The NACA duct

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Current page

91

Current page

92

Current page

93

Current page

94

Current page

95

Current page

96

Current page

97

Current page

98

Current page

99

Current page

100

Current page

101

Current page

102

Current page

103

Current page

104

Current page

105

Current page

106

Current page

107

Current page

108

Current page

109

Current page

110

Current page

111

Current page

112

Current page

113

Current page

114

Current page

115

Current page

116

Current page

117

Current page

118

Current page

119

Current page

120

Current page

121

Current page

122

Current page

123

Current page

124

Current page

125

Current page

126

Current page

127

Current page

128

Current page

129

Current page

130

Current page

131

Current page

132

Current page

133

Current page

134

Current page

135

Current page

136

Current page

137

Current page

138

Current page

139

Current page

140

Current page

141

Current page

142

Current page

143

Current page

144

Current page

145

Current page

146

Current page

147

Current page

148

Current page

149

Current page

150

Current page

151

Current page

152

Current page

153

Current page

154

Current page

155

Current page

156

Current page

157

Current page

158

Current page

159

Current page

160

Current page

161

Current page

162

Current page

163

Current page

164

Penetrating the air efficiently while also ingesting a little of it has been a concern of aerodynamicists since the early years of the science, and intermittently of racing car designers for almost as long. With the notable exception of rockets, most powered vehicles — earthbound or flying — generate their motive force by burning gas or liquid fuel, and that requires an air supply for combustion and, usually, cooling. The trick is to tap this from the passing airstream with maximum efficacy but minimal drag.

Even in the era of propeller-driven aircraft this was an important issue, but with the advent of the jet engine it became a major source of concern. A jet lives on airflow; restrict it in any way and performance falls off in proportion.

So it was that once the US had been passed details of Whittle’s invention across a Whitehall office table in July 1941 — as part of the wartime free trade in secrets, a process which also saw the handing over of the cavity magnetron, the key to centimetric radar — American researchers began a thorough investigation of the aerodynamics of jet intakes. Much of this work was carried out by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, NACA, which in later years metamorphosed into the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA. NACA had already distinguished itself by designing improved engine cowlings for radial-engined prop planes; now it set about the jet intake problem.

And problem there was. One vital measure of an air intake’s efficiency is its pressure recovery. Air has mass and therefore momentum, so a moving airflow exerts a force (pressure) if slowed. In fact the expression describing that pressure is closely allied to the familiar F = 1/2rnv^2 taught in school physics lessons as the equation for kinetic energy. A perfectly efficient inlet would extract all this energy from the impinging air and have a pressure recovery of 100 per cent. What the NACA researchers, working at the Ames Aeronautical Laboratory at Moffett Field, California, soon discovered was that very few existing jet inlets achieved better than 65 per cent pressure recovery — a startling inefficiency that took a large toll on aircraft performance potential.

The solution they developed, first described in an Advanced Confidential Report dated October 1945, was a form of submerged inlet that was later to become universally known as the NACA duct. Unlike the gaping jet intakes that were to become the norm, the NACA duct comprised a carefully formed indentation in the fuselage, which started as a narrow, shallowly inclined inward ramp and widened with reflexly curved sides to a squared off end.Trailing vortices created along the flared edges of the duct deflected airflow into the gradually deepening inlet with remarkable efficiency, so that even in early form the NACA design offered pressure recovery of over 90 per cent under optimal conditions and incurred very little drag penalty.

As events would develop, the NACA duct was not to see much use as a jet intake but for other air inlet purposes it rapidly became standard. In 1951 the original NACA report on it was declassified, and the design of the duct became public information, available for use by anyone. Racing cars were an obvious application, but it wasn’t until 1956 and the emergence of Frank Costin’s redesigned Vanwall that someone had the nous to exploit it.

Costin, still working at that time for De Havilland, was an aircraft aerodynamicist by training. Racing car design was a relatively new diversion for him and it doesn’t take much imagination to appreciate the horror with which he viewed contemporary aerodynamic practice on the track. For all their semblance of streamlining, race cars of the period were mostly a triumph of hope over understanding.

It was Costin who famously, if vainly, was to offer up the prayer, “Save me, oh Lord, from the statement: ‘What looks right is right.'” He had a rigorous, mathematical approach to aerodynamics, and when invited by Tony Vandervell to recast the Vanwall’s bodywork he set about the task with a meticulousness foreign to most racing teams, with the possible exception of Mercedes. One feature of the old Vanwall to be binned was its prominent bluff induction air intake — an ugly carbuncle on the right side of the bonnet which Costin replaced with a discreet, efficient NACA duct

Other F1 teams hardly fell over themselves to copy Costin’s example, but aerodynamics was, in time, to become a major design issue. Science gradually supplanted guesswork, and in the process the NACA duct became a common feature on racing cars of all persuasions. Or rather, simulacrums of it did, as many designers were lax in appreciating certain subtleties of the duct which were essential to its performance: the need to place it in an area of laminar airflow with a thin boundary layer, the need to align it accurately with the airstream, the need to restrict the ramp angle to a maximum of 10 degrees, the need to have sharp edges to ensure energetic vortex generation, and the need to form the terminating edge carefully.

One or more of these important features was often missing, but the NACA duct had by now taken on an almost mystical quality, becoming itself another victim of Costin’s pet hate: the triumph of aesthetics over functionality. Brake ducts, engine bay cooling, oil and water heat exchangers, cabin ventilation — NACA ducts of varying quality came to be widely deployed in all these applications, as both inlets and outlets, and still are. In pretty short order, due to Costin’s close association with Lotus, the distinctive NACA air inlet even made its first, albeit fleeting, appearance on a road car. Asked to modify a number of racing Elites, Costin turned once again to a bonnet-mounted NACA duct for conveying cool inlet air to the carburettors. It was so successful that when the final Super 95 version of the road-going car was launched it was incorporated as a standard feature — making this last Elite variant the first road car to boast what has since flowered into one of the more unlikely motorsport icons.

You may also like

Related products