Comparative evaluation of four wind tunnel blockage correction methods for propeller testing

Abstract This study evaluates classical and contemporary wind tunnel blockage correction methods for propeller testing, with a focus on slipstream effects in closed section tunnels. Four methods: Glauert, Barnsley and Wellicome (1992), Mikkelsen and Sørensen (2002), and Werle (2011) were selected as representative of distinct theoretical approaches and time evolution, were implemented and compared using experimental data from three commercial propellers (APC 10×5E, 12×6E, 13×6.5E) tested in both open (unblocked) and closed (blocked) wind tunnel configurations. Results indicate that Glauert’s method provided the most consistent and reliable corrections, producing smooth curves without discontinuities and converging well with open section reference data. The Barnsley and Wellicome method systematically overestimated thrust coefficients, while Mikkelsen and Sørensen’s approach yielded non-physical values at low advance ratios ( J < 0 . 3 ). Werle’s method showed significant divergence and convergence issues, rendering it unsuitable for propeller applications. It is concluded that Glauert’s method remains the most robust for correcting slipstream blockage in propeller wind tunnel tests.