Magnetic Suspension — Today’s Marvel, Tomorrow’s Tool

  • Pierce L. Lawing


There have been more than a dozen Magnetic Suspension Systems (MSS) built and used during the past 30 years (references 1, 2 and 3). There are now six systems in use around the world. All are small, and generate inadequate levels of Reynolds number for simulation purposes. Because of advances in supporting technologies, and the continued advocacy and development of MSS by Langley Research Center, it is now possible to build MSSs for large tunnels. Advances in superconductivity, large magnet construction, computers, automatic control techniques, and innovation in MSS design, make the use of MSS with large tunnels both possible and very attractive. References 4, 5, and 6 deal with the systems aspect of integrating MSS into large tunnels. Reference 7 updates the status of MSS research.


Mach Number Wind Tunnel Delta Wing Aerodynamic Coefficient Magnetic Suspension 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Tournier, Marcel; and Laurenceau, P.: Suspension Magnetique d’une Marquette en Soufflerie. (Magnetic Suspension of a Model in a Wind Tunnel). La Recherche Aeronautique, no. 59, July-Aug. 1957, pp. 21–27.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tuttle, M. H.; Kilgore, R. A.; and Boyden, R. P.: Magnetic Suspension and Balance Systems. A Selected, Annotated Bibliography. NASA TM-84661, July 1983.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boyden, Richmond P.: A Review of Magnetic Suspension and Balance Systems. AIAA 15th Aerodynamic Testing Conference, May 18–20, 1988, San Diego, CA. AIAA Paper No. 88–2009.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bloom, H. L.; et al: Design Concepts and Cost Studies for Magnetic Suspension and Balance Systems. NASA CR-165917, 1982.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Britcher, C. P.: Progress Towards Large Wind Tunnel Magnetic Suspension and Balance Systems. AIAA Paper No. 84–0413, 1984.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boom, R. W.; Eyssa, Y. M.; McIntosh, G. E.; and Abdelsalam, M. K.: Magnetic Suspension and Balance System Advanced Study. NASA CR-3937, 1985.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boyden, Richmond P.; Britcher, Colin P.; and Tcheng, Ping.: Status of Wind Tunnel Magnetic Suspension Research. SAE 851898, Oct. 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    AIAA 14th Aerodynamic Testing Conference, West Palm Beach Florida, March 5–7, 1986: AIAA CP 861.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barnwell, R. W.; Edwards, C. L. W.; Kilgore, R. A.; and Dress, D. A.: Optimum Transonic Wind Tunnel. AIAA No. 86–0755, March 1986.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bushnell, D. M.; and Trimpi, R. L.: Supersonic Wind Tunnel Optimization. AIAA No. 86–0773, March 1986.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dietz, W. E.; and Altstatt, M. C.: Experimental Investigation of Support Interference on an Ogive-Cylinder at High Incidence. J. Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 16, Jan-Feb. 1979, pp 67–68. See also AIAA Paper 78–165, Jan. 1978.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johnson, Joseph L., Jr.; Grafton, Sue B.; and Yip, Long P.: Exploratory Investigation of Vortex Bursting on the High-Angle-of-Attack Lateral-Directional Stability Characteristics of Highly-Swept Wings. AIAA Paper No. 80–0463, March 1980.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Price, Earl A., Jr.: An Investigation of F-16 Nozzle-Afterbody Forces at Transonic Mach Numbers with Emphasis on Support System Interference. AEDC-TR-79–56, AFAPL-TR-2099, December 1979.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tuttle, Marie H. and Lawing, Pierce L.: Support Interference of Wind Tunnel Models — A Selective Annotated Bibliography. Supplement to NASA TM 81909, May 1984.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dress, David A.: Drag Measurements on a Laminar-Flow Body of Revolution in the 13-Inch Magnetic Suspension and Balance System. NASA TP 2895, April 1989.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Davenport, E. E.; and Kilgore, R. A.: Dynamic-Stability Tests of an Aircraft Escape Module at Mach Numbers From 0.40 to 2.16. NASA TM-X-72680, April 1975.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    MacWilkinson, D. G.; Blackerby, W. T.; and Paterson, J. H.: Correlation of Full-Scale Drag Predictions With Flight Measurements on the C-141A Aircraft—Phase II, Wind Tunnel Test, Analysis, and Prediction Techniques. Volume I—Drag Predictions, Wind Tunnel Data Analysis and Correlation. NASA CR-2333, 1974.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Arnold, R. J.; and Epstein, C. S.: Store Separation Flight Testing. AGARD-AG-300-Vol.5, April, 1986.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Billingsley, J. P.; Burt, R. H.; and Best, J. T.: Store Separation Testing Techniques at the Arnold Engineering Development Center. AEDC-TR-79–1, March 1979.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Covert, Eugene E.: Wind Tunnel Simulation of Stores Jettison With the Aid of an Artificial Gravity Generated by Magnetic Fields, AIAA Journal of Aircraft, Volume 4, No. 1, 1967.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Killpatrick, Joe: New Developments in the Ring Laser Gryo. Scientific Honeyweller, Vol. 8, No. 1, Fall 1987. ISSN 0196–8440.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lawing, Pierce L.; Dress, David A.; and Kilgore, Robert A.: Potential Benefits of Magnetic Suspension and Balance Systems. NASA TM-89079, February 1987.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kayten, Gerald G.; Driver, Cornelius; and Maglieri, J.: The Revolutionary Impact of Evolving Aeronautical Technologies. AIAA-84–2445, Nov., 1984.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Crain, C. D.; Brown, M. D.; and Cortner, A. H.: Design and Initial Calibration of A Magnetic Suspension System For Wind Tunnel Models. AEDC-TR-65–187, September 1965.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierce L. Lawing

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations