Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T15:21:05.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Advanced open rotor noise prediction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

M. J. Kingan
M. J. Kingan*
Affiliation:
Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to describe the current status of open rotor noise prediction methods and to highlight future challenges in this area. A number of analytic and numerical methods are described which can be used for predicting ‘isolated’ and ‘installed’ open rotor tonal noise. Broadband noise prediction methods are also described and it is noted that further development and validation of the current models is required. The paper concludes with a discussion of the analytical methods which are used to assess the acoustic data collected during the high-speed wind-tunnel testing of a model scale advanced open rotor rig.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 118 , Issue 1208 , October 2014 , pp. 1125 - 1135
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Parry, A.B. and Vianello, S. A project study of open rotor noise, Int J Aeroacoustics, 2012, 11, pp 247–58.Google Scholar
2. Colin, Y., Carazo, A., Caruelle, B., Node-Langlois, T. and Parry, A.B. Computational strategy for predicting CROR noise at lowspeed Part I: review of the numerical methods, Proceedings of the 18th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Colorado Springs, USA, AIAA Paper 2012-2221.Google Scholar
3. Ffowcs-Williams, J.E. and Hawkings, D.L. Sound generation by turbulence and surfaces in arbitrary motion, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, 1969, 264, pp 321–42.Google Scholar
4. Farassat, F. Linear acoustic formulas for calculation of rotating blade noise, AIAA J, 1981, 19, pp 1122–1130.Google Scholar
5. Farassat, F. Prediction of advanced propeller noise in the time domain, AIAA J, 1986, 24, pp 578–584.Google Scholar
6. Farassat, F. and Myers, M.K. Extension of Kirchhoff’s formula to radiation from moving surfaces, J of Sound and Vibration, 1988, 123, pp 451–60.Google Scholar
7. Hanson, D.B. Near field frequency domain theory for propeller noise, AIAA J, 1985, 23, pp 499–504.Google Scholar
8. Hanson, D.B. Helicoidal surface theory for harmonic noise of propellers in the far field, AIAA J, 1980, 18, pp 1213–1320.Google Scholar
9. Hanson, D.B. Noise of counter-rotation propellers, J of Aircraft, 1985, 22, pp 609–17.Google Scholar
10. Sharma, A. and Chen, H. Prediction of aerodynamic tonal noise from open rotors, J of Sound and Vibration, 2013, 332, pp 3832–3845.Google Scholar
11. Parry, A.B. and Crighton, D.G. Asymptotic theory of propeller noise part I: subsonic single-rotation propeller, AIAA J, 1989, 27, pp 1184–90.Google Scholar
12. Crighton, D.G. and Parry, A.B. Asymptotic theory of propeller noise part II: supersonic single-rotation propeller, AIAA J, 1991, 29, pp 2031–37.Google Scholar
13. Crighton, D.G. and Parry, A.B. Higher approximations in the asymptotic theory of propeller noise, AIAA J, 1992, 30, pp 3023–39.Google Scholar
14. Parry, A.B. Theoretical prediction of counter-rotating propeller noise, PhD thesis, University of Leeds, 1988.Google Scholar
15. Peake, N. and Crighton, D.G. An asymptotic theory of near-field propeller acoustics, J of Fluid Mechanics, 1991, 232, pp 285–301.Google Scholar
16. Colin, Y., Blanc, F., Caruelle, B., Barrois, F. and Djordjevic, N. Computational strategy for predicting CROR noise at lowspeed Part II: investigation of the noise sources computation with the chorochronic method. Proceedings of the 18th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Colorado Springs, USA, AIAA Paper 2012-2222.Google Scholar
17. Colin, Y., Caruelle, B. and Parry, A.B. Computational strategy for predicting CROR noise at lowspeed Part III: investigation of noise radiation with the Ffowcs-Williams Hawkings analogy. Proceedings of the 18th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Colorado Springs, USA, AIAA Paper 2012-2223.Google Scholar
18. Peters, A. and Spakovszky, Z.S. Rotor interaction noise in counter-rotating propfan propulsion systems, J of Turbomachinery, 2010, 134.Google Scholar
19. Whitfield, C.E., Mani, R. and Gliebe, P.R. High speed turboprop aeroacoustic study (counterrotation) Volume 1 – model development, NASA Contractor Report 185241, 1990.Google Scholar
20. Sears, W.R. Some aspects of non-stationary airfoil theory and its practical applications, J Aeronautical Sciences, 1941, 8, pp 104–88.Google Scholar
21. Amiet, R.K. Compressibility effects in unsteady thin-airfoil theory, AIAA J, 1974, 12, pp 253–255.Google Scholar
22. Parry, A.B. Modular prediction scheme for blade row interaction noise, J of Propulsion and Power, 1997, 13, pp 334–41.Google Scholar
23. Majjigi, R.K., Uenishi, K. and Gliebe, P.R. An investigation of counterrotating tip vortex interaction. NASA CR-185135, 1989.Google Scholar
24. Kingan, M.J. and Self, R.H. Counter-rotation propeller tip vortex interaction noise. Proceedings of the 15th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Miami, AIAA Paper 2009-3135, 2009.Google Scholar
25. Roger, M., Schram, C. and Moreau, S. On vortex–airfoil interaction noise including span-end effects, with application to open-rotor aeroacoustics, J of Sound and Vibration, 2012, 333, pp 283–306.Google Scholar
26. Carazo, A., Roger, M. and Omais, M. Analytical prediction of wake-interaction noise in counter-rotation open rotors, Proceedings of the 17th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Portland, USA, AIAA Paper 2011-2758, 2011.Google Scholar
27. Glegg, S. Effect of centerbody scattering on propeller noise, AIAA J, 1991, 29, pp 572–576.Google Scholar
28. Kingan, M.J., Powles, C. and Self, R.H. Effect of centerbody scattering on advanced open-rotor noise. AIAA J, 2010, 48, pp 975–80.Google Scholar
29. Kingan, M.J. and Sureshkumar, P. Open rotor centrebody scattering, J of Sound and Vibration, 2013, 333, pp 418-33.Google Scholar
30. Parry, A., Kingan, M.J. and Tester, B.J. Relative importance of open rotor tone and broadband noise sources, Proceedings of the 17th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Portland, AIAA Paper 2011-2763, 2011 Google Scholar
31. Schlinker, R.H. and Amiet, R.K. Helicopter rotor trailing edge noise, NASA Contractor Report 3470, 1980.Google Scholar
32. Pagano, A., Barbarino, M., Casalino, D. and Federico, L. Tonal and broadband noise calculations for aeroacoustic optimization of a pusher propeller, J of Aircraft, 2010, 47, pp 835–848.Google Scholar
33. Rozenberg, Y., Roger, M. and Moreau, S. Rotating blade trailing-edge noise: experimental validation of analytical model, AIAA J, 2010, 48, pp 951–962.Google Scholar
34. Sinayoko, S., Kingan, M.J. and Agarwal, A. Trailing edge noise theory for rotating blades in uniform flow, Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 469, 2013.Google Scholar
35. Kim, Y.N. and George, A.R. Trailing-edge noise from hovering rotors, AIAA J, 1982, 20, pp 1167–1174.Google Scholar
36. Chou, S. and George, A.R. Effect of angle-of-attack on rotor trailing-edge noise, AIAA J, 1984, 22, pp 1821–1823.Google Scholar
37. Zhou, Q. and Joseph, P.F. Frequency-domain method for rotor self-noise prediction, AIAA J, 2006, 44, pp 1197–1206.Google Scholar
38. Amiet, R.K. Noise produced by turbulent flow into a propeller or helicopter rotor, AIAA J, 1977, 15, pp 307–308.Google Scholar
39. Paterson, R.W. and Amiet, R.K. Noise of a model helicopter rotor due to ingestion of isotropic turbulence, J of Sound and Vibration, 1982, 85, pp 551–577.Google Scholar
40. H, R.K. Noise produced by turbulent flow into a rotor: theory manual for noise calculation, NASA CR 181788, 1989.Google Scholar
41. Majumdar, S.J. and Peake, N. Noise generation by the interaction between ingested turbulence and a rotating fan, J of Fluid Mechanics, 1998, 359, pp 181–216.Google Scholar
42. Blandeau, V.P. and Joseph, P.F. Broadband noise due to rotor-wake/rotor interaction in contra-rotating open rotors, AIAA J, 2010, 48, pp 2674–86.Google Scholar
43. Kingan, M.J. Open rotor broadband interaction noise, J of Sound and Vibration, 2013, 332, pp 3956–3970.Google Scholar
44. Hanson, D.B. and Magliozzi, B. Propagation of propeller tone noise through a fuselage boundary layer, J of Aircraft, 1985, 22, pp 63–70.Google Scholar
45. Spence, P.L. Effects of fuselage boundary layer on noise propagation from advanced propellers, J of Aircraft, 1992, 29, pp 1005–1011.Google Scholar
46. Lu, H.Y. Fuselage boundary-layer effects on sound propagation and scattering, AIAA J, 1990, 28, pp 1180–1186.Google Scholar
47. Amiet, R.K. Unifed Aeroacoustics Analysis for High Speed Turboprop Aerodynamics and Noise, vol. II—Development of Theory for Wing Shielding, NASA CR 185192, 1991 Google Scholar
48. McAlpine, A. and Kingan, M.J. Far-field sound radiation due to an installed open rotor, Int J of Aeroacoustics, 2012, 11, pp 213–245.Google Scholar
49. Le Garrec, T. and Reboul, G. Computational aeroacoustics of counter rotating open rotor model on rear full scale airplane in cruise condition. Proceedings of the 18th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Colorado Springs, 2012, AIAA Paper 2012-2125.Google Scholar
50. Lummer, M., Richter, C., Pröber, C. and Delfs, J. Validation of a Model for Open Rotor Noise Predictions and Calculation of Shielding Effects using a Fast BEM, Proceedings of the 19th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Berlin, AIAA Paper 2013-2096, 2013 Google Scholar
51. Kresja, E.A. Prediction of the noise from a propeller at angle-of-attack, AIAA paper 90-3954, 1990.Google Scholar
52. Hanson, D.B. Noise radiation of propeller loading sources with angular inflow. AIAA paper 90-3955, 1990.Google Scholar
53. Hanson, D.B. Sound from a propeller at angle-of-attack: a new theoretical viewpoint. Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 1995, 449, pp 315–328.Google Scholar
54. Hanson, D.B. and Parzych, D.J. Theory for noise of propellers in angular inflow with parametric studies and experimental verifcation, NASA CR 4499, 1993.Google Scholar
55. Brandvik, T., Hall, C. and Parry, A.B. Angle-of-attack effects on counter-rotating propellers at take-off, Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo, 2012, 8, pp 523–534.Google Scholar
56. Ricouard, J., Julliard, E., Omais, M., Regnier, V., Parry, A.B. and Baralon, S. Installation effects on contra-rotating open rotor noise. Proceedings of the 16th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, AIAA Pap. 2010-3795, 2010.Google Scholar
57. Wood, M.E. and Newman, D.A. The design and commissioning of an acoustic liner for propeller noise testing in the ARA transonic wind tunnel, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: J of Aerospace Engineering, 1990, 204, pp 135–145.Google Scholar
58. Parry, A.U., Britchford, K., Kingan, M.J. and Sureshkumar, P. Aeroacoustic Tests of Isolated Open Rotors at High Speed, Proceedings of the 18th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Colorado Springs, USA, AIAA Paper 2012-2220, 2012.Google Scholar
59. Peake, N. and Boyd, W.K. An approximate method for the prediction of propeller near-field effects. J of Aircraft, 1993, 30, pp 603–610.Google Scholar
60. Sureshkumar, P., Kingan, M.J. and Parry, A.B. A method for predicting the tone noise produced by an open rotor in a rectangular wind tunnel, Proceedings of the 19th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Berlin, Germany, AIAA paper 2013-2095, 2013.Google Scholar
61. Eversman, W. Analytical study of wind-tunnel acoustic testing of propellers, J of Aircraft, 27, pp 851–858, 1990.Google Scholar
62. Mosher, M. The infuence of a wind tunnel on helicopter rotational noise: formulation of analysis. NASA TM 85982, 1984.Google Scholar
63. Kingan, M.J., Ekoule, C.E., Parry, A.B. and Britchford, K. Analysis of Advanced Open Rotor Noise Measurements, Proceedings of the 19th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Atlanta, USA AIAA paper 2014-2745, 2014 Google Scholar