Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology

The Design of Wind Tunnels: Notes on Past History and Present Tendencies, Showing the Advantages of the Open-Jet type
Ernest F. Relf, A.R.C.Sc.,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Ernest F. Relf, A.R.C.Sc., (1931) "The Design of Wind Tunnels: Notes on Past History and Present Tendencies, Showing the Advantages of the Open‐Jet type", Aircraft Engineering
and Aerospace Technology, Vol. 3 Issue: 2, pp.27-34, https://doi.org/10.1108/eb029363
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/eb029363
Downloaded on: 01 September 2017, At: 02:14 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 52 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2006),"1. The Intersection between Community Sociology and Environmental Sociology", Research in Urban Policy, Vol. 10 pp. 1-14

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:425905 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write
for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE At 02:14 01 September 2017 (PT)

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book
series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS
initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 February, 1931
The Design of Wind Tunnels
Notes on Past History and Present Tendencies, Showing
the Advantages of the Open-Jet type
D
URING the last year or two the construction
of several new wind tunnels in this Country
has been commenced, after many years of
inactivity in this direction. The new tunnels are
intended either to bring existing equipment up-to-
date or to meet specific needs for researches which
cannot be satisfactorily carried out in the older
tunnels. In all cases the new tunnels are of types
very different from those previously in use in this
country, and it is interesting to trace the reasons
for the change. In order to do this it would be
well to review the history of the development of
the existing tunnel equipment, in order to under-
stand in the first place why the standard type of
wind tunnel used in this country was entirely
different from, and in some respects less efficient than,
that developed on the Continent. When the study
of aerodynamic problems was undertaken a t the
National Physical Laboratory in 1909, the question
of a suitable design of wind tunnel was naturally
one of the first to be raised.
The First N.P.L. Tunnel
It is interesting to note t h a t the first 4-ft.
tunnel to be constructed was of the return-flow
type, but with a closed working section. This
tunnel was described in the Report of the
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics for 1909-10.
An examination of the drawings there given,
or of the outline sketch given in the accom-
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE At 02:14 01 September 2017 (PT)
panying diagram, in the light of present-day
knowledge, will at once explain why it was not a
satisfactory tunnel. There were no guide blades
to deflect the air regularly a t the corners, and there
was no contraction of area immediately before the
working section is reached. The flow in this tunnel
was very unsteady, but in spite of this defect a
great deal of interesting work was accomplished in it.
The next step in development was an a t t e m p t to
secure reasonably steady flow in a tunnel, and this
problem was attacked by using a " m o d e l " tunnel
of about 6 in. square working section in conjunction
with a photographic gauge which gave a record of
the fluctuations of pressure produced by a pitot
tube in the wind stream. As a result of many
experiments the form of tunnel now commonly
known as the N.P.L. type was produced. In this,
AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING
By Ernest F. Relf, A.R.C.Sc.
the return flow, instead of being guided back to
the tunnel entrance at high speed, was allowed to
return to the inlet end a t a very low speed through
the large room in which the tunnel was placed, so
t h a t the tunnel took its supply from air nearly a t
rest, in which eddies had had time to die down.
I t was found t h a t under these circumstances the
flow in the tunnel was very much steadier than in
the previous return flow t u n n e l ; a honeycomb a t
the intake end was necessary to prevent a tendency
of the incoming air to rotate about the tunnel
axis. The 4-ft. wind tunnel constructed in 1911
as a result of these model tests was very satisfactory,
and enabled results to be obtained much more
The n e w s that one of the 7-ft. closed-
w o r k i n g section w i n d - t u n n e l s at N . P . L .
m a y be replaced by t w o 8-ft. tunnels
of the open-jet return-flow type, and that
the 24-ft. tunnel at the R . A . E . is to be of
the s a m e type, indicated a change of atti-
tude on the part of those responsible for
British research w o r k w h i c h s e e m e d
interesting. Mr. Relf, the head of the
A e r o d y n a m i c s Department of the N . P . L . ,
w h e n approached, kindly agreed to write
this article, explaining the reasons for
the n e w development to readers of
AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING
quickly and certainly than in the previous unsteady
tunnel. It was realised a t t h a t time that the new
type of tunnel was not highly efficient as regards
power consumption for a given wind speed on
account of the fact t h a t the kinetic energy imparted
to the air was destroyed when the air emerged into
the room and not conserved as in the return-flow
type of tunnel. It was considered, however, t h a t
steadiness of flow, giving ease of working with the
tunnel balances, was more important than power
economy. There seems little doubt t h a t this con-
clusion was completely justifiable a t the time. In
those days the speed of 50 ft./sec. achieved by the
new tunnel was considered very satisfactory, and
27
a t this speed the cost of power was a very small
fraction of the total cost of running the tunnel.
The demands on the tunnel were soon more than
it could meet and plans were made for a 7-ft. tunnel
on the same lines. This tunnel was completed in
1913 and had a top speed of G5 ft./sec. Its flow
characteristics were similar to those of its smaller
prototype, and there was no doubt t h a t a design
of tunnel had been reached which could be relied
upon to give excellent flow conditions, both as
regards distribution and steadiness in the working
section. This was the state of things when the
War commenced and brought with it the demand
for more tunnels to provide the data required by
the now rapidly-expanding aircraft industry.
There was no time to consider the advisability of
seeking to develop other types, although it was
known t h a t the Germans considered t h a t the
return-flow open-jet type was capable of giving
just as good flow characteristics with a much
smaller expenditure of power. Accordingly, the
equipment a t the National Physical Laboratory was
doubled by the provision of another 7-ft. and
another 4-ft. tunnel, both of higher power than
their predecessors.
Higher Speeds or Larger Tunnels
Even this provision failed to meet the increas-
ing demands for long, and in 1917 plans were
made to construct a new building to house
another 7-ft. tunnel and a still larger tunnel.
The importance of a high value of Reynolds Number
was fully realised, a t this stage and the relative
merits of higher speeds and larger tunnels were
carefully weighed. Decision was in favour of a
larger tunnel on the grounds t h a t larger models
were easier to make accurately to scale and t h a t it
was desirable to have a t any rate one tunnel large
enough to test a model aeroplane containing a
motor to drive its airscrew so t h a t slipstream effects
could be included. As the wing span was the
limiting factor in determining the size of model,
the idea of a rectangular working section instead
of square or circular followed naturally, and led to
the development of the Duplex tunnel. This
tunnel is too well-known to need a detailed descrip-
tion here, but it may bo remarked that tests upon
 28
a model showed that there was no difficulty in using
more than one duct t o extract t h e air from t h e
working section of a tunnel provided t h a t the air-
screws working in the multiple duct were geared
together so t h a t their speeds could not fluctuate
independently. The Duplex tunnel, which was not
completed until after the War, proved entirely
successful and was at the time the largest tunnel in
the world and provided the highest Reynolds
Number so far attained.
A N e w Feature
Meanwhile, the N.P.L. type of tunnel had been
copied in many places abroad, and a t the Royal
Aircraft Establishment a 4-ft. and a 7-ft. tunnel
had been built on precisely similar lines. At about
the time the Duplex tunnel was completed a second
7-ft. tunnel was erected a t Farnborough and incor-
porated a new feature in the long expanding cone
placed after the working section and having a much
larger airscrew a t its far end. I t was shown t h a t
by this means a saving of some 35 per cent of power
was possible without any loss of steadiness of flow
in the working section. This tunnel, like the
Duplex, had a honeycomb wall across the room
about half-way along its length, such a wall having
been shown b y the tests on t h e Duplex model to
have a distinct steadying effect on t h e flow, pre-
sumably by preventing large eddies from returning
intact to the inlet end of the tunnel.
The return of peace conditions resulted in a long
period during which no expansion of wind-tunnel
equipment took place, although a definite proposal
to build a compressed-air tunnel was formulated
in 1921 b y Mr. McKinnon Wood as a result of a
paper by M. Margoulis pointing out t h a t full-scale
Reynolds Numbers could be realised in the Labor-
atory b y the use of a compressed gas as the working
fluid instead of air a t atmospheric pressure. The
project was discussed, b u t it was decided that the
time was not opportune for such an adventure.
The Americans decided otherwise, and built the
first compressed-air tunnel in 1922, showing con-
clusively by its use t h a t it was a practical project
and that it was able to provide aerodynamic data
directly applicable to full-scale conditions. The
importance of scale effects continually increased,
partly as a result of the introduction of wing
sections on which such effects were large and partly
because the increasing accuracy with which aero-
dynamic calculations were made rendered t h e un-
known scale effect relatively more important. The
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE At 02:14 01 September 2017 (PT)
need for a compressed-air tunnel in this country
became urgent and in 1927 it was decided t h a t one
should be constructed a t t h e National Physical
Laboratory. I t was this decision t h a t led immedi-
ately to the intensive study of types of wind tunnels
other than the standard N.P.L. type, since this
latter was entirely unsuitable for the compressed-air
tunnel.
Advantages of Göttingen T y p e
Meanwhile, very full information on the single
duct return-flow open-jet tunnel a t Göttingen
had been obtained and the two main features t h a t
contribute to its success were well understood, viz.,
the cascades of guide blades a t the corners, which
ensure a uniform velocity distribution a t all points
of the circuit, and the rapidly-contracting nozzle
a t the entrance to the working section which reduces
the magnitude of velocity fluctuations to a very
great extent. There was, however, no actual experi-
ence of the return-flow type in this country, b u t
this was soon forthcoming as the result of tests
upon model tunnels made both a t the National
Physical Laboratory and the Royal Aircraft
Establishment. The experiments a t the former
establishment were directed to the development of
a design for the compressed-air tunnel, while those
a t the latter were conducted in order t o prepare a
design for a very large atmospheric tunnel. The
tests on the compressed-air tunnel model showed
TABLE OF POWER
Tunnel. Type.
Closed-working section no-return
R.A.E. 7-ft. N o . 2...... As above, b u t with expanding cone
Open-jet, single-return
R.A.E. New 5-ft. tunnel.... Open-jet, single-return
American propeller research tunnel .. Open-jet, double-return
N . P . L . proposed new tunnels.... Open-jet, double-return
N . P . L . compressed-air tunnel .. Open-jet, annular-return
AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING
t h a t in this case, where there is radial symmetry of
the return duct, guide blades could be dispensed
with a t the corners, and t h a t it was only necessary
to provide a few radial blades in the annular return
duct to eliminate a n y tendency of the air t o swirl
about the tunnel axis. A honeycomb a t t h e
entrance to the contracting nozzle was found to be
advantageous. The elimination of guide blades
was a great simplification in construction, as these
blades would have to be bent round into circles
instead of being straight, as in the Göttingen tunnel,
and would have been very difficult to make a n d
assemble correctly. The ratio of contraction a t
the nozzle was made as large as possible, as it was
realised t h a t both the steadiness and the power
factor would be improved as this ratio was in-
creased; t h e limitation in t h e compressed-air
tunnel is the size of the containing shell, t h e cost
of which increases enormously with increasing
diameter. The experiments made a t Farnborough
confirmed the Göttingen opinion t h a t a perfectly
satisfactory single-duct return-flow tunnel can be
designed, and threw much light on the correct design
of the guide blades a t the corners of the duct.
They showed also t h a t model tests would not in
this case give a good forecast of the power factor
of the full-size tunnel on account of the fact t h a t
the model guide-blades are working a t a very low
Reynolds Number and accordingly have a very high
profile-drag coefficient. The Royal Aircraft Estab-
lishment accordingly decided to replace their old
4-ft. N.P.L.-type tunnel b y a 5-ft. open-jet tunnel
built on the lines indicated b y t h e model. This
tunnel is now completed and serves the double
purpose of giving more definite data for the design
of a 24-ft. tunnel and providing a very much better
tunnel in place of the old one. As mentioned in
the review of research last month* a similar course
of action has been proposed a t the National Physical
Laboratory in order to modernise a n d increase the
equipment there.
Compactness of Return-Flow T y p e
The return-flow tunnel is so compact t h a t it
is easily possible to house two tunnels of
this type in a room originally designed for
one N.P.L.-type of t h e same size of working
section. If this project is carried out, the tunnels
will probably be of the symmetrical type with two
return-ducts, one above a n d the other below t h e
jet, as this form of construction suits the available
space better than the single duct. A model 1-ft.
tunnel has been made and tested and seems t o
show t h a t there is very little to choose between t h e
single and double-return duct types. A certain
amount of guide-blade adjustment is necessary in
either case to secure t h e best possible distribution
of velocity in t h e jet, b u t it appears t h a t in either
type the distribution can easily be made as uniform
as is necessary, and incidentally quite as uniform
as in the N.P.L. type of tunnel. The power required
for running t h e tunnel is a little higher with t h e
double-return duct, since in this type there is more
wall area in the ducts for the same size j e t and con-
sequently more loss in skin friction, b u t t h e
difference is not great and the choice is largely a
matter of convenience. If a tunnel is to be erected
in a low building, the single-duct type is certainly
the most convenient, as the return duct can be
placed a t one side of the jet, leaving free access t o
the airstream on the other side. If, however, a
high and narrow space is available the twin-duct
type with one return duct above a n d the other
below the j e t is very convenient, although it would
still be possible to use a single duct, either above or
below the jet. For a very large wind tunnel the
single-return seems best, on account of t h e free
access it allows to the working section. T h e
American 20-ft. tunnel is of t h e double-return-flow
* "Aerodynamic Research in 1930," By E. F. Relf. AIRCRAFT
ENGINEERING, Vol. II, January 1930, p. 13.
FACTORS.
Power F a c t o r .
Size of
Working Section.
duct 4 ft. square 1·6
7 ft. square a n d (average value)
7 ft. by 14 ft.
(Duplex)
7 ft. square 0·89
duct 7·2 ft. circular 0·68
duct 5 ft. circular 0·38
duct 20 ft. circular 0·62
duct 7 ft. 6 in. or 0·48
8 ft. circular (estimated from 1-ft. model)
0·48
duct 6 ft. circular (estimated from model)
February, 1931
type and it is impossible to take a complete aero-
plane through t h e doors in the return duct t o the
j e t ; the wings have to be placed in position in the
tunnel itself. In designing the 24-ft. tunnel to be
erected a t t h e Royal Aircraft Establishment,
Mr. McKinnon Wood has adopted the single-return
duct form mainly on the grounds of accessibility,
and has expressed t h e opinion t h a t the ability to
p u t a complete machine into position in the tunnel
without a n y re-assembly of parts will add very
materially to t h e expedition with which tests can
be carried out.
We have traced the general lines of wind-tunnel
development in this country from the early days
of aerodynamic research to the present time and
have noted the extensive model experiments recently
made upon small tunnels in order t o develop the
return-flow type.
Comparison of the T w o Types
It remains to discuss briefly t h e advantages
of this kind of tunnel as compared with the
N.P.L. type, which, in spite of its admitted
inefficiency as regards power consumption, has
proved a very valuable instrument and has, in fact,
provided practically all the basic data for our
designers until quite recently. In the first place,
it now seems quite clear t h a t the return-flow type
of tunnel, either with an open or closed jet, can
be made to give a flow in the working section a t
least as uniform as in the older type, so t h a t we
may fairly state t h a t as regards the mere production
of a steady and uniform stream of air there is
nothing to choose between the two. When it
comes to the cost of producing t h a t air stream,
however, the choice is, in all respects, in favour of
the newer type. The return-flow tunnel is much
more compact, and for a given performance requires
much less power. There is thus a considerable
saving of money, both on first cost and maintenance.
The tunnel itself is probably a t least as costly as
the N.P.L. type, b u t the containing building can
be made very much smaller. As regards power, it
may be useful to give, as far as they are known, the
power factors of some of the later tunnels, with the
figures for the N.P.L. type for comparison (see table).
I t is not certain t h a t the figures given are exact, or
all estimated on precisely the same basis, but the
differences are so striking t h a t no great accuracy
is needed for comparison purposes. Outline
drawings of the tunnels are given in the diagram,
so t h a t their general form m a y be seen a t a glance
for comparison.
The power factor, as stated above, is defined as
the ratio of the brake power of the driving motor
to the kinetic energy per second passing t h e working
section, both being, of course, in the same units.
Thus, if V is t h e speed in ft. per sec., A the cross-
sectional area of t h e working section in sq. ft., and
P the brake horse-power:—
The value given for the proposed new N.P.L.
tunnels was estimated from model tests, using
Mr. McKinnon Wood's results on his 5-ft. tunnel
and the 1-ft. model of it as a guide in extrapolation.
In the case of the compressed-air tunnel the extra-
polation to full scale is not so difficult as the absence
of small guide-blades leads to a much smaller
variation of power factor over the model range of
speeds.
Power Economy
The table brings out very strongly the enormous
saving of power possible with the return-flow
tunnel, or alternatively t h e much higher wind
speed available for a specified power. The power
economy can be still further increased b y using
a closed instead of an open jet, as a consider-
able amount of power is lost as a result of the
communication of energy to the air immediately
outside the free jet, and the " s p i l l i n g " which occurs
a t the collector cone. For a very high-speed tunnel
this additional saving would be well worth while;
for ordinary speeds it is doubtful whether the saving
would compensate for the loss of the great con-
venience of t h e accessibility of the open jet.
This question of accessibility is indeed as great,
if not a greater, advantage of the return-flow type
of tunnel than the economy of power. In the
N.P.L. type of tunnel each model t o be tested must
be fitted u p in the tunnel itself. The balances are
fixed either on the roof or under the floor and the
necessary attachments to them must be made
in situ. With the open-jet type, however, it is
possible to assemble the model complete with its
balances on a frame outside the tunnel and only to
place it in the air stream immediately before taking
observations. The saving of time in changing from
{Concluded on page 34.)
 34
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE At 02:14 01 September 2017 (PT)
The Design of W i n d Tunnels
one experiment to another is obvious, and is a very
important factor in the running cost, especially in
the case of a tunnel used for development tests on
many models. The saving in the case of long
researches is naturally less, since the model may not
be removed from the tunnel for days or even weeks,
b u t even in this case rapid access to the model is a
distinct asset, especially in cases where it is desired
to study the nature of the air-flow near the model
by the use of smoke or streamers. This question
of accessibility is no new one, for Eiffel had employed
separate frames wheeled into the tunnel as required,
before the first tunnel was built in England. A
word might well be said here as to the merits of
the Eiffel type of tunnel. While no comparative
data are available, it seems probable that provided
the collector is of a good shape the flow in the
open-jet of the Eiffel type should be quite as
uniform as in any other type, and probably con-
siderably less turbulent. The power factor would
be high, probably about the same as in the N.P.L.
type. The Eiffel tunnel thus appears to have all
the main advantages of the return-flow type, but
without the low-power factor of the latter.
Regarding the general question of turbulence in
wind tunnels, it is exceedingly difficult to form any
opinion of what is desirable. It may be argued
t h a t the ideal is a turbulence-free tunnel on the
grounds t h a t this corresponds most nearly with
motion through still air. The air, however, is
rarely still, and the degree of turbulence in a wind
m a y well be comparable with t h a t in an ordinary
wind tunnel. The only tests known to the writer
which bear on this point were some made by the
late Mr. J. R. Pannell on the drag of a sphere in
free air and in the tunnel. These certainly indicate
a tendency for the critical Reynolds Number to
be lower in free air, as though the natural wind
were more turbulent than the flow in a N.P.L.-type
AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING
By E. F. Relf
(Concluded from page 28)
tunnel. In the measurement of the drag of stream-
line bodies there is no doubt t h a t better consistency
is obtained if the tunnel flow is thoroughly turbu-
lent, but this may only be because our present state
of knowledge of the influence of initial turbulence
on conditions in the boundary layer is too meagre
to enable us to analyse the effects in detail. As
regards the actual degree of turbulence in different
tunnels, it would appear from such evidence as is
available on the drag of spheres, cylinders, and
streamline bodies, that the N.P.L. type is probably
the most turbulent, and t h a t the effective turbulence
of the return-flow type decreases as the ratio of
contraction a t the entrance nozzle is increased.
The Eiffel type, as mentioned above, should be
fairly non-turbulent, since it combines the effect
of a contracting entry with the intake of air from
a region of comparative stillness. In this connection
it may be mentioned t h a t some tentative experi-
ments have recently been made at the National
Physical Laboratory to explore the possibility of
constructing a turbulence-free tunnel, should such
a tunnel prove to be desirable for special investi-
gations. By using a very large contraction of the
intake and sucking air from a large room it has
been found possible to produce a (low in which the
velocity fluctuations, as recorded by a hot-wire
anemometer, are no more than one or two per cent
of those found in a standard N.P.L.-type tunnel.
It is probable, however, as has been pointed out
by Professor G. I. Taylor, t h a t the contracting
intake reduces the longitudinal fluctuations of speed
but increases the lateral ones, so that it is by no
means certain t h a t the above achievement indicates
real freedom from turbulence. The whole question
of turbulence and its effects is of great importance
and is the subject of much contemporary research
work, and it is as yet too early to be able to state
February, 1931
which type of wind tunnel is the most desirable in
this respect.
There is one other important point in which the
open-jet tunnel differs from the closed-jet. This is
the influence of the constraint of the stream upon
the forces measured on a model, and the nature of
the corrections which must be applied to render the
results to free-air conditions. As regards tests of
wings, there is little to choose, as the Prandtl theory
indicates that the corrections are of the same
magnitude, but of opposite sign in the two cases.
The correction to the drag of a streamline body is
only about one-quarter as great in the open-jet as
it is in the closed-jet, but with models of normal
size this correction is so very small that the decrease
is of little importance. In the case of airscrew
tests, however, the open-jet is a t a distinct advan-
tage, for the corrections which it entails are very
small, even for a screw of half the jet diameter,
whereas with the closed-jet tunnel the corrections
under these conditions would be very large and
troublesome.
In conclusion, it may fairly be said that the
modern types of return-flow tunnel have been
proved to be more economical, both in cost and
maintenance, than the standard N.P.L. type, and
to be more convenient as regards conditions of
experimenting. It is quite likely t h a t if the War
had not occurred the merits of the Göttingen type
of tunnel would have been explored earlier in this
country and we might now have possessed more
tunnels of this type. There is little doubt that
any tunnels constructed in the near future will be
of the return-flow type, b u t it will always be con-
venient to have tunnels of the N.P.L. type, if only
to examine doubtful cases of the effect of tunnel
constraint, and to study further the important
question of the effects of varying types of initial
tunnel turbulence.