Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T23:32:38.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aeroacoustic source mechanisms of a wavy leading edge undergoing vortical disturbances

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2016

Jacob M. Turner  and
Jae Wook Kim
Jacob M. Turner
Affiliation:
Aerodynamics and Flight Mechanics Research Group, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
Jae Wook Kim*
Affiliation:
Aerodynamics and Flight Mechanics Research Group, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
*
†Email address for correspondence: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

High-accuracy numerical simulations are performed to study aeroacoustic source mechanisms of wavy leading edges (WLEs) on a thin aerofoil undergoing vortical disturbances. This canonical study is based on a prescribed spanwise vortex travelling downstream and creating secondary vortices as it passes through the aerofoil’s leading edge. The primary aim of the study is to precisely understand the relationships between the vortex-induced velocity perturbation and the wall pressure fluctuation on the WLE geometry. It is observed that by increasing the size (amplitude) of the WLE the source strength at the peak region is reduced rapidly to a certain point, followed by a saturation stage, while at the root (trough) it remains fairly consistent regardless of the WLE size. This observation is demonstrated to be the consequence of three-dimensional vortex dynamics taking place along the WLE. One of the most profound features is that a system of horseshoe-like secondary vortices are created from the WLE peak region upon the impingement of the prescribed vortex. It is found that the horseshoe vortices produce a significantly non-uniform velocity perturbation in front of the WLE leading to the disparity in the source characteristics between the peak and root. The alterations to the impinging velocity perturbation are carefully analysed and related to the wall pressure fluctuation in this study. In addition, a semi-analytic model based on Biot–Savart’s law is developed to better understand and explain the role of the horseshoe vortex systems and the source mechanisms.

JFM classification

Acoustics: Aeroacoustics Acoustics: Hydrodynamic noise
Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 811 , 25 January 2017 , pp. 582 - 611
Check for updates
Copyright
© 2016 Cambridge University Press 

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

Amiet, R. K. 1975 Acoustic radiation from an airfoil in a turbulent stream. J. Sound Vib. 41, 407–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atassi, H. M., Subramaniam, S. & Scott, J. R.1990 Acoustic radiation from lifting airfoils in compressible subsonic flow. AIAA Paper 90-3911.Google Scholar
Ayton, L. J. & Peake, N. 2013 On high-frequency noise scattering by aerofoils in flow. J. Fluid Mech. 734, 144–182.Google Scholar
Ayton, L. J. & Peake, N. 2015 On high-frequency sound generated by gust-aerofoil interaction in shear flow. J. Fluid Mech. 766, 297–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaitanya, P., Narayanan, S., Joseph, P., Vanderwel, C., Turner, J., Kim, J. W. & Gantapathisubramani, B.2015 Broadband noise reductions through leading edge serrations on realistic aerofoils. In 21st AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA Paper 2015-2202.Google Scholar
Christophe, J., Anthoine, J. & Rambaud, P.2008 Numerical issues in the application of an Amiet model for spanwise-varying incoming turbulence. In 14th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA Paper 2008-1600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christophe, J., Anthoine, J., Rambaud, P., Schram, C., Mathey, F. & Moreau, S.2007 Prediction of incoming turbulent noise using a combined numerical/semi-empirical method and experimental validation. In 13th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA Paper 2007-3468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clair, V., Polacsek, C., Garrec, T. L., Reboul, G., Gruber, M. & Joseph, P. 2013 Experimental and numerical investigation of turbulence-airfoil noise reduction using wavy edges. AIAA J. 51, 2695–2713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deniau, H., Boussuge, J. F., Polacsek, C. & Moreau, S.2011 Affordable compressible LES of airfoil-turbulence interaction in a free jet. In 17th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA Paper 2011-2707.Google Scholar
Devenport, W. J., Staubs, J. K. & Glegg, S. A. L. 2010 Sound radiation from real airfoils in turbulence. J. Sound Vib. 329, 3470–3483.Google Scholar
Evers, I. & Peake, N. 2000 Noise generation by high-frequency gusts interacting with an airfoil in transonic flow. J. Fluid Mech. 411, 91–130.Google Scholar
Fish, F. E., Howle, L. E. & Murray, M. M. 2008 Hydrodynamic flow control in marine mammals. Integr. Compar. Biol. 48, 788–800.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gill, J., Zhang, X. & Joseph, P. 2013 Symmetric airfoil geometry effects on leading edge noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 134, 2669–2680.Google Scholar
Gill, J., Zhang, X. & Joseph, P. F. 2015 Single velocity-component modeling of leading edge turbulence interaction noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 137 (6), 3209–3220.Google Scholar
Goldstein, M. E. 1978 Unsteady vortical and entropic distortions of potential flows around arbitrary obstacles. J. Fluid Mech. 89, 433–468.Google Scholar
Hansen, K., Kelso, R. & Doolan, C. 2012 Reduction of flow induced airfoil tonal noise using leading edge sinusoidal modifications. Acoust. Australia 40 (3), 172–177.Google Scholar
Hansen, K. L., Kelso, R. M. & Dally, B. D. 2011 Performance variations of leading-edge tubercles for distinct airfoil profiles. AIAA J. 49, 185–194.Google Scholar
Hansen, K. L., Rostamzadeh, N., Kelso, R. M. & Dally, B. B. 2016 Evolution of the streamwise vortices generated between leading edge tubercles. J. Fluid Mech. 788, 730–766.Google Scholar
Johari, H., Henoch, C., Custodio, D. & Levshin, L. 2007 Effects of leading-edge protuberances on airfoil performance. AIAA J. 45, 2634–2642.Google Scholar
Kim, J. W. 2007 Optimised boundary compact finite difference schemes for computational aeroacoustics. J. Comput. Phys. 225, 995–1019.Google Scholar
Kim, J. W. 2010 High-order compact filters with variable cut-off wavenumber and stable boundary treatment. Comput. Fluids 39, 1168–1182.Google Scholar
Kim, J. W. 2013 Quasi-disjoint pentadiagonal matrix systems for the parallelization of compact finite-difference schemes and filters. J. Comput. Phys. 241, 168–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J. W. & Haeri, S. 2015 An advanced synthetic eddy method for the computation of aerofoil-turbulence interaction noise. J. Comput. Phys. 287, 1–17.Google Scholar
Kim, J. W., Haeri, S. & Joseph, P. 2016 On the reduction of aerofoil-turbulence interaction noise associated with wavy leading edges. J. Fluid Mech. 792, 526–552.Google Scholar
Kim, J. W., Lau, A. S. H. & Sandham, N. D. 2010 Proposed boundary conditions for gust-airfoil interaction noise. AIAA J. 48 (11), 2705–2710.Google Scholar
Kim, J. W. & Lee, D. J. 2000 Generalized characteristic boundary conditions for computational aeroacoustics. AIAA J. 38 (11), 2040–2049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J. W. & Lee, D. J. 2004 Generalized characteristic boundary conditions for computational aeroacoustics, part 2. AIAA J. 42 (1), 47–55.Google Scholar
Kim, J. W. & Morris, P. J. 2002 Computation of subsonic inviscid flow past a cone using high-order schemes. AIAA J. 40 (10), 1961–1968.Google Scholar
Lau, A. S. H., Haeri, S. & Kim, J. W. 2013 The effect of wavy leading edges on aerofoil-gust interaction noise. J. Sound Vib. 25, 6234–6253.Google Scholar
Lockard, D. & Morris, P. 1998 Radiated noise from airfoils in realistic mean flows. AIAA J. 36, 907–914.Google Scholar
Mathews, J. & Peake, N.2015 Noise generation by turbulence interacting with an aerofoil with a serrated leading edge. In 21st AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA Paper 2015-2204.Google Scholar
Migliore, P. & Oerlemans, S. 2004 Wind tunnel aeroacoustic tests of six airfoils for use on small wind turbines. J. Solar Energy Engng 126, 974–985.Google Scholar
Miklosovic, D. S., Murray, M. M., Howle, L. E. & Fish, F. E. 2004 Leading-edge tubercles delay stall on humpback whale flippers. Phys. Fluids 16, 39–42.Google Scholar
Moreau, S., Roger, M. & Jurdic, V.2005 Effect of angle of attack and airfoil shape on turbulence-interaction noise. In 11th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. AIAA Paper 2005-2973.Google Scholar
Myers, M. R. & Kerschen, E. J. 1995 Influence of incidence angle on sound generation by airfoils interacting with high-frequency gusts. J. Fluid Mech. 292, 271–304.Google Scholar
Myers, M. R. & Kerschen, E. J. 1997 Influence of camber on sound generation by airfoils interacting with high-frequency gusts. J. Fluid Mech. 353, 221–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narayanan, S., Chaitanya, P., Haeri, S., Joseph, P., Kim, J. W. & Polacsek, C. 2015 Airfoil noise reductions through leading edge serrations. Phys. Fluids 27, 025109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paterson, R. W. & Amiet, R. K.1976 Acoustic radiation and surface pressure characteristics of an airfoil due to incident turbulence. NASA CR-2733.Google Scholar
Rockwell, D. 1998 Vortex-body interactions. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 30, 199–229.Google Scholar
Roger, M. & Moreau, S. 2010 Extensions and limitations of analytical airfoil broadband noise models. Intl J. Aeroacoust. 9, 273–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsuji, Y., Fransson, J. H. M., Alfredsson, P. H. & Johansson, A. V. 2007 Pressure statistics and their scaling in high-Reynolds-number turbulent boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech. 585, 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar