Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 22 (1986) 129--148 129

Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam -- Printed in The Netherlands

E X P E R I M E N T A L E V A L U A T I O N OF TEST SECTION B O U N D A R Y
I N T E R F E R E N C E E F F E C T S IN R O A D VEHICLE TESTS IN WIND
TUNNELS

J.T. TEMPLIN and S. RAIMONDO

DSMA International Inc., Toronto, Ontario (Canada)

Summary

Vehicle aerodynamicists are aware that the boundaries of a test section can strongly
influence the measurements of aerodynamic characteristics of vehicles tested in a wind
tunnel. Wall interference was experimentally investigated in one solid and two open-area-
ratio (OAR) slotted wall test sections. The blockage interference was studied using
surface pressures from three scales of the Motor Industry Research Association (MIRA)
notch-back reference model, representing 8.3, 13.0 and 18.7% area blockage. Tests were
also performed using flat plates with area blockages between 1.6 and 20%.
A wall pressure signature matching method was used to determine the wall-induced
"interference v el o c it y " at the model location for the solid wall test section. Comparison
was made between the predicted "free-air" pressures and those measured in the 30% O A R
slotted wall test section. It was shown that a slotted wall test section can provide a
virtually interference-free testing environment.

1. Introduction

Wind tunnels have been used for many years by designers of road vehicles
including cars and trucks. The influence of the test section boundaries,
which can be solid, partially open or completely open, on the measured
aerodynamic loads and surface pressures of vehicles is one of the most
c o m m o n l y discussed problems. Blockage correction procedures, discussed in
refs. 1--5, and their use in vehicle testing, discussed in ref. 6, have n o t proved
to be universally applicable. The uncertainty in the magnitude of the block-
age correction that must be applied has resulted in the car manufacturers
testing in large facilities in order to test at low area blockages and thus
reduce the uncertainty in their data. In recent years slotted wall and adaptive
wall test sections have been proposed which require little or no blockage
correction even at relatively high area blockages. It is important to recognize
that differences in measured results from different facilities can be attributed
to flow quality, model differences or testing procedures and n o t just bound.
ary interference. The various factors and precautions that must be taken in
order to obtain high quality data are discussed in ref. 7.

0167-6105/86/$03.50 © 1986 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

130

This paper describes a program undertaken to evaluate wall interference in

solid and slotted wall test sections. The interest in the solid wall correction
techniques was sparked by the need to obtain interference-free reference
data to evaluate any residual blockage which may exist in a non-optimally
designed slotted wall test section.

2. Test program description

The present study is an extension of research into the behavior of slotted

wall facilities that began at DSMA six years ago [8, 9, 10]. The DSMA wind
tunnel, suitable for 0.2 scale vehicle testing, was used for the present test
program. The test section is shown in Fig. 1 and represents a full scale area
of 22.32 m 2 . The walls and ceiling were modified to represent 0% (solid), 12
and 30% OAR. In each case the flaps at the downstream end of the test
section were set to the position where further opening had no effect on the
wall pressures at 95% of the test section length. Once the position was set for
a given model, it was n o t adjusted for different yaw angles.
The MIRA reference test car with the notch-back configuration was
chosen as the test vehicle because of its simplicity of shape and close re-
semblance to actual cars. Three models were built at 0.2, 0.25 and 0.3 scale.
The models were primarily of mahogany construction except for aluminum
inserts that contained holes for surface pressure measurements. Basic dimen-
sions of the vehicle are shown in Fig. 2 and the models are shown in Fig. 3.

_•'j• 10LT~
0.~5 L;S

4Dlffuser Contraction<\

/
i-
0,41LTS ~i f
"]•'• Wa~l (Wake) Plenum
I/ StaticTap

Adjustable/
R$-Entry - ~
Flap, ~ /---- Ceiling(Wake) Stttlc Tap
Plenum Slat Slot

I I I I

Fig. 1. Wind tunnel test section con~iguration.

 131

The models produced area blockages o f 8.3, 13.0 and 18.7% in the DSMA
wind tunnel.
Surface pressures were measured at 76 locations by means of a Scanivalve
and pressure transducer system installed inside each model. Reference
pressure lines and electrical cables entered each vehicle through a hole
behind one of the rear wheels. A PDP 11/34 c o m p u t e r controlled the Scani-
valve, acquired the pressure data and stored it for later analysis. Pressures
were also measured on the ceiling and one of the side walls of the test
section.
Flat rectangular plates (width to height ratio o f 1.45:1) with area block-
ages between 1.6 and 20% were also tested in each test section configuration.
The plates were m o u n t e d normal to the airstream with a 2 mm ground
clearance gap at an axial station 0.66 equivalent test section diameters from
the start of the test section (approximately where the f r o n t of a test vehicle
would be located). Plate base pressures and wall and ceiling pressures were
measured.

II t
q- 4165Overall Length
_ 1055 _L 1790 .I. o 1320 !
-2--~

T 6~8 ,R 152(TYP.)
I
-
I

R 30 ~
-4- i

Z05 x,.~lj ±
I 1805
.5 k ;5,0 10~

8!2 IR 152(TYp)

1
Width

I -1
Fig. 2. MIRA c a r m o d e l for blockage study. All dimensions in ram.
 132

0.2, 0.25 And 0.3 Scale Models

0.3 Scale Model in 0.2 Scale Slotted Wall Wind Tunnel

Fig. 3. MIRA car scale models.

The full scale MIRA car was tested b y MIRA, Volvo and the German--
Dutch Wind Tunnel (DNW) in the 6 X 6, 8 X 6 and 9.5 X 9.5 m test sections
at DNW and represented 5.1, 3.9 and 2.1% area blockage, respectively. The
results of these tests were obtained and analyzed to produce a corrected set
of "reference" pressure coefficients by linearly extrapolating the results of
the three test section sizes (tap by tap) to a zero blockage or infinite test
section condition. This set of data was used in subsequent analysis to deter-
mine the degree of blockage present in each of the scale model tests. It is
important to note that even the data in the 9.5 X 9.5 m test section required
a blockage correction of about 1%. The potential flow model discussed in
Section 3 confirmed the magnitude of this correction.

3. Description of blockage evaluation techniques

3.1. Comparison with reference data

The comparison between reference and solid and slotted wall wind tunnel
pressure data sets was made by performing a linear regression analysis on a
 133

velocity basis. Thus for tap number i, the normalized s p e e d was calculated
using
yi
- (I - Cp ) I n
V~

for both data sets. Linear regression was used to minimize the expression
N
[(1 - Cprefi)½ - A 2 (1 - Cpi)l/2] 2
i=l

The value of A2 can be expressed as a reference pressure or q correction.

qc _ 1 - C p ~ _ 1
q 1 - Cpci A
where the subscript c indicates the deduced corrected value. A measure of
the goodness of fit of the linear assumption is given by
N 1/2

Oep = N-1 iffiI

The total acp may include the effect of systematic trends such as axial
pressure gradients expected in solid wall test sections. Therefore it is useful
to examine individual differences
ei = Cpc~- Cpref/

3.2. Potential flow modelling o f a vehicle

In order to evaluate the blockage in a solid wall facility a simple potential
flow model was developed to simulate the inviscid flow outside the separated
flow regions around the vehicle and outside the test section surface bound-
ary layers. The potential flow model, similar to that suggested by Hackett
and Wilsden [11], consisted of an axially aligned point source and sink pair
of equal strength, superimposed on a uniform flow, to represent a solid b o d y
in the flow. A second point source was used to simulate the wake displace-
ment. Lift and side force induced flow angles can be simulated using horse-
shoe vortices. They have not been included in the present analysis because
most o f the results to be discussed are for zero y a w and the lift force gener-
ated by the models is small at zero yaw. All the singularities used are du-
plicated beneath the ground plane (test section floor) to provide the ground
influence. For rectangular test sections, the b o u n d a r y conditions at the other
walls can be met b y providing an infinite number of reflections. Five layers
of singularities were modeled exactly and the effects of the remainder were
modeled using a source sheet for each singularity plane. This distribution of
singularities is illustrated in Fig. 4. Equations were derived for the com-
134

SourceSheet
/ /
/ j

// / /
/
/

1o 1o o
o o o
Wind Tunnel
Walls
Body j
8tnoularlty
o "*(~ o ~ Pllno
o o

Reflection

o o o
o o o

Fig. 4. A r r a n g e m e n t of source singularities.

putation of the three velocity components at any point within the test
section.
The wall "interference velocity" is the velocity increment or perturbation
in the flow caused by the presence of the walls and expressed as a fraction of
the freestream velocity. This velocity can be calculated at any point by
including only the contributions of the reflections and n o t the body singular-
ities or their ground images. The distribution of interference velocities was
relatively uniform over a plane normal to the wind axis but showed a non-
uniform axial distribution also reported in ref. 11. In order to correct the
force data an average correction over the length of the body can be used. For
correcting vehicle surface pressures either an average correction can be used
or more appropriately an axially varying correction could be used [ 6, 11 ].
An initial approach to the selection of the singularities was to match the
vehicle geometry. The strength and separation of the source--sink pair were
chosen such t h a t the frontal area and length of the ovoid matched those of
the vehicle to be simulated. The wake strength was based on the drag co-
efficient and the m o m e n t u m deficit area of the wake. After some initial
investigations the wake source was chosen to coincide with the body "sink".
The singularities were placed along the centerline of the test section at an
elevation equal to the height of the centroid of the reference frontal area of
the vehicle.
 135

The adequacy of using three point singularities and their reflections to

model the inviscid far field of a vehicle is supported by the comparison with
a more complete simulation using a panel m e t h o d [12]. In this m e t h o d
196 source sheet panels were nsed to describe the car shape, as illustrated in
Fig. 5, and a further 365 source sheet panels were used to describe the test
section walls. The ceiling centerline pressure distribution, for an 8.3% area
blockage and a drag coefficient of 0.28 is also shown in Fig. 5. Even though
the comparison is quite good, neither model takes into account the separa-
tion regions of the vehicle nor the viscous effect of the vehicle's pressure
field on the test section boundary layers.
To overcome these limitations experimental ceiling pressure distributions
were used to determine the blockage interference. The strengths and axial
locations of the singularities were chosen through an iterative procedure to
match three measured values of pressure on the ceiling, one at the peak
pressure, one at the asymptotic value downstream and one near the front of
the vehicle. Another computer program was written to c o m p u t e the re-
sultant ovoid bodies.

0.1
o Ovoid Model
-- Panel Modal

o~ 0 . 0
t~

~ -0.1

-0.2 I I i I I I
-6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0
X (m)

tTiii
t~
[iL~
t.J

" !

3.0

Fig. 5. Comparison of panel method and ovoid model (8.3% blockage).

136

4. Flat plate measurements

The usefulness o f fiat plates for blockage determination has already been
shown in the literature [1, 2] and can dramatically illustrate the effec-
tiveness o f the slotted walls. A total of ten flat plates were tested in the solid
and slotted wall test sections to cover a range of area blockages from 1.6 to
20.0%. The measured base pressures as a function of area blockage are shown
in Fig. 6. The solid walls and 12% OAR slotted walls show significant block-
age. The 30% OAR walls reduce the interference effects to near zero for area
blockages less than 15%. Four measurements in an open jet facility are also
shown and indicate a slightly "open" correction required for area blockages
above 10% (corrected pressure coefficients are larger in magnitude than
measured pressure coefficients).
The ceiling pressure signatures were matched using the ovoid fitting
program to derive the properties of equivalent ovoids for each flat plate. The
success at matching the signatures is illustrated in Fig. 7. One can consider
that the ovoid represents the combined blockage of the flat plate and its

LEGEND
8¥mbol ~ Deacr~k~n
Mese~ed Predated OAR
X 0 | Messured~
•• 312
0 I TunnY•
~W~d
100,
0 (314

[] A~" .~..__.
-1.8

-1.8
Teet Section
/

Area = A
- 1.4
c% 1.45

Fiat
Plate
B~e
Preeewe
-1.2.

-1~

-0.8
Y
-0.0

.o D []
-0.4 I~ ~ v-QJ llA
¢

-0.2
0.0 0~)5 0.10 0.18 0.20
Blockage Area Ratio, S/A

Fig. 6. Flat plate base pressures.

 137

separation bubble. The mean ratio of the ovoid-to-plate area for all but the
largest and smallest plates is 2.26 with a standard deviation of 0.14. The
"wall interference" velocity along the centerline of the test section at an
elevation equal to the half-height of each plate was calculated using the
procedure described in Section 3.2. The average interference velocity over
the length o f the ovoid was used to determine a blockage correction for the
plate base pressure coefficients. The corrected values are shown in Fig. 6 as
squares. It can be seen that the influence of the blockage on the data has
been virtually removed using the relatively simple model.
The suitability of using the flat plate results to simulate vehicles at zero
yaw can be seen from Fig. 8. The far field pressures generated at the ceiling
by a flat plate and a vehicle are quite similar. A flat plate with an area
blockage of approximately 3.7% yields the same peak pressure coefficient as
a vehicle with an area blockage of 8.3%. The asymptotic value of the wake
pressure coefficient differs in magnitude reflecting the difference in the drag.

Notes : Flat Plates L o c a t e d at X / ~ = 0 Flat

Flats Plata area : 8 Symbol Plate 8/A
Test Section m'ea = A
-O-- 1 0.016
: 2 0.031
---8-- $ 0.048
4 O.Oe2
i . . . . . .-,- 5 0.064
~-- " - 0 - - - S 0.129
--~V-- 7 0.171

-S °'~t s lO 1~
I

-0.4~-h~" ".,'..,~,"

-1.1,
-t.2~ /
-1.S~

-1.e

Fig. 7. Flat plate measured (symbols) and ovoid-matched (lines) ceiling pressures in solid
wall wind tunnel.
138
S = Flat Plate Area
A =Test Section Area

0 X/Lcar
-t.0 -0.5 0.5 1.0 1.5
0 I=.. I ~ = I ] S/A
O O <---.-0.016
ACp

-0.1

~ I R A Car (SIA = 0.083)

-0.2

-0.3

"Equivalent" Flat Plate

Fig. 8. Measured solid wall ceiling pressures: flat plates and M I R A car.

5. MIRA model measurements

Each of the three MIRA car models was placed in the solid wall, 12 and
30% OAR slotted wall test sections. The uncorrected surface pressures on
each vehicle are shown in Figs. 9--11 at zero y a w and in Fig. 12 at - 2 0 ° yaw
in the 30% OAR slotted wall test section. The corrected DNW "reference
d a t a " , as defined in Section 2, are also plotted in each figure. Several quali-
tative observations can be made. The solid wall results show a consistent
blockage error that increases with model size. Both the 12 and 30% OAR
slotted wall results agree better. For the 30% OAR slotted wall test section
the level of agreement at - 2 0 ° yaw is similar to the zero yaw case. Some of
the apparent discrepancies have been identified as model-specific variations.
For example, the pressures on the front of the vehicle at the beltline do n o t
agree well with the DNW results for either the 0.2 or 0.3 scale models.
However, the 0.25 scale results agree well. Further examination of the results
indicated that the measured pressure coefficients in this region of the vehicle
are extremely sensitive to tap position. Figure 13 shows t h e variation of
pressure coefficient with tap position on a vertical line through the center of
the vehicle. The beltline (tap 1) occurs in the region of m a x i m u m pressure
gradient. Other regions of large pressure gradients also showed differences
between the results.
A least-squares m e t h o d as described in Section 3.1 was used to quantify
 139
.... \

-- DNN REFERENCE
+ 0 . 20 BCALEs 00~; OAR RUNSI0$? YANI 0 . 0 DG8
0. 20 8CALE~ 12~ OAR 147
1.0 0 0.20 SCALE5 30~; OAR 182

o s
. . . . . . . . . . . . i.
i
;
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
,
,,
_[
i
i
i
. . . . . . . . . . . .
!
i i

0 0 t ,
. . . . . . . . . . . . i. . . . . . . . . . . . . . "r . . . . . . . . . . .
i i

: +
Cp-0 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

-1 0

1 5

2 0
1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 .0
LEFT SIDE X/L TOP SURFACE

Fig. 9. Measured pressures: full scale vs. 0.20 scale MIRA car.

-- DNN REFERENCE
+ 0.25 SCALE5 00~ OAR RUNSI105 YAW I 0 . 0 DG8
X 0.25 8CALE~ 12~ OAR 151
1.0 0 0. 25 SCALE5 30~ OAR 173
i
i
J

0.5 _ , _ i . . . .
, :
I i
i i
I i
0,0
,

÷ :
÷ +

Cp -0.5

i I
-1.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . i. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . .

i i '
1.5

1 + I ~ I
I I
I I
-2.0
1.0 0.5 0.0 O.S .0
LEFT SIDE X/L TOP SURFACE

Fig. 10. Measured pressures: full scale vs. 0.25 scale M I R A car.
140

-- DNW REFERENCE
+ 0.30 8CALE~ 00~ OAR RUNSIlll YAWl O.O DG5
X 0.30 8CALE~ 12% OAR 153
1 0 0 0.30 8CALE~ 30% OAR 104

I
i

0 5

0 0 ~ - - ~ - - ~ .............. ;
: X X X x ~ ~ ~J~ (~ I~l ~ l ~ / I ~_

-0 5
P I -t- + + + Jr -t-

-I 0

-1 5 i+
,,
+ ,,
-2 0
II.0 .O
LEFT SIDE X/L TOP SURFACE

Fig. 11. Measured pressures: full scale vs. 0 . 3 0 scale M I R A car.

-- DNW REFERENCE
i / .... \
+ 0.20 8CALE~ 30% OAR RUN81172 YAWl -20.0 DG5
X 0. 25 8CALE~ 30% OAR t83
1.0 0 0.30 8CALE~ 30% ofig 184

0,5

0.0

-0.5
C
P

-1.0

-1.5

-2.0
.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
LEFT SIDE X/L TOP 8URFACE

Fig. 12. Measured pressures at y a w .

 141

the comparison of the present results with the "reference" data. For each
comparison, taps that appeared to be sensitive to position or pitch of the
model were excluded. In this way a q correction was computed for each
model--wall configuration that was tested. The results are shown in Table 1.
On each line of the table the open area ratio (OAR), test section configura-
tion, model scale and solid blockage ratio are given. The number of taps
(from a total of 76) used in the analysis and the mean q correction are also
listed. The Ocp is a measure of the remaining differences after the correction
has been applied. Some disagreement is expected because of differences
between models. The reference data were derived from the full scale vehicle
test results (including the 6 × 6 m test section results) and therefore the
agreement between the reference data and the data from the 6 × 6 m DNW
tests is good. The lowest value of Ocp for the DSMA solid wall tests occurs
for the 0.25 scale model and suggests that this model most closely resembles
the full scale vehicle. The corrections versus solid blockage ratio are shown
graphically in Fig. 14. Results from the DNW pressure tests are consistent
with the DSMA tests. The 30% OAR slotted wall results indicate that a

-qymbol Description
0 0.2 S c a l e
~, 0.25 Scale
Q 0.3 Scile

_ _ _ ~ 2 1
400 - - -

-~- .I 3 3 /
..........G ~ O 5 I , ,~" 32 #!
I I ; ,
2oo

I t i
-1,5 - 1.0 -0.5 0 G.r........ 1.o Cp

-201
I
......... ~ 33

...f.~'~" ..... -400 -

•~" ~o 3~

"':"~*""~ ........
"~ 30-eO0-

Fig. 13. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f pressures o n f r o n t o f vehicle.

142

TABLE 1

Results o f linear regression analysis, zero y a w

Wall Facility Model Blockage Number q acp

OAR scale (%) of correction
(%) taps

0 DNW 9.5 1.0 2.06 70 1.009 0.006

0 DNW8X 6 1.0 3.87 70 1.023 0.011
0 DNW6X 6 1.0 5.16 70 1.023 0.014
0 DSMA 0.20 8.32 54 1.066 0.035
0 DSMA 0.25 13.00 59 1.140 0.032
0 DSMA 0.30 18.71 54 1.254 0.044
30 DSMA 0.20 8.32 51 1.000 0.020
30 DSMA 0.25 13.00 66 1.020 0.027
30 DSMA 0.30 18.71 61 1.029 0.028

Test
Symbol 8ectlm Description
OAR~,
Measured DNW.DSMA Pressures
o • 0 (8oSd denotes v/: _20~)
• 12 M e a e u r e d DBMA Preslmros
M e a s u r e d DBMA Preelmres
a • 30 ~ I d dqmctw f : _ ~ o )
x 0

1.25
Dynamic
Pireesure
Blockage
Correction
Factor,
1.20-

o ¢/o

1.15-

1.10-

1.0S -

• a
o a
o.04 O.~e 0.12 • o.16 0.20
1.00
Blockage, BIA

0.050 -

Fig. 1 4 . q c o r r e c t i o n vs. a r e a b l o c k a g e f o r M I R A v e h i c l e .
 143

correction of approximately 3% is required for the 0.3 scale car in the

0.2 scale test section. This compares with a 2.3% correction required for the
much larger 6 × 6 and 8 × 6 m solid wall tests at DNW. There is no apparent
required correction for the 0.2 scale vehicle in the 30% OAR test section.
The residual differences, el, are plotted as a function of axial position for
several cases in Fig. 15. The differences for the 6 × 6 m DNW results show
that there is an axial static pressure gradient which is known to exist in solid
parallel-walled test sections. The effect is even more pronounced in the
13.0% blockage (0.25 scale model) results. Additional scatter may be caused
by differences between models. For the 30% OAR slotted wall test section
there is no axial static pressure gradient but some scatter. The largest dif-
ferences are less than 0.1 in magnitude and usually occur in areas where the
pressure coefficients have large magnitudes or large spatial gradients.

0.05 To DNW exam Solid Wall Wind Tunnel (5.2% Blockage)

p
° o o
o o
o 1.0
o ~ , ~ . . . . 0.8 ,~
0.2 0.~ ~ 0'.0 c," o~,~_ o~ o~ ~l
0 Locoliln, XI L

-0.05
0.10
DSMA Solid Well Wind Tunnel (13.0% Blockage)
o o
0.05 o

~o o o
C P L s - Cpre f 1.0
o 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0,2 oo 0!4"o I
O.g I
0.8 o Axial
co o Location, X I L
Oo 8 % o° o o o
o
-0.05 o
o

0.10 T
D$MA 3 0 ~ OAR 8lotted Well Wild Tunnel (13.0~ Blockage)

0.05 ~ _ o o o
1" o Co °° o
o ,°o co °oo oo.O
~o o ~2 o o'.4 o~e 0~0 o~'.0 Axlel
o -- O o ~ Location, X / L
o o o co o o o
- 0 . 0 5 ~c o

Fig. 15. Residual differences in pressure coefficients after blockage correction is applied.
 Symbol Description
_ _ From m a t c h
of e e l l k m Cp
\ ____ From matoh of
~ " Wind Tunnel Boundaries body geometry

Scale 0.16

0.14

0.12

0.10
Interference
Voloctty odel Sc

0.08

0.04
Scale

~. 3 0 ~
o.o ) " / ..~----~ ~

0 5 10 15

X, (m) Full Scale

Fig. 16. Equivalent ovoid body shapes. Fig. 17. Ovoid interference velocities at model centerlines.
 145

The ovoid matching program was used to predict required corrections for
the solid wall DSMA tests. The derived b o d y shapes that provide the best
match to ceiling pressure signatures are shown in Fig. 16. The ratios of ovoid
area to vehicle frontal area are 1.02, 1.06 and 1.09 for the 0.2, 0.25 and
0.3 scale vehicles, respectively. The ovoid lengths are 1.07, 1.04 and
0.97 times the vehicle length for the 0.2, 0.25 and 0.3 scale vehicles, re-
spectively. The wake sizes are as much as 140% larger than that predicted
using a m o m e n t u m balance and the vehicle drag. This is a result of attribut-
ing all viscous effects, including induced changes in wall boundary layers, to
the vehicle wake source. The deduced correction velocities are shown in
Fig. 17. The correction velocity predicted using an ovoid matching the
length, frontal area and drag of the vehicle rather than the measured pressure
signature is also shown. The correction is under-predicted using this geo-
metric method. By using the average correction velocity over the ovoid
length a q correction was derived for each DSMA solid wall test configura-
tion. They are shown in Fig. 14 and agree well with those derived by direct
comparison with reference data.
Symbol Meaeured Relults
• Solid Wills

0 30~ OAR 8lotted Wllll

Symbol Predl~tione
Solid WeBs - Bseed on
mt~ o~ oea.. cD
8o.d Wslle - Sued on

"Free AirB- ~ll~ed on

----m hitch of sOlid Oq~g Cl

0"05 I

.~------~--.0.25 n ~ 0.75 0 1.0

o ho "'~" .,."_-a" o "-t
o I ~ x o // _ o X/LTs
I -", " o ./o .....
-0.05.
\ ,., " - .-. J ' ~ J ~,---.

_o,1o.

-0.15- ~
Air Flow

-0,20- "

Fig. 18. Test section ceiling pressures a t zero yaw. 8.3% blockage.
146

Symbol Measm'ed Results

• Solid Walls

0 30% OAR Slotted Willis

Symbol Predictions
Solid Wills - Based on
match of ~ CD
Solid wilnil - Balled on
body m~metr/
"Freil A i r ' - Based on
0.1_I I---- Imatch of solid ceiling C;

. . . . . "',~. 2 5 0.5 0.7~ . . . . . . . . .1.0

_o.1.1 -\'~ \ / o /

-0.6- Air F l o w

Fig. 19. T e s t s e c t i o n ceiling pressures at z e r o yaw. 18.7% blockage.

The derived ovoid representations of the vehicle were used to predict

pressure coefficients at the wall location in "free air" (no wall constraints).
These results are shown in Figs. 18 and 19 along with measured pressure
coefficients on the centerline slat in the 30% OAR test section for two
model sizes. These results indicate that most of the measured pressure
signature is caused by the vehicle pressure field and n o t interference effects.
T h e measured signatures in the solid wall test section are also shown with the
matched signatures from the ovoid model.

6. Conclusions

It has been shown t h a t flat plates can be used to study the interference
effects of walls for automotive testing. The influence of the plates on the
walls and vice versa can be analyzed using similar techniques to those used
for vehicle tests.
 147

A wall pressure signature analysis m e t h o d has been used successfully to

estimate the interference effects of solid wall test sections for vehicle tests at
solid blockages up to 18.7%. The m e t h o d uses a set of point sources and
sinks and their images to simulate the flow conditions outside the region of
the model and its separated flows. The analysis showed t h a t a q correction
t h a t varied axially in the test section was appropriate for correction of
pressure coefficient data. A " b u o y a n c y correction" could be used partially
to account for this variation when correcting force data.
Slotted wall test sections with open-area-ratios (OAR) of 12 and 30% were
used to measure surface pressures on car models at up to 18.7% blockage.
These results were compared with reference pressure data derived from
measurements on a full scale car shape in three large test sections at DNW in
the Netherlands. Blockage effects in the form of reference dynamic pressure,
q, corrections were deduced and it was shown t h a t the corrections were very
small and comparable to solid wall results obtained at much lower blockages.
For a properly scaled vehicle (8.3% blockage) in a 30% OAR test section the
wall interference was negligible. The results for a larger car (18.7% blockage)
in the existing 30% OAR test section showed that a small q correction was
necessary. By properly choosing the open area ratio of the slotted walls and
the length of the test section, the wall interference for the 0.3 scale car
(18.7% blockage) could be reduced.

Acknowledgments

This project has been supported by the National Research Council of

Canada (NRCC) under their Program for Industry/Laboratory Projects
(PILP, Arrangement No. CA910-4-0028/635). The assistance of N R C C
personnel, particularly M. Mokry of the High Speed Aerodynamics Section
of the National Aeronautical Establishment, during the course of this project
is gratefully acknowledged. The authors are indebted to their colleagues at
D S M A for useful discussions and particularly to L. Grant who performed the
wind tunnel tests and much of the data analysis.The reference pressure data
set was derived from tests undertaken by MIRA, D N W and Volvo at the
D N W wind tunnel in the Netherlands.

References

1 E. Maskell, A theory of blockage effects on bluff bodies and stalled wings in a closed
wind tunnel, U.K. Aeronautical Research Council (ARC), Report and Memoranda (R
and M) No. 3400, 1963.
2 R.W.F. Gould, Wake blockage correction in a closed wind tunnel for one or two wall-
mounted models subject to separated flow, U.K. Aeronautical Research Council
(ARC), Report and Memoranda (R and M) No. 3649, 1969.
3 C.F. Cowdry, Application of Maskell's theory of wind tunnel blockage to very large
solid models, National Physical Laboratory (NPL), Aero Report No. 1247, 1967.
148

4 K.G. Ranga Raju and R.J. Garde, Resistance of an inclined plate placed on a plane
boundary in two-dimensional flow, ASME, J. Basic Eng., 92 (1970) 21.
5 W.H. Bettes and K.B. Kelly, The influence of wind tunnel solid boundaries on
automotive test data, SAE 741031, Toronto, 1974.
6 E. Mercker, Comparison of different blockage correction methods applied to a
passenger car in the German--Dutch Wind Tunnel (DNW), International Symposium
organized by Volkswagenwerk AG-Research Division, 1982.
7 P.M. Waudby-Smith and W.J. Rainbird, Some principles of automotive aerodynamic
testing in wind tunnels with examples from slotted wall test section facilities, SAE
850284, Detroit, 1985.
8 S. Raimondo and P.J.F. Clark, Slotted wall test section for automotive aerodynamic
test facilities, A I A A 12th Aerodynamic Testing Conference, Williamsburg, VA, 1982.
9 R.G.J. Flay, G.M. Etfstrom and P.J.F. Clark, Slotted wall test section for automotive
aerodynamic testing at yaw, SAE 830302, 1983.
10 G.M. Elfstrom, R.G.J. Flay and P.J.F. Clark, Slotted wall test section for car and
truck aerodynamic testing, Proceedings of the ASME Conference on Aerodynamics
of Transportation, Boston, MA, 1983.
11 J.E. Hackett and D.J. Wilsden, Estimation of wind tunnel blockage from wall pres-
sure signatures: a review of recent work at Lockheed-Georgia, AIAA Paper No. 78-
828, AIAA 10th Aerodynamic Testing Conference, San Diego, CA, 1978.
12 M. Mokry and J.T. Templin, Calculation of wall interference on automobile models
using a source panel method, presented at Canadian Aeronautics and Space Institute
Aerodynamics Symposium, Montreal, Quebec, 1985.