238mph...most Slot cars wouldn't see 10% of that...and for that reason...I'm out!

 

As somebody who has used both full size and “scale” wind tunnels, (university facility), I’m fairly confident in saying it will have no use whatsoever. Certainly not for anyone on this forum, or anyone building model cars at the scales you’ve listed.

Maybe a case to argue for sections of an aircraft wing. But probably not worth the investment, even in that case.

The university tunnel, which was the size of an entire room by the way, had a test area comparable to that of a large aquarium. I didn’t watch the promo link, but if this is anything that approaches “desktop” then I’d only laugh at it twice as hard.

Wait, this hasn’t been proposed by NSR has it?!!?

 

that is so cool , just looks fab
as Gary and Kevan say , not of any practical use at all , but is it supposed to be ?
its a fantastic desk top talking point / centre piece / novelty or what ever you might call it
but i bet they do sell quite a few

Kev

 

Not a tool, just an art piece.

 

The current kickstarter price is 199usd, that is at 40% discount. Excluding shipping costs. Which are about 1/3 of that price (to Europe at least)
A bit too much for me.

And then you will have to use refills of the smoke liquid if you want to keep using it.

So yes, I will skip this too.

 

And then you will have to use refills of the smoke liquid if you want to keep using it.

A smoke jet is a visual aid in aero study applications, it’s purely for demonstration purposes. There’s nothing scientific about it. In fact there’s no wind and no tunnel involved.

Looks pretty, that’s about it. It can be neat to see the vortices in this example but they don’t really “tell” you anything. The speed of the smoke jet is arbitrary. The spacing between the jets are arbitrary. If the product we’re talking about has no instrumentation, and is just a smoke cabinet like the one in these pictures, then it is 100% completely useless. It’s closest cousin might as well be a lava lamp. At that price, all signs point toward that!

This model is 1:10, by the way..

 

They call it a display case for your diecast models, I think that says it all.

 

The only slotting use I can see for a wind tunnel would be to measure the aerodynamic downforce of a 1/24th scale wing car.

Trouble is, to properly simulate the aerodynamics you'd need to install a 'rolling road'. Otherwise your ground effects would not be realistic.*

But then trying to measure downforce becomes a real challenge. You might be able to hang the model from a vertical rod suspended from a strain gauge. Position the car giving the tires a fraction of a millimeter clearance above the rolling road and you might get meaningful readouts.

Measuring drag could be done with a similar setup using a horizontal rod rather than a vertical one.

As for using smoke, yeah, it might help you understand where that downforce or drag is coming from. Could inspire the next development tweak.

But if you only want to impress folks who don't grok fluid dynamics, well, I gotta admit the smoke does look cool.

* Many long years ago I heard that the Ford 'J' car's aerodynamics were all effed up because the body was developed in a wind tunnel that lacked a rolling road. True? Well maybe...

 

I built a model wind tunnel in year 11 physics. Mine measured downforce using a scale beneath the floor, and with a variable power supply and anemometer I could vary wind speed and know what that wind speed was. With that I could vary wing angles and understand what downforce any given angle would achieve at a given speed. A great side effect was that whilst I could not measure drag I could see downforce dropping significantly when angles increased beyond about 45 degrees. The wing I used was a 1/24 rear wing for no less than a McLaren MP4/4. That was in 1994…

This looks great and what it does is visually appealing, even if the only information you’ll get is where drag is occurring.

 

Load cells under the model would seem a much better idea that a suspending rod.

 

The majority of scale tunnel testing is done with the model suspended from a rod, called a “sting”, because the interaction between the bottom of the model and the floor of the test area introduces significant errors. This is because the relationship between the bottom of the model and the ground doesn’t scale correctly.

 

Load cells under the model would seem a much better idea that a suspending rod.

Not so easy if you've included a 'rolling road'. But a more desirable setup if you can manage it.

 

I think most F1 teams found that out the hard way recently!

 

I have to wonder what the aerodynamic effects are on those big, open F1 wheels. The fact they are rotating should have an impact. I think their rolling into the wind would create a high-pressure area in front of and somewhat above the tires. That should produce downforce. I'm surprised they don't model that.

It would be truly fun to spend some time learning what wind-tunnels tell us about F1 design. But you know the really good stuff they aren't telling.

 

I doubt at the speeds the majority of our cars travel that 'high speed pressure areas' even exist.

 

For 1/24th scale wing cars, I'm sure they do and that they have real, measurable effects. In smaller scales I agree that any aero effects are probably negligible.

 

'majority' was a carefully chosen word

 

This project reminded me of a fella who drills the holes and vents on his 1:32 cars for “cooling” the motor 🤣

In any case if I were to improve cooling on the motor I’d use one like the heat sinks used in RC but not drilling holes on the body 🤣