Noise from Forced Mixers

Funded by the Indiana 21

st

Century Research and
Technology Fund
Correlating RANS Computed
Mean Flow with Forced Mixed
Jets
C. Wright, G. Blaisdell, A. Lyrintzis

School of Aeronautics & Astronautics
Purdue University
Goals of Project
The primary goal is to develop a greater
understanding of the how noise from
forced mixed jets may be correlated to the
RANS calculated mean flow field.
The ultimate goal is to develop quantitative
correlations that could be used as input for
a semi-empirical model
Approaches
Careful selection of numerical tools such as the
turbulence model and CFD code are very
important. Validation should concentrate on a
detailed comparison of flow contours rather than
integrated quantities.
Grid development and validation should likewise
concentrate on the details of the flow.
Qualitative trends and observations regarding
the relationship between noise data and CFD
results should be investigated before attempting
to quantify the results.


Internally Forced Mixed Jet
Bypass
Flow
Mixer
Core
Flow
Nozzle
Tail Cone
Exhaust
Flow
Exhaust / Ambient
Mixing Layer
Lobed Mixer
Mixing Layer
Forced Mixer
H
Lobe Penetration
(Lobe Height)
H:
3-D Mesh
WIND Code options
2
nd
order upwind scheme
1.7 million/7 million grid points
8-16 zones
8-16 LINUX processors
Spalart-Allmaras/ SST turbulence model
Wall functions
Grid Dependence
1.7 million grid points 7 million grid points
Density
Vorticity
Magnitude
Spalart-Allmaras and and Menter SST at
Nozzle Exit Plane
Spalart
SST
Density
Vorticity
Magnitude
Vorticity Magnitude at Nozzle Exit
( Scale Geometry)
Low Penetration
Mid Penetration
High Penetration
Turbulent Kinetic Energy at Nozzle Exit
( Scale Geometry)
Low Penetration Mid Penetration
High Penetration
High Penetration Mixer Flowfield
Case is for a high throttle
setting at Mach 0.2
Used Menter SST
Turbulence Model
Good overall agreement
with experiment. TKE is a
little low for X/D = 1.0 and
X/D = 2.0. CFD results
tend to be overly sharp and
defined.
CFD and experiment both
show a substantial amount
of interaction between the
free shear layer and the
streamwise vortices.
Medium Penetration Mixer Flowfield
Case is for a high throttle
setting at Mach 0.2
Used Menter SST
Turbulence Model
The agreement between the
CFD and the experiment is
about the same as for the
high penetration case.
The free shear layer and the
streamwise vortices exist as
separate and distinct flow
structures through at least
X/D = 1.0.
Experimental Results (1/4 Scale Model)
Experimental Results (1/4 Scale Model)
Current State of Project
Finishing up CFD runs. Using WIND and Menter
SST turbulence model.
Currently studying noise data along with RANS
results and PIV experiments (including low
penetration case not shown).
Have identified some interesting trends, and are
preparing more CFD runs to finalize these
comparisons.
Specifics of research is being published in a
paper for the AIAA Reno conference (Jan. 2004).
Development of a Semi-Empirical
Jet Noise Model for Forced Mixer
Noise Predictions

L. Garrison, Purdue University
W. Dalton, Rolls-Royce Indianapolis
A. Lyrintzis and G. Blaisdell
Purdue University
Four-Source Model Comparisons
Four-Source method implementation
Predictions for the confluent mixer
Two-Source Model
Formulation
Optimization procedure
Optimized results for the 12 lobe mixers
Optimized parameter correlations
Outline
Practical Configuration Geometry
Secondary Flow
Primary Flow
Flow Mixer
Nozzle Wall
Tail Cone
(Bullet)
Final Nozzle Exit
Dual Flow Configurations
Four-Source method
developed for a
coplanar, coaxial jet

The configuration for the
practical case has a
buried primary flow in a
convergent nozzle with a
center body (tail cone or
bullet)
Based on an Equivalent Coaxial Jet
Approach developed by B. Tester and M.
Fisher
Define primary and secondary jets at the
final nozzle exit plane
Assumptions
Isentropic flow in the nozzle
Primary and secondary flows do not mix in the
nozzle
Static pressure of the two flows at the exit
plane are equal
Single Jet Property Calculation
Single Jet Property Calculation
Jet Areas at the Final Nozzle Exit
Guess A
p
Calculate A
s

Calculate M
exit

Calculate P
static

Iterate until the primary and secondary static
pressures are equal
p n s
A A A =
( ) 1 2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
1
1

+

+
+
=

cs
exit
exit
cs
cs
exit
M
M
M
M
A
A
1
2
2
1
1

|
.
|

\
|

+ =

exit
static
o
M
P
P
J
Four-Source Method Implementation
Primary and Secondary Jet Properties
Calculated at the final nozzle exit

Mixed Jet and Effective Jet Properties
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
+
=
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
+ +
=
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
+
=
1
1
T T
1
) )(1 (1
D D
1
1
V V
p m
2
1
2
p m
2
p m
p
s
p
s
p
s

A
A

V
V

=
=
=
( )
p e
1/2
2
p e
p e
T T
1 D D
V V
=
+ =
=
7 dB
e
= A
Current Prediction Method Comparisons
Four-Source / Single Jet / Experimental
Data Comparisons
Confluent Mixer, Low Power Operating Point
ARP876C Method used for all single jet
noise predictions
Bass and Sutherland correction for atmospheric
attenuation
Four-Source coaxial jet prediction
Based on equivalent coaxial jet properties
Single jet prediction
Based on fully mixed flow at the final nozzle exit
Current Prediction Method Comparisons
Forced Mixer Experimental Data
Four Mixer Configurations
Confluent Mixer (CFM)
Low Penetration 12 Lobe Mixer (12CL)
Mid Penetration 12 Lobe Mixer (12UM)
High Penetration 12 Lobe Mixer (12UH)
Low Power Operating Point
H
Forced Mixer Experimental Data
Objective:
Match the experimental data SPL spectrum at all
angles and all frequencies using two single stream
jet sources.
Formulation:


s s s s 1 s 0 U
SPL ( , ) SPL(V ,T ,D , , ) 10lo B g ( d F , )
c
f f f f u u = + + A
Single Jet
Prediction
Source
Strength
Spectral
Filter
Variable Parameters:
m m m m 1 m 0 D
SPL ( , ) SPL(V ,T ,D , , ) 10lo B g ( d F , )
c
f f f f u u = + + A
s m
Spectral Filter Cut-off Frequency
, Source Strengt dB hs ) d B B (d
c
f
Two-Source Model
Two-Source Model
AdB
AdB
Af
c
Af
c
Variable Parameters

1/3 Octave Band Number 1/3 Octave Band Number
1
/
3

O
c
t
a
v
e

S
P
L

[
d
B
]

1
/
3

O
c
t
a
v
e

S
P
L

[
d
B
]

Effects of Variations in AdB Effects of Variations in f
c
Optimization Procedure
For a given geometry and operating condition,
optimize the source strength parameters
(Adb
s
, Adb
m
) for a range of cut-off frequencies

Find the set of optimized parameters that
minimize the prediction error for all operating
conditions

Correlate the final set of parameters to the
changes in the mixer design
Two-Source Model Optimization
Optimization Challenges
Optimum Criterion
Maximum Error
Average Error
Weighted Error
Solution Non-Uniqueness
Local Minima
Non-Linear Behavior
Optimization Tools
Nonlinear Least Squares
MATLAB: lsqnonlin (LevenbergMarquadt Optimization
Method )
Two-Source Model Optimization
Two-Source Model Optimization
15 Microphone locations (90 to 160 in 5 increments)
1 Sound Pressure Level (SPL) spectrum per microphone
27 Frequency Bands per spectrum (1/3 Octave Bands)

405 SPL values per data point
Microphone Locations
Jet
80
observer
J
r
D
~
Two-Source Model Optimization
Optimum Criterion
Based on a OASPL type weighting
At each observer angle:



Weighted error values:
( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) exp exp
max
0.1 SPL , SPL ,
, 10
i i
f f
w i
E f
u u
u
(

=
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
, , , ,
w exp pred
Error f E f SPL f SPL f u u u u ( =

Two-Source Model Results
Test Case
Low Penetration Mixer
Low Power Operating Point
Two-Source Model
Upstream Source: Secondary Jet
Downstream Source: Mixed Jet
Prediction
Method
Maximum
Error [dB]
Average
Error [dB]
Weighted
Error [dB]
Four-Source 13.18 2.56 0.41
Single Jet 12.02 2.53 0.64
Two-Source 8.35 1.29 0.36
Optimized Two-Source Results
Optimized Two-Source Results
Current jet noise predictions do not
accurately model the noise from jets with
internal forced mixers
Forced mixer jet noise can be modeled by
a combination of two single jet sources
Optimized Two-Source model source
strengths and cut-off Strouhal numbers
appear to correlate linearly with the
amount of lobe penetration
Summary
Fisher, M.J., Preston, G.A., and Bryce, W.D., A Modelling of the
Noise from Simple Coaxial Jets Part I: With Unheated Primary
Flow, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 209(3):385-403, 1998
Fisher, M.J., Preston, G.A., and Mead, C.J., A Modelling of the
Noise from Simple Coaxial Jets Part II: With Heated Primary Flow,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 209(3):405-417, 1998
ARP87C: Gas Turbine Jet Exhaust Noise Prediction, Society of
Automotive Engineers, Inc., November, 1985.
Bass, H.E., Sutherland, L.C., Zuckerwar, A.J., Blackstone, D.T., and
Hester, D.M., Atmospheric Absorption of Sound: Further
Developments, Journal of the Acoustical Society America,
97(1):680-683, 1995

References
Two-Source Model Optimization
SPL
exp
- SPL
pred
SPL
exp
SPL
exp
max