Journal of Wina Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 41-44 (1992) 897-908

Elsevier

Wind t u n n e l
blockage
induced vibration

effects

on

drag

coefficient

897

and

wind-

K.Takeda a and M.Kato b

abEngineering Research Center, NKK Corporation,

w a t a r i d a - c h o , Kawasaki, Kanagawa 210, Japan

1-1,

Minami-

Abstract
Wind t u n n e l blockage e f f e c t s on not only drag c o e f f i c i e n t
but a l s o wind-induced v i b r a t i o n were
experimentally i n v e s t i gated.
I t was found In t h i s study t h a t M a s k e l l ' s t h e o r y i s
a p p l i c a b l e to porous body and hexagonal s e c t i o n as well as
f l a t p l a t e and r e c t a n g u l a r s e c t i o n , and t h a t blockage f a c t o r
can be expressed in a g e n e r a l form to enable t h e
correction
of blockage e f f e c t f o r a r b i t r a r y s e c t i o n .
The magnitude o f
blockage e f f e c t on drag c o e f f i c i e n t was s i g n i f i c a n t even a t 5%
of blockage r a t i o , while t h a t on wind-lnduced v i b r a t i o n was
found to be not so remarkable.
H o w e v e r , t h e r e e x i s t s more
s e r i o u s e f f e c t on t h e dynamic responses o f s l e n d e r models
where flow r e a t t a c h m e n t l i k e l y o c c u r s .

1.

INTRODUCTION

It is quite
important
to estimate
the wind tunnel
blockage
effect
on t i l e t e s t
data,
and correct
them properly,
if any.
Maskell[1]
first
examined
the blockage
effect
on t h e
drag
coefficient
of flat
plate
normal to wind, and proposed a correction
method introducing
the model of bluff-body
wake.
His
theory
is based on the correction
of the dynamic pressure
increment
around the model.
Cowdrey[2] and Sykes[3]
examined
the applicability
of Maskell's
theory to rectangular
sections.
Though the applicability
was p r o v e d ,
t h e r e was a s l i g h t
difference
in the blockage factor
between Cowdrey's and Sykes's.
The r e l a t i o n
between the blockage
factor
and d/h
(dep~:h t o
height
ratio)
was m a d e c l e a r b y A w b i [ 4 ] .
However, it is not
y e t known t h a t M a s k e l l ' s t h e o r y i s a l s o a p p l i c a b l e to d i f f e r -

0167-6105/92/S05.00 1992 Elsevier SciencePublishers B.V. All rights reserved.

898
ent types of models such
as truss
girder
(porous body) and
hexagonal section
which are frequently
used as a bridge girder.
On t h e o t h e r
hand, very few investigations
h a v e b e e n made
concerning
the wind tunnel
blockage
effect
on w i n d - i n d u c e d
vibration
though
it
is considered
to be fairly
important.
Judging from the results
on the blockage effect
on d r a g c o e f ficient,
there seems to exist
some s e r i o u s
blockage effect
on
the dynamic response of structures.
B a s e d on s u c h c i r c u m s t a n c e s ,
the interest
was focused on the
following
subjects;
(1)To examine the applicability
of Maskell's
theory and correction
method to various
kinds of sections
including
porous
plate and truss
girder
which air stream can blow through,
and
also hexagonal section.
(2)To express the blockage factor,
which has
been considered
t o d e p e n d on e a c h s e c t i o n ,
as a function
o f some p a r a m e t e r
in
o r d e r t o make i t p o s s i b l e
to correct
the blockage
effect
for
arbitrary
section.
(3)To clarify
the magnitude
of the blockage
effect
on w i n d induced vibration,
and
consider
the mechanism comparing with
that of drag coefficient.

2.

2.1.

BI, OCKAGE E F F E C T ON DRAG C O E F F I C I E N T

Maskell's
Maskeil,'s

theory
formulation

('4)/CDC=I+

ts

s h o w n by

(CDS/C)+O{(S/C)2}

where S is model projected

area normal to wind, C is cross
sectional
area of
the working section
of wind tunnel
(S/C Is
blockage ratto),
a n d CD i s d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t .
The s u b s c r i p t
c
means the corrected
value with respect
to blockage effect,
so
CDC i s t i l e t r u e
drag coefficient
obtained
on c o n d i t i o n
that
S/C a p p r o a c h e s
to zero.,
"e " is the blockage factor
by which
~he correction
i_.~s e x e c u t e d .
H i g h o r d e r t e r m s o f S/C come f r o m
tile process
of the derivation
of equation.
If high order
terms are negligible,
tile relation
b e t w e e n CD a n d CDS/C t u r n s
o u t t o be l i n e a r .
The i n t e r c e p t
I s CDC a n d t h e s l o p e
is
CDC e on t h e l i n e a r
curve.
This linear
relation
is a requirement
to apply Maskell's
theory to
blockage
correction.
If the blockage Factor
i s k n o w n , CDC I s d i r e c t l y
obtained
by
m e a s u r i n g CD o n l y o n c e f o r c e r t a i n
S/C w i t h i n t h e r a n g e o f t h e
blockage
ratio
where the linear
relation
holds.
But If the

899
b l o c k a g e f a c t o r i s unknown, CD needs t o be measured f o r s e v e r a l c a s e s o f S/C.

2.2. Experimental
methods
Drag coefficients
of various
kinds
of 2-dimensional
models
shown in Table 1 were measured varying
the values
of blockage
ratio
S/C.
Blockage ratio
was varied
by changing
the scale of
model,
or the cross
sectional
area of the Industrial
Aerodyn a m i c s Wind T u n n e l ,
NKK C o r p o r a t i o n
as shown in Figure
1.
Drag coefficients
were measured in a uniform flow.
Figure
2.
shows
the
uniformity
of
the
mean w i n d s p e e d
profile
when
blockage
ratio
was changed by the
latter
method.
Reynolds
number was kept nearly
equal
in all
cases
t o make t h e t e s t
condition identical.
S o l i d i t y r a t i o i n Table 1 i s d e f i n e d by t h e r a t i o o f p r o j e c t e d a r e a t o o u t l i n e d one o f t h e model.
I n changing t h e
s o l i d i t y r a t i o o f t r u s s g i r d e r , upper and lower decks were
k e p t unchanged.
The s l e n d e r n e s s r a t i o B/D (B, D : a l o n g - w i n d
and c r o s s - w i n d dimension o f c r o s s s e c t i o n , r e s p e c t i v e l y ) o f
r e c t a n g u l a r s e c t i o n i s 2.
S i n c e hexagonal s e c t i o n was formed
by a t t a c h i n g t r i a n g u l a r f a l r i n g s t o b o t h s i d e s o f r e c t a n g u l a r
one, i t s s l e n d e r n e s s r a t i o i s 4.

Table 1
Model t y p e , range of b l o c k a g e r a t i o and CD when S/C=5~
I E f f e c t on drag c 0 e f f l c l e n t ]
~lodel t y p e

Model name

Solidity ratio

Blockage r a t i o S/C

C /C

,ix)

Porous
plate

Truss
girder

PC1
PC2
PC3
PC4
PC5

100
93
88
83
70

5.0
4.6
4.4
4.1
3.4

25
23
22
21
17

1.10
1.10
1.10
1.10
1.13

TRSIO0
TRS 80
TRS 60
TRS 40
TRS 20

100
80
60
40
20

7.2
5.9
4.5
3.1
1.6

14
12
9.0
6.1
3.2

1.06
1.11
1.15
1.19
1.48

Rectangular
section

REC

100

0.99 - 9.9

1.15

llexagonal
section

flEX

100

0.99 - 9.9

1.15

900
Static pressure
hole B

hole A

Working
2400

section

Iit111111

!\

IIIIIIIIIIIIII

I
Figure 1. Experimental setup for variable height of
wind tunnel (unit : ram)

VNmean

0.0 0,5 1.0

LI

L I LLLj.J_L,

V/Vmean

~ 0,0 0,5 1.0

LL,J.J.=~

' ' I , ,Lz.

"al,b'~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

VNmean
0,0 0.5 1.0
I,,~.L,.,=,I,

!,' ....

Wind tunnel floor

Figure 2.

Mean wind speed profile

2.3. Test results

F i g u r e 3. - F i g u r e 5. s h o w t h a t r e l a t i o n s h i p s
b e t w e e n CD a n d
CDS/C a r e a l l k e p t l i n e a r
within
the range of blockage
ratio
tested
in this study.
This means that linear
relation
Is kept
on not only flat
plate and rectangular
section
but also hexagonal
section,
porous
plate,
and truss
glrder.
Therefore,
Haskell's
theory
Is widely applicable
to correct
the blockage
effect
of those sections
mentioned
above.
It was also found

901

that
blockage
effect
o n CD i s a s l a r g e
as over
10% a t t h e
blockage
ratio
S / C o f 5% a s s h o w n i n T a b l e 1 . T h e l a r g e v a l u e s
found
in such models
a s TRS40 a n d TRS20 s u g g e s t
that
model
outli~d
area In place
of model projected
one should be taken
into consideration
In case of porous body with small solidity
ratio.
Measured drag coefficients
on truss
girder
are compared with
the
design
curve
proposed
by
Honshu-Shlkoku
Bridge
Authority[S]
as shown in Figure
6.
The c o r r e c t e d
data based
on Maskell's
theory
are also plotted
in the figure.
Measured
data show a good agreement
with the design curve,
while these
values
are roughly
30% l a r g e r
than the corrected
data.
The
design
curve was determined
b a s e d on many w i n d t u n n e l
test
data
where blockage
ratio
S/C was kept
smaller
than
5% t o
avoid blockage
effect,
but thls restriction
seems to be Insufficient
to avoid the effect
Judging from these results.
It is
desirable
to correct
the measured drag coefficients
by means
of Maskell's
t h e o r y o r some o t h e r m e t h o d e v e n when S/C I s k e p t
smaller
t h a n 5%.
CD

4.0

-"

3.0

3.0'
2.0

2.0,

..........................

4f

O
PC1
.... ~---. PC2

1.0,

I 0o 00o 0 oO
0 o c,.,~O~o
0 0 0 0 0 cL

~lk, - o . . . . . . . . . . .

TRS60
TRSOO
TR$ IO0,.-,,L...

1.0 OoS/C

Figure 3. Co vs. C=S/C on porous plate model

"&"

1.0

'--~'-PC~
p4
..~,'.'PC6

0.5

~" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0.1

0.2

CoS/C

Figure 4. Co vs. CoS/C on truss girder model

Co
2.0

.
~ (

3.0

14

1.0

_,

|o

2,0

C.SIC

1.0

....H E x < ' - - - - - >

b..411.

~.~

,o''

I.~N

....

0.1

.--.2 k

141 i.(

Design curve(s)
"-~-Co corrected
" Comeasured

Ii

I
i

i
i

I
i

I
i

I
w

I
i

I
i

I
i

50

I
i

- -

100

0.2

Figure 5. Co vs. CDS/C on REC

Figure 6. Relation between solidity ratio and

and HEX models

drag coefficient on truss girder model

902
2.4. Discussion
In order to establish a
convenient and practical method to
correct the blockage effect, blockage factor
~ was tried to
be expressed by some parameter.
Figure 7. shows the relation
between porous ratio (100-4) and blockage factor e.
The
blockage factors of porous plate and truss girder are found to
distribute parabolically with respect to porous ratio.
Especially, the blockage factors of PC1 and TRSIO0 (both porous
ratio=O%)
are nearly
equal
to 1.0 which
coincides
with
Maskell's results, while REC and HEX do not fit this parabolic
curve,
Though drag coefficients
are usually
non-dimensionalized
by
model projected
area,
they are newly defined
by model outlined
a r e a (CDc*) a n d c o m p a r e d w i t h t h e v a l u e s o f b l o c k a g e
factor
in
order
to obtain
more useful
expression
of blockage
factor
including REC and HEX.
Figure 8. shows that this attempt was
quite successful, and that the blockage factors tested In this
study and Awbi's data on rectangular sectlon[4] are all related with each CDC* on a single curve.
Now that the blockage factor e which was believed to depend
on each section Is found to be related to the true value of
drag coefficient defined by model outlined area (CDc*) for all
of the models tested in thls study, measured data are easily
corrected by iteration method where the measured data
defined
by model outlined area are used as the first approximate
values.
Table 2 shows that 3rd iteration gives satisfactory
estimation for the true value CDC which was obtained by intercept of C D - CDS/C curve.

HEX

e = 3 . 3 x 1 0 "~ ( 1 0 0 - ~ )= ~t.0,98

3.o

2.0

REC
1,0

0.0

I
o

Figure 7,

I
5o

I-

1 (1o-

Porous ratio (100- 4 ) vs. blockage factor

903

E:~ .<)D~X
=1.8
O
PC
5.0
tx
TRS
OREC r--i
'~HEX
AbyAwbi(4}
Maskel[I)l
--I ~ C:
4..
I
1 -DC
0.0
1.0
2.0
0.0
Figure 8.

Drag coefficient defined by model outlined

area Co; vs. blockage factor

Table 2
Comparison o f i n t e r c e p t ( t r u e ) v a l u e Cnc w i t h
b l o c k a g e f a c t o r e s t i m a t i o n c u r v e in FlguEe~8.

corrected

Corrected Cn
Corrected Cn
(3rd iteratiSn) (converged7

value

Model

Measured Cn
(at S/C[~]7

PC1
PC2
PC3
PC4
PC5

3.79(24.8)
3.35(23.0)
3.14(22.0)
2.94(20.8)
2.63(17.3)

2.18
1.94
1.80
1.68
1.52

2.10
1.86
1.73
1.61
1.46

2.01
1.92
1.90
1.83
1.58

TRSIO0
TRS 80
TRS 60
TRS 40
TRS 20

1.57(14.4)
1.95(11.7)
2 . 0 1 ( 9.0)
2.23{ 6.1)
2.92{ 3.2)

1.17
1.45
1.49
1.66
2.17

1.16
1.44
1.49
1.66
2.16

1.31
1.48
1.52
1.79
2.32

REC

2.08(9.9)

1.71

1.71

1.53

HEX

0.65( 9.9)

0.54

0.53

0.48

based

CDC I)

1)intercept value of CD - CDS/C curve

3.

BLOCKAGE EFFECT ON WIND-INDUCED VIBRATION

3.1. E x p e r i m e n t a l m e t h o d s
R e s p o n s l z ? am~lltude of 2-dlmensional
rigid models was
m e a s u r e d varying the values of blockage ratio to clarify the
m a g n i t u d e of the blockage effect on w l n d - l n d u c e d vibration.

on

904
Table 3 shows test
cases and conditions.
In tile test,
springmounted test
of four klnds of rectangular
sections
(slenderness
ratio
B/D=1,2,3,4
;D=150mm) w a s c o n d u c t e d .
Structural
damping
# was a d j u s t e d
so that both vortex-induced
vibration
and galloping
may b e o b s e r v e d ,
and the natural
frequency
of
t h e model f was k e p t a l m o s t c o n s t a n t
(2.13 - 2.16HZ) in all
cases.
Surface pressure
distribution
o f t h e s e m o d e l s was a l s o
measured to consider
the mechanism comparing with that of drag
coefficient.
Blockage r a t i o S/C was v a r i e d by changing the height of the
tunnel as shown In Figure 1.

Table 3
Model type, range of blockage ratio and test conditions
[Effect on wind-induced vibration]
Model type
Blockage ratio
Slenderness r a t i o
S/C(~)
B/D
2-dimensional
( r i g i d model)
[L=2000mm]

1
1
2
3
4

5 - 15
ditto
ditto
ditto
ditto

Mass/unit length
m(kg/m)
7.9
7.9
7.9
9.0
9.1

Structural
damping
~
0.0045
0.060
0.0053
0.010
0.011

2m6
P V2
2.7
36
3.2
6.8
7.5

3.2. Results and discussion

3.2.1.
Response of 2-dimensional
model
F i g u r e 9. s h o w s t h e v a r i a t i o n
of non-dimensionallzed
responsive
amplitude
~/D of
the
2-dimensional
models
with
nondimensionalized
wind speed V/(fD)
for 3 different
values
of
blockage ratio S/C.
It is found that the responsive
amplitude
of
"B/Dffil m o d e l "
is scarcely
affected
by blockage
ratio,
w h i l e t h a t o f " B / D r 2 m o d e l " s e e m s t o be d i f f e r e n t
for varied
values of blockage
ratio.
In both cases,
however, the magnitude of the blockage effect
on wind-induced
vibration
was much
smaller
than expected
in comparison
with
the case
of drag
coefficient
as shown in Table 4.
I n c a s e o f "B/D=3 m o d e l " , on t h e o t h e r h a n d , a c o n s i d e r a b l e
change in responsive
amplitude
due to blockage
ratio
is observed,
that is, the galloping
vibration
which is seen in case
of the blockage ratio
S/C o f 5~ d i s a p p e a r s
w h e n S/C i s l a r g e r
than I0~,
Furthermore,
the responsive
amplitude
of vortexinduced
vibration
gradually
decreases
as
blockage
ratio
becomes larger.
In case
of
"B/D=4 m o d e l " ,
the
galloping

905
vibration
is not observed
for any value of S/C, but the vortex-induced
vibration
is
definitely
affected
by
blockage
ratio,
w h i c h I s t h e same t e n d e n c y a s t h a t o f "B/D=3 m o d e l " .

3.2.2
Surface pressure
distribution
Figure 10. shows the surface
pressure
distribution
of these
models where pressure
coefficient
is defined
by Cp=(P-Ps)/Pd
(Ps:static
pressure,
Pd:dynamic pressure).
The absolute
value
of back pressure
Cpb i s f o u n d t o i n c r e a s e
when b l o c k a g e
ratio
increases,
which directly
causes the increase
in drag coefficient.
It is quite
interesting
that
the blockage
effect
on
wind-induced
vibration
o f "B/D=1 m o d e l " a n d " B / D = 2 m o d e l " i s
much s m a l l e r
than that
on drag coefficient
though side press u r e Cps o f t h e s e m o d e l s a r e d e f i n i t e l y
affected
by blockage
ratio
just
like back pressure
Cpb.
T h i s may b e b e c a u s e
the
wind-induced
vibration
is caused by the pressure
difference
between
upper and lower surfaces.
The s i d e
pressure
distribution
o f "B/D=3 m o d e l " s u g g e s t s
that the separated
flow at the leading
edge tends to reattach
on t h e b o d y w h e n b l o c k a g e
ratio
S/C is larger
t h a n 10%, w h i c h
is considered
t o b e t h e m a i n r e a s o n why t h e g a l l o p i n g
vibration was not observed for these large values of S/C.
In case
of "B/D=3 model", where the oceurence
of flow reattachment
is
dependent
on t h e v a l u e o f b l o c k a g e
ratio,
galloping
vibration
is seriously
affected
by blockage
ratio.
I n c a s e o f "B/D=4
model",
the tendency of flow reattachment
is observed
for all
cases,
which is consistent
with the fact
that galloping
does
not occur
in this
mode].
Spring-mounted
test
results
show
that
the
vortex-induced
vibration
of
slender
models
like
"B/D=3
model"
and
"B/D=4
mode]"
where
flow
reattachment
likely
occurs are affected
by b l o c k a g e e f f e c t
to a larger
extent.
T h i s may b e c a u s e d b y t h e m o v e m e n t o f t h e f l o w r e a t tachment point to the upstream direction,
but further
investigation
is necessary
t o make c l e a r t h e more d e t a i l e d
mechanism.

Table 4
Blockage e f f e c t on t h e drag c o e f f i c i e n t of 2 - d i m e n s i o n a l models
Blockage ratio S/C
O(CDc)
5
10
15

CD o f
r e c t a n g u l a r model
(B/D=I)
2.00
2.20
2.44
2.74

CD of
r e c t a n g u l a r model
(B/D=2)
1.50
1.65
1.83
2.05

906
SliD

e/D

I~

0.2'

0.2

0.1-

0.1

00

4= . . . , ,
o

~o

~-

%Z._
'J/D

t.,'

10

~) W(fD)

0 ;

;, - -

02
I0 V/(ID)

~'~ WeO)

,,,

l,"

' -;...,
/D

+5-

o.

1'0

1"5

V/(fD)

: C ,,e $ e
(a) 8 -0.06

(b) ~ -0.0045

,~ -%0.005

(1) B/O=1 B ~

(2) BID=2 i ~

300

t50
,#D

'.'ID

0.015

'
.q1 :+..

II

/~,,~

mJ ~l ,++J,

10

']

20

V/(ID)

~llD

~uUeuU~

10

20

Vl(fD)

20

VI(ID)

F//D

ooq

0,01
o

OIO1~

=
~

e
o

lo

20

Vt(ID)

,/tD

10

,/~1)

""

oo

- ~-.,,,.~,=+,~J,
0

10

-;-+ -_,t.,='~

20

VFdD}

20

W(ID)

~ =0.01

=0.01

(3) B/D=3 ~

(4) B/D=4 i - ~

450

Figure 9,

10

V a r i a t i o n of

600

responsive amplitude of 2-dimensional

r e c t a n g u l a r m o d e l s for S / C = 5 ~ 1 5 %

907
o

(~

q I ...........................

.o-i:o-2.o

Win-e~

TT

1.0 0

--_:_- 10%~

9 ~',#

"-

" "

1.0 0

(2)

(I) B/D=I

B/D=2

q
---

"

" ~ "

15%

...:.~...-C..L.---... ..... i~.~:~..,

T'

,o%1 ~5%J

0,

Wind

~'

T_.Lc_

- -

I
1,0

__

--

__

..

"_

~ ~--.~~'"~

-I,0

(3) B/D=3

~. ................

.":..7...-...~....':~....~._._._.
~

. . . . -.':

,O,~o, s
5%

wi.d .f
0

T/e_
I
1,0

""

'"~-

i~

I
0

(4)

B/D=4

Figure 10, Variation of surface pressure of 2.dimensional

rectangular models for S/C=5~15%

I
-1,0

908
4.

CONCLUSIONS

New f i n d i n g s
in the current
study are as follows;
(1)Maskell's
theory
and correction
method is
applicable
to
porous body and hexagonal
section
as well as flat
plate
and
rectangular
section.
(2)General
expression
of
blockage
factor
was
successfully
executed
through
t h e new d e f i n i t i o n
of drag
coefficient
by
model outlined
area.
This formula is quite useful
to correct
the measured drag coefficients
for arbitrary
section.
(3)Generally,
blockage effect
on wind-induced
vibration
is not
so remarkable
as that
on d r a g
coefficient
though
the
side
pressure
is definitely
affected
by blockage
ratlo
Just
llke
back pressure.
(4)Slender
models
such
as
2-dimenslonal
"B/D=3 m o d e l "
or
"B/D=4 m o d e l " w h e r e f l o w r e a t t a c h m e n t
llkely
occurs are more
sensitive
to blockage ratio.
Especially,
the galloping
vibration
of "B/D=3 model" is considerably affected by blockage

ratio.

REFERENCES

[1]

E.C.Maskell:

A theory

of

the

blockage

effects

on

bluff

bodies and stalled wings in a closed wind tunnel,

R&M,
No.3400, ARC, 1963,
[2] C.F.Cowdrey: The application of Maskell's theory of wind
tunne]
1967.

blockage

to

very

large

solid

models,

NPL A c r e

R.1247,

[3] D.H,Sykes: Blockage corrections for large bluff bodies in

wind tunnels, BIIRA Fluid Eng., 1 9 7 3 .
[4] H.B.Awbi: Wind-tunnel-wall constraint on two-dimenslonal
rectangular
section prisms, J. of Industrial Aerodynamics,
vol.3, 1978.
[S]
Honshu-Shikoku Bridge Authority: The specification for
the wind resistant design of llonshu-Shlkoku Bridge, 1980,