Fluid Flow & Aerodynamics
why things fly, and why the usual explanation is wrong
Series

Tunnel interference — the series

2 essays on one idea, from the one that introduces it to the one that assumes the rest.
  1. The wall is a boundary condition, solved for rather than reflected. A model's trailing vortices in a closed working section, with the sheet of sources that makes the wall a wall drawn as a displacement of the wall itself. The interference is an upwash — the model looks better than it is, and the correction factor comes to 0.1242 against the exact value 0.1250 that the image at the inverse point gives for a circle. The arrows are the interference velocity alone, with the model's own downwash removed, drawn to a common scale set by the longest of them.

    The walls are in the answer

    A wind tunnel measures a wing in a box the aeroplane will never fly in, and the box is worth a fifteenth of the induced drag. The correction is exactly an eighth for a closed circular section and exactly minus an eighth for an open jet, and the sign is the whole argument.

    part 1 · circulation
  2. One coefficient, two errors, two places they vanish. The two wall-interference errors against the slot parameter, in units of the tunnel's half-height. Both are positive for an open jet at the left and negative for a solid wall at the right, so each passes through zero — the blockage at 1.184 and the streamline curvature at 1.590. A wall has one coefficient and the two zeros are a third of a tunnel height apart.

    One coefficient, two errors

    A closed tunnel's walls push a measurement one way and an open jet's push it the other, so a wall somewhere between them should push it neither. There is such a wall, its coefficient is a length, and it nulls the blockage at 1.184 tunnel half-heights — and the streamline curvature at 1.590.

    part 2 · circulation

All series