frequently the
Appendix
Answers to problems Numerical constants.

and conversion of units
2:10 30,000 hp,
2:14 q = 100 psf; P = 2100 psf. 1. Speed of Sound, Ve'
3:1 5.2 % water, sp. gr. = 0.796 at 26° C. a = 49.01JoR = 65.77JoK, ft/sec.
3:2 "R = "Fahrenheit + 459.6.
3:3 TF = 1.64. "K = °Centigrade + 273.0.
3:4 ERt = 2.68.
2. Standard Sea-Level Conditions.
3:7 1.21.
Pressure Po = 14.7 lbjinch> = 29.92 inches mercury.
5:1 Density Po = 0.002378 slugjft",
5:2 e = 0.962. Viscosity flo = 3.74 X 1O-71b-sec/ft2.
5:3 dCD/dCL = 0.0893 and 0.0876 Speed of sou-nd ao = 761 mph = 1116 ft/sec.
5:4 0.218, CP = 0.468. Temperature to = 59°F.
5:5 3. Standard Atmosphere.
5:6 0.998.
Temperature decreases 1°F for each 280 ft of altitude until 36;500 ft.
6:1 0.191 lb.
6:2 0.141 lb. From 36,500 to 82,000 ft temperature is constant at -69.7°F. '
6:3 0.0039. Pressure decreases according to
6:4 !Y>.(1.i = 0.91°.
p = (1.910 - 0.01315Z)5-256
6:5
6:6 (a) -0.134, (b) +0.134, (c) 0.085, (d) 0.160, (e) 0.110. up to 36,500 ft, and according to
6:7 V' = 102.4.
p = 6.94e(J.6D-O,0478Z)
from 36,500 to 82,000 ft. In both formulas above, Z is in thousands of

feet, and p is in inches of mercury. Density decrease's according to
-:':»>.
Viscosity varies with temperature
<:»:: according to
eR)1.5 lb-sec
fl = 2.27 X 10-8 __
OR + 198.6 ft2
4. Conversion.Factors
451
450
452 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing Appendix ! 453
A. LENGTH Multiply by to obtain
to obtain Feet/second 1.097 kilometers/hour

Multiply by
0.5921 knots
Inches 2.54 centimeters 0.6818 miles/hour
Feet 30.48 centimeters Miles/hour 0.447 meters/second
0.3048 meters 1.467 feet/second
Miles 5280 feet 1.609 kilometers/hour
1.609 kilometers 0.8684 knots
0.8684 nautical miles Kilometers/hour 0.9113 feet/second
Centimeters 0.3937 inches -\ 0.5396 knots
Meters 39.37 inches 0.6214 miles/hour
3.281 feet 0.2778 meters/second
1.094 yards Meters/second 3.281 feet/second
Kilometers 3281 feet 3.6 kilometers/hour
0.6214 miles 2.237 miles/hour
1094 yards Knots 1.152 miles/hour
B. AREA E. WEIGHT
Square inches 6.452 square centimeters - I Ounces (avoirdupois) 0.0625 pounds (avoirdupois)
Square feet 929.0 square centimeters Pounds (avoirdupois) 16.0 ounces (avoirdupois)
144 square inches Tons (short) 2000 pounds (avoirdupois)
Square centimeters 0.1550 square inches 907.18 kilograms
Square meters 10.76 square feet 0.90718 tons (metric)
Tons (long) 2240 pounds (avoirdupois)
C. VOLUME 1016 kilograms
Tons (metric) 1000 kilograms
Cubic feet 1728 cubic inches
2205 pounds
0.02832 cubic meters " I
1.1025 tons (short)
7.4805 U.S. gallons
Kilograms 2.2046 pounds
Imperial gallons 0.1605 cubic feet
4.546 liters F. PRESSURE
277.4 cubic inches Pounds/square inch 51,710 microns
''1llons, liquid 0.1337 cubic feet 0.06804 atmospheres
. 231 cubic inches 2.036 inches of mercury
0.83267 imperial gallons 703.1 kilograms/square meter
4 U.S. quarts Pounds/square foot 0.1924 inches o(water
35.31 cubic feet 4.883 kilograms/square meter
1.308 cubic yards Atmospheres 76.0 centimeters of mercury
264.2 U.S. gallons 29.92 inches of mercury
1.033 kilograms/square
centimeters
Q.01667 feet/second 14.7 pounds/square inch
bt"'\. ' 01136 miles/hour
2116 pounds/square foot
450
Multiply by to obtain
Inches of water 5.204 pounds/square foot
25.40
0.07355
kilograms/square meter
inches of mercury
Index
Kilograms/square meter 0.2048 pounds/square foot
Microns (of mercury) 0.00601934 pounds/square inch
G. TEMPERATURE
To change Fahrenheit to Centigrade

1. Add 40.
2. Multiply by t. Aerodynamic center, location of, 212 octagonal jets, 347
3. Subtract 40. Angular variation, 112 power on tests, 356
rectangular jets, 336, 337, 340
To change Centigrade to Fahrenheit Balance measuring units, 155 reflection planes, 359
beams, 156 round jets, 332, 334, 335
1. Add 40. electric pots, 158 solid blocking, 320
2. Multiply by t. hydraulic capsules, 157 square jets, 338
3. Subtract 40. Balances, accuracy of, 138 streamline curvature, 326
alignment of, 170 summary of, 369
calibration of, 140, 166 swept wings, 357
deflection of, 155 VISTOL models, 368
design of, 136 wake blocking, 322
external, 126 whig body combinations, 356
installation of, 140 two dimensional, experimental verif-
interactions, 169 ication of, 318
interference of, 175 solid blocking, 307
loading tee, 141 streamline curvature, 313
loads for, 136 summary of, 315
platform, 132 wake blocking, 311
pyramidal, 133 zero correction configurations, 362
strain gage, 160 Boundary layer, 99
strut type, 129 drag due to, 379
wire, 128 laminar, 100, 399
yoke, 133 thickness of, 380
Bernoulli's equation, 46 mouse, 99
Boundary corrections, 300 turbulent, 100, 379
hinge moments, 374 thickness of, 380
[, method of ~mages, 301
propeller tests, 362 Calibration, 109
rotor tests, 446 Circular cylinders" drag of, 145
three dimensional, asymmetrical Continuity, law of, 46
loading, 365
behind the wing, 348 Date, use of, 378
buoyancy, 318 Design, 36
'" circular arc jets, 339, 341 breather, 43
downwash, 327 corners, 62
elliptic jets, 333 drive motors, 60
flapped models, 359 entrance cones, 65
450
455
r
\
Index / 456 Index / 457

Design, fans, 44 Models, mounting systems, 147 Testing, flutter models, 276 Tunnels, construction of, 67
flow straighteners, 45, 51 powered, 265 fuselages, 268 cooling, 75
heat exchangers, 76 pressure, 197 ground planes, 284 losses in, 69
honeycombs, 64 strut fittings, 195 helicopters, 433 open circuit, 75
jet inserts, 78 types of, 202 fuselages, 448 types of, 6, 7
double venturi, 81 Momentum drag, 183 rotors, 436 annular return, 7
two-dimensional, 78 jet-engined models, 272 automobile, 25
nacelles, 61 Nomenclature, of tunnel, 5 jettison models, 287 double return, 7
return passage, 40 landscape, 472 Eiffel, 6
screens, 64 Pitot-static tube, 91 low-aspect ratio wings, 287 free flight, 12
test sections, 37 Pressure distribution, 188 missile overturning, 297 full scale, 9
Drag, by momentum method, 183 nacelles, 268 Gottingen, 6
by pressure distribution, 186 Rakes, 98 para brakes, 289 ice, 20
Rear supports, 179 powered models, 259 low speed, table of, 25
Energy ratio, 122 Reynolds number, 3 propellers, 270 low turbulence, 19
tests unaffected by, 398 radar antennas, 420 open circuit, 16
Flexures, 156 very low, 402 re-entry landing craft, 296 Prandtl, 6
Flow visualization, 103 rudders, 232 single return, 8
Fales method, 105 Safety, 82 sails, 425 smoke, 9
smoke, 9 Scale effects, on directional stability, ships, 425 spin, 13
tufts, 104 396 signs, 407 stability, 20
wire grid, 105 on drag, 386 spin models, 281 two dimensional, 20
Froude number, 3 on flaps, 394 stores, 292 variable density, 8
on lateral stability, 396 structures, 409 V/STOL, 22
Ground plane, 293, 362 on lift, 390 .three-dimensional wings, 206 Turbulence factor, 113
on longitudinal stability, 395 transmission lines, 414 increasing, 119
Honeycombs, 64, 72 on pitching moment, 394 trucks, 417 measurement of, 114
Small wind tunnels, 398 two-dimensional wings, 218 sphere, 113
Instrumentation, 85 experiments for, 400 underwater vehicles, 424
for rotors, 440 for instruction, 399 unsteady aerodynamics, 411 Velocity variation, 109
Span, efficiency of, 210 V/STOL aircraft, 293
Kiel tubes, 96 vortex, 332 windmill generators, 283 Yawhead, 97
Speed setting, 107 Testing procedures, 200
Lift, by pressure distribution, 186 Sphere, drag of, 145 general, 202 Wind tunnels, list of, 25
Lift curve, slope of, 207 Strain gages, 159
Mach number, 3
Manometers, 85
Surging, 121
Tare, 175
..
fluids for, 86 Testing, aeroelastic models, 273
multiple, 89 aileron panels, 222
vernier, 88 autos, 417
Measuring, flow direction, 96 bodies of revolution, 268
static pressure, 91 bomb shapes, 292
total head, 91 bridges, 413
Models, construction of, 192 buildings, 407
design of, 192 cavity resonance, 271
finishes for, 196 complete models, 239
motors for, 265 components, 220
air, 266 elevators, 237
electric, 264 engines, 287
hydraulic, 265 evaporation, 427

A. Pope, J.J. Harper - Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A. Pope, J.J. Harper - Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A. Pope, J.J. Harper - Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

T he companion volume ...

~igh-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing

"The book is well

Jehn Wiley & Sons New York • london

The radical open-circuit propulsion wind tunnel of the Canadian

diffuser. (Courtesy National Research Council.) Of ( "

It is apparent that the low-speed wind tunnel, suffering for almost a

1. The Wind Tunnel 1

Abbreviation Complete Meaning

ACA Australian Council for Aeronautics, CSIR

Abbreviation Complete Meaning

The wind tunnel

Experimental information useful for solving aerodynamic problems may

I to produce great. improvements. It may be safely stated that an over-

Fig. I :5 Double-return wind tunnel.

Annular return passage

Fig. 1:9 Smoke generator.

40 mph) and most of them have two-dimensional test sections. Much

Fig. 1: 10 Smoke picture, low low Reynolds

1:9 Free-Flight Tunnels 1:10 Spin Tunnels

14 I Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing The Wind Tunnel I 15

Fig. 1: 13 Vertical wind tunnel with open test section.

NASA; a smaller one is at the NAE in Ottawa, Canada; a 15-ft pressur-

The Test Section is Below Ambient Pressure. This, of course, is a

1 :13 Stability Tunnel

1 :19 Table of Low-Speed Wind Tunnels

1 :1 What difficulties are encountered when testing in a pressure tunnel that

Fig. 1: 18 An automobile being tested at 90 deg. yaw. (Courtesy Ford Motor

.::: .::: .:::

11o "'.,'"o" ~o ""'.,'""'""'" "'~o" -e~ "0~

0\0_ ...... 0\ ~:;t!::~~

"0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0

k = !:::..pA = !:::..p (2:1)

Large advance ratios imply lowered speeds of fan rotation, necessitating

10 ~. rk,~ -- / ~ ;/ x 1.53 X 106 )

Table 2:1 Ordinates of Fan Profiles D and E L

0.075 0.0925 0.0724

The pressure loss coefficient of a straightener composed of symmetrical 'YJt= ku2/2.Qr2w

Solving, the necessary rise through the fan is j

short-chord vanes are used in preference to fewer of large chord. This is

2:9 The Entrance Cone

.2:10 Wind Tunnel Construction

D.E = KtpAV3 AoVo' Vo:

where Ao = test section area and A = local area.

honeycombs with a length/diameter = 6.0, and equal tube areas. Rou

tubes placed outside it. Variations can be made by remotely movable

2:13 Jet Inserts

3:2 Multiple Manometers

Fig. 3:2 A vernier manometer. (Courtesy Convair, San Diego.)

3D Eight holes equally

Fig. 3: 6 Velocity correction for a circular pitot tube near a wall.

'"~ ~- P. Vt = .J0.002378/0.00215 . 157.8

Vi = .J63.20/0.00256 = 157.8 mph Fig. 3: 8 Performance of standard pitot tube in yaw.

Fig. 3: 9 Kiel tube.

3:4 Kiel Tubes

Fig. 3: 14 A total-head rake. Note single static-pressure tube. (Courtesy Aerolab

0.08 f------+----+------f----4-+-'--j-' , ___,t-l

Per cent freestream velocity

Fig. 3: 16 Velocity distribution in laminar and turbulent boundary layers.

is illustrated in Fig. 3 :21. This type of setup may not be photographed