Search Results

Wind tunnel testing of reduced-scale models is a valuable tool for aerodynamic development during the early stages of a new vehicle program, when basic design themes are being evaluated. Both full-and reduced-scale testing have been conducted for many years at the General Motors Aerodynamics Laboratory (GMAL), but with increased emphasis on aerodynamic drag reduction, it was necessary to identify additional facilities to provide increased test capacity. With vehicle development distributed among engineering teams around the world, it was also necessary to identify facilities local to those teams, to support their work. This paper describes a cooperative effort to determine the correlation among five wind tunnels: GMAL, the Glenn L.

The GM Aerodynamics Laboratory (GMAL) was modified in 2001 to reduce the background noise level and provide a semi-anechoic test section for wind noise testing. The walls and ceiling of the test section were lined with acoustic foam and foam-filled turning vanes were installed in the corners. Portions of the wind tunnel circuit were also treated with fiberglass material covered by perforated sheet metal panels. High skin drag due to roughness of the foam surfaces, along with high blockage due to the large turning vanes, increased the wind tunnel circuit losses so that the maximum wind speed in the test section was reduced. The present study calculates the averaged total pressure losses at three locations to evaluate the reductions in skin drag and blockage from proposed modifications to the circuit, which were intended to increase the test section wind speed without compromising noise levels.

A correlation of aerodynamic wind tunnels was initiated between Chrysler, Ford and General Motors under the umbrella of the United States Council for Automotive Research (USCAR). The wind tunnels used in this correlation were the open jet tunnel at Chrysler's Aero Acoustic Wind Tunnel (AAWT), the open jet tunnel at the Jacobs Drivability Test Facility (DTF) that Ford uses, and the closed jet tunnel at General Motors Aerodynamics Laboratory (GMAL). Initially, existing non-competitive aerodynamic data was compared to determine the feasibility of facility correlation. Once feasibility was established, a series of standardized tests with six vehicles were conducted at the three wind tunnels. The size and body styles of the six vehicles were selected to cover the spectrum of production vehicles produced by the three companies. All vehicles were tested at EPA loading conditions. Despite the significant differences between the three facilities, the correlation results were very good.