Three sets of measurements in laboratories merit attention. The first, by Dayman at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California, is the most comprehensive. This enabled the ability of the program to be demonstrated rigorously for a variety of tunnel configurations including shafts, flares, perforated tubes and portal restrictions (see Dayman & Vardy, 1979).
Another set of model tests was sponsored by the Dutch Railway at the Dutch National Aerospace Laboratory. The railways had used ThermoTun to optimise an innovative design in which a wall between adjacent tracks in a tunnel has holes to provide pressure relief. The resulting paper (de Wolf & Demmenie, 1997) includes comparisons between ThermoTun's full-scale predictions and measurements in the model.
The third set of measurements is reported by Johnson & Dalley, who used a high speed model at AEA Technology Ltd. Comparisons were presented for tunnel configurations (i) with an aishaft and (ii) with a porous entrance region. Unfortunately, the figures were omitted from the proceedings of the conference at which the data were presented.
Dayman,B & Vardy,AE (1979) 'Alleviation of tunnel entry pressure transients', Proc 3rd int symp on the Aerodynamics and Ventilation of Vehicle Tunnels, BHR Group, Sheffield, UK, 343-376.
de Wolf,WB & Demmenie,EAFA (1997) 'A new test facility for the study of interacting pressure waves and their reduction in tunnels for high-speed trains', Proc 9th int symp on the Aerodynamics and Ventilation of Vehicle Tunnels, BHR Group, Aosta Italy, 301-317.
Johnson,T & Dalley,S (2000) ‘Moving model rig tests on a tunnel with a porous entrance and with an airshaft - measurements and comparison with ThermoTun predictions’, Proc 10th int symp on the Aerodynamics and Ventilation of Vehicle Tunnels, BHR Group, Boston USA, 815-827.
