Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:34:37.312Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Computer studies of hybrid slotted working sections with minimum steady interference at subsonic speeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

D. G. Mabey  and
F. W. Steinle
D. G. Mabey
Affiliation:
Royal Aircraft Establishment, Bedford
F. W. Steinle
Affiliation:
NASA Ames
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Currently there is renewed interest in the evaluation and reduction of steady wind tunnel wall interference, especially for large models.

Evaluation of previous predictions for perforated and slotted tunnels suggests that a hybrid slotted tunnel, ie a slotted tunnel with closed slats and perforated slots) should offer minimum corrections for upwash, flow curvature and solid blockage. This suggestion is confirmed by the present computer studies of a range of rectangular hybrid slotted tunnels.

The computer studies are for tunnel working section height to breadth ratios of 0·835 and 0·600 over the Mach number range from 0 to 0·85. Wings swept at 28° and 50°, with ratios of model span to tunnel breadth varying from 0 to 0·7, are considered. An idealised fuselage shape is used to predict solid and wake blockage corrections for the wall configurations selected on the basis of minimum upwash and curvature interference.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 89 , Issue 884 , April 1985 , pp. 135 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1985 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Ashill, P. R. and Weeks, D. J. A method for determining wall-interference corrections in solid-tunnels from measurements of static pressure at the walls. Paper 1, AGARD CP 335. 1982.Google Scholar
2. Steinle, F. W. and Pejack, E. R. Towards an improved transonic wind tunnel wall geometry—a numerical study. AIAA 80-0442,11 AIAA Aerodynamic Testing Conference. 1980.Google Scholar
3. Garner, H. C, Rogers, E. W. E., Acum, W. E. A. and Maskell, E. C. Subsonic wind tunnel wall corrections. AGARDograph 109. 1966.Google Scholar
4. Rushton, K. R. and Tomlinson, L. M. Theoretical solutions of oscillatory lift interference. ARC R&M 3700. 1971.Google Scholar
5. Lo, C. F. and Oliver, R. H. Boundary interference in a rectangular wind tunnel with perforated walls. AEDC TR 70-67. 1970.Google Scholar
6. Vaucheret, X. and Vayssaire, J. C. Wall corrections for transonic three-dimensional flow in ventilated wind tunnels. Paper 16, AGARD CP 174. 1975.Google Scholar
7. Kemp, W. B. A slotted test section numerical model for interference assessment. AIAA 84-0627. 1984.Google Scholar
8. Williams, C. D. and Parkinson, G. V. A low correction wall configuration for aerofoil testing. Paper 21, AGARD CP 174. 1975.Google Scholar
9. Parkinson, G. V., Williams, C. D. and Malek, A. Development of a low correction wind tunnel wall configuration for testing high lift aerofoils. ICAS Proc. 1978. 1, 355–360.Google Scholar
10. Göethert, B. H. Transonic wind tunnel testing. AGARDograph 49, Pergamon Press. 1961.Google Scholar
11. Speigel, J. NASA unpublished tests.Google Scholar
12. Mabey, D. G. Flow unsteadiness and model vibration in wind tunnels at subsonic and transonic speeds. ARC CP 1155. RAE Technical Report 70184. 1971.Google Scholar
13. Moore, A. W. and Wight, K. C. On achieving interference-free results from dynamic tests on half models in transonic wind tunnels. NPL Aero Report 1293. ARC R&M 3636.1969.Google Scholar
14. Moore, A. W. and Wight, K. C. An experimental investigation of wind-tunnel wall conditions for interference free dynamic measurements. NPL Aero Report 1307. ARC Report 31704. 1969.Google Scholar
15. Davis, S. A compatibility assessment method for adaptive wall wind tunnels. AIAA Journal. 1981, 19, 9, 1169–1173.Google Scholar
16. Vaissaire, J. C. Langot, M. Menard, M. Adaption de la method de Joppa à une soufflerie à permeabilute variable. AGARD CP210, Paper 7.1976.Google Scholar
17. Garner, H. C, Moore, A. W. and Wight, K. C. The theory of interference effects on dynamic measurements in slotted-wall wind tunnels at subsonic speeds and comparisons with experiment. ARC R&M 3550. 1966.Google Scholar
18. Garner, H. C. Theoretical use of variable porosity in slotted tunnels for minimising wall interference on dynamic measurements. RAE Technical Report 71071. ARC R&M3706. 1971.Google Scholar
19. Steinle, F. W. and Mabey, D. G. Computer studies of hybrid slotted working sections with minimum interference on large models at subsonic speeds. NASA TM 86-002. 1984.Google Scholar