Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 32

UNIVERSIT DE SHERBROOKE

Facult de gnie
Dpartement de gnie mcanique

EXPERIMENTAL CHARACTERIZATION
OF NOISE GENERATION AND
REDUCTION OF AN AIRFOIL AT
MODERATE REYNOLDS NUMBER
Title to be defined

SCA 772 Dfinition du projet de recherche au doctorat

Prateek JAISWAL

Jury: Stephane MOREAU (directeur)


Martin BROUILLETTE
Yann PASCO
Douglas NEAL

Sherbrooke (Qubec) Canada

Avril 2014

RSUM
Consultez le Protocole de rdaction et de dpt aux tudes suprieures de la Facult de
gnie de lUniversit de Sherbrooke afin de connaitre les dtails sur le rsum.
Mots-cls : 3 e 8 mots-cles

ABSTRACT
Missing english abstract file.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION

2 Literature Review

3 Objectives and Methodology

4 CONCLUSION

A DONNES

11

LIST OF REFERENCES

13

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES

vii

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

LIST OF TABLES

ix

LIST OF TABLES

GLOSSARY
Ceci est un exemple de lexique (glossaire).
Terme technique Dfinition
Actionneur
Dfinition du terme actionneur
Capteur
Dfinition du terme capteur
Rfrentiel
Dfinition du terme rfrentiel

xi

xii

GLOSSARY

LIST OF SYMBOLS
Ceci est un exemple de liste des symboles.
Symbole Dfinition
[]
Drive premire selon le rfrentiel inertiel

[]
Drive seconde selon le rfrentiel inertie
a
Acclration
m
Masse
t
Variable temporelle
...
...

xiii

xiv

LIST OF SYMBOLS

LIST OF ACRONYMS
Ceci est un exemple de liste des acronymes.
Acronyme
OIQ
UdeS
...

Dfinition
Ordre des ingnieurs du Qubec
Universit de Sherbrooke
...

xv

xvi

LIST OF ACRONYMS

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Talk about the airfoil self noise in a quite ambient atmosphere
Noise generated by an airfoil itself in low turbulent ambiance is known as airfoil self noise.
To be more precise it has been defined by [Brooks et al., 1989] "total noise produced when
an airfoil encounters smooth non turbulent inflow". The principal way of noise generation
here is due to three dierent mechanism1)If the flow is attached and Turbulent. Noise generated due to vortical disturbances
present in the boundary layer gets amplified due to presence of a geometrical discontinuity
due to Kutta condition. This results in broadband noise and means that dierent scales
are responsible for this kind of noise generation resulting in presence of multiple frequency
in radiated noise.
2) If the flow is however laminar and attached at most parts of the airfoil(except at the
trailing edge) this leads to the formation of Tonal Noise. This results from a frequency
selection due to some feedback mechanism.
3) Vortex shedding leading to narrow band noise.
Talk about the nuisance caused by the noise thus generated and places where this type of
noise is pertinent
As already stated the type of noise is related to state of boundary layer. In particular
turbulent boundary layer is mostly encountered in moderate to high Reynolds number.
The Broadband part of noise is considered significant, emitted by turbines, high lift devices,
Fan Blades etc. The Tonal component on the other hand can be found in Micro-turbine ,
UAV, ......
talk about the previous works that has been done already in this domain Tonal and
broadband noise have been extensively studied in the past starting from 1970s onward.
The Broadband Noise has been extensively studied in the past. Various experiments were
performed in the year 1970s and 80s. Subsequently several ad hoc models were proposed.
Later some more mature models were in early 2000 and 2010. Hence more refined models
are present as of now.
1

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Limitations1) They are limited to low to moderate chambered airfoil, in particular none of them can
take into account eect of high camber.
2) All of them ignore the eect of mean flow on the flow field statistics.
Trailing edge noise reduction using serrations was proposed in late 1970s and in early 90s
models were also proposed which could determine the overall noise reduction. However
this model overestimates the total noise reduced, in addition to this model is limited to flat
plate i.e with zero pressure gradient. Also there seems to be huge discrepancy in various
ways many past researchers have proposed how the noise reduction works in general.
On the other hand their seems to be no two study that predict unique mechanism responsible for tonal noise generation. Since the first comprehensive study done by [Paterson
et al., 1973] till this day no two study have converge on the same conclusion. Also there
seems to be a substantial dierence in the observations made from one author to another.
Talk about the diculties faced by studies made in the past
1)The first few studies were made in a normal wind tunnel-no anechoic chamber till early
80s (not sure) ?
2) Intrusive flow measurements by HWA-now we have development of PIV.
3) Non existence of Digital signal processing.
4) Not taking installation eects into account see for example [Moreau et al., 2003]
Define the scope of the present study
The aim of this PhD is therefore to try and find mechanisms responsible. Also on the
other hand propose some simple solutions for noise reduction in each of the cases that
will be investigated. For this an openjet an echoic wind tunnel will be used. Tomo PIV
systems, wall pressure measurements , HWA and phase array study will be done.
Talk about the structure of DPR

CHAPTER 2
Literature Review
Talk about the noise generation and where it is pertinent i.e context
Mechanism and implications,How it is formed, Past studies, Conclusion on TS formation
studies.
It is known experimentally that at low-moderate Reynolds number (from few 5 104 to
6 105 an airfoil generates intense whistling sound which in general is several DB higher
than the corresponding Broadband noise. A complete study was first done by [Paterson
et al., 1973] but till this day no clear explanation of the phenomenon exists. What is even
worse is the fact that often new studies do not support the results and claims made in
the past. There seems to be a two school of thoughts, first lead by Tam (see [Tam and
Ju, 2012]) and Nash (see [Nash et al., 1999]. They claim that tonal noise at moderate
reynolds number are due to feedback mechanism. The source of energy lies in the wake,
in particular kelvin Helmholtz instability was pointed out by [Tam and Ju, 2012] to be
the primary energy source. They also point out that a single tone is formed if the airfoil
is kept in clean background (no possible feedback from setup). In particular they point
out that multiple tones observed result from feedback from the wind tunnel components
and the airfoil.
Hence it is important to underscore the dierences observed. Firstly, we have to look at
the design of these two studies their implications and limitations.
The paper by [Tam and Ju, 2012]
1) The study have been carried out in a NACA 0012 airfoil. This airfoil is chosen to
avoid any separations at the trailing edge which may produce additional sources. More
importantly this airfoil was chosen so that a comparison can be made with past works.
2) The study of Tam is carried out with zero turbulence level. Which has implications on
its own. One of them is that it cannot be repeated experimentally.
3) The study is restricted to zero angle of attack. The Reynolds number number is between
2 104 to 5 105 .
Findings The peak scales with patersons empirical formula.
3

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

A single peak is observed.


Near wake oscillations are the primary drivers of the feedback mechanism
Secondary mechanism is also identified as one that leads to discrete vortices in the wake.
Paper by [Nash et al., 1999]
1) Experiments conducted in acoustically lined wind tunnel. From 105 to 2 106 .
2)Experiments conducted at a very low Turbulence intensity about 0.05%
The above are two examples of work that has been carried out in past numerically and
experimentally. They have following observations in common
Both have been carried out in a very no or low turbulence levels respectively.
both report a single tone and which is accordance with patersons [Paterson et al., 1973]
empirical formula.
The observation that a single tone is observed is in contrary to the observations made
by [Arbey and Bataille, 1983], [Prbsting et al., 2014], [Desquesnes et al., 2007] , and
others.
Recent experiments and numerical study conclude that these multiple peaks around the
most amplified one are due to amplitude and frequency modulation. And they concluded
it is not because of feedback of the profile with the tunnel itself as hypothesized by [Nash
et al., 1999]
However all these studies confirm presence of feedback mechanism with is responsible
for frequency selection resulting in tonal noise. Also all the experiments in past are in
accord with paterson emperical formula. Also the linear stability analysis shows that the
frequency of most amplitude wave is equal to frequency of tonal noise.
conclusion
There seems to be large discrepancy in the study, observations and conclusion from one
author to other.
Noise generated by BB
Mechanism and implications,How it is formed, Past studies
Models available for prediction of BB noise
Conclusion on BB formation studies.
Reduction techniques
serrations

5
Howes model
Previous results
Conclusion
Study made in past show discrepancy and contradict each other on how the noise reduction
through serrations in achieved. Also the analytic model proposed by howe over-predicts
the noise reduction observed. Also the model presented by howe works with flat plate only
i.e with zero pressure gradient.
Noise reduction by Blowing at trailing edge
Results and observation
Conclusion
Installation Eects [Moreau et al., 2003]
PIV
HWA
phased array measurements
Wall pressure sensors
Conclusion on Experimental Tools used
Therefore it will be interesting to study the mechanism responsible for generation of tonal
noise. At our disposal are state of the art anechoic open jet wind tunnel, Tomographic PIV
system , microphone array measurements and many other classical tools. In particular
anechoic wind tunnel cuts out possibility of having feedback mechanism with wind tunnel
components and airfoil. This has been already noted by [Nash et al., 1999] . Other
advantage of using such a tunnel is that blade passing frequency (BPF) are not present in
the measurements. A regular fan driven wind tunnel produces additional spurious sources
(BPF) hence open jet tunnel are preferred for aeroacoustics study.
Draw similar conlcusion for use of PIV and HWA measurements.

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

CHAPTER 3
Objectives and Methodology
Context
a lot of work in the past have been done and this PhD will be a continuation of the work
in past with aim to improve our understanding.
Talk about benefits of using experimental methods and in particular approach (experimental tools such as PIV, HWA, etc) taken for this thesis.
Definition of project and objectives
Approach and methodology
Talk about how we will proceed with the work
1) complete flow field analysis around the airfoil.
2) Aeroacoustics analysis BB noise compare with dierent models.
3) Aeroacoustics analysis of TS waves on CD airfoil.
4) Study eect of serrations and blowing on the airfoil trailing edge
At each of the above mentioned steps we will compare our results with HAOs work.
Draw a Time line of the project

CHAPTER 3. OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

CHAPTER 4
CONCLUSION
Discuss the aim of study
Talk about the structure of the thesis. i.e the way it is organized step by step.
Justify your approach

10

CHAPTER 4. CONCLUSION

ANNEX A
DONNES

11

12

ANNEX A. DONNES

LIST OF REFERENCES
Arbey, H. and Bataille, J. (1983). Noise generated by airfoil profiles placed in a uniform
laminar flow. Journal of Mechanics, volume 134, pp. 3347.
Brooks, T., Pope, D. and Marcolini, M. (1989). Airfoil self-noise and prediction (Technical
report). National Aeronautics and Space Adminstration.
Desquesnes, G., Terracol, M. and Sagaut, P. (2007). Numerical investigation of the tone
noise mechanism. Journal of Mechanics, volume 591, pp. 155182.
Moreau, S., Henner, M., Iaccarino, G., Weng, M. and Roger, M. (2003). Analysis of
flow conditions in freejet experiments for studying airfoil self-noise. AIAA, volume 41,
number 10, pp. 18951905.
Nash, E., Lowson, M. V. and Mcalpine, A. (1999). Boundary-layer instability noise on
aerofoils. Journal of Mechanics, volume 382, pp. 2761.
Paterson, R., Paul, G., Fink, M. and Munch, C. (1973). Vortex noise of isolated airfoil.
Journal of Aircraft, volume 10, number 5, pp. 296302.
Prbsting, S., Serpieri, J. and Scarano, F. (2014). Experimental investigation of aerofoil
tonal noise generation. Journal of Mechanics, volume 747, pp. 656687.
Tam, C. and Ju, H. (2012). Airfoil tones at moderate reynolds number. Journal of
Mechanics, volume 690, pp. 536570.

13

14

LIST OF REFERENCES