Skip to main content

Reduction of Background Noise in the NASA Ames 40- by 80-Foot Wind Tunnel

NASA (NTRS) · 1995

Open the PDFPublic domain · NASA (NTRS)Technical Reports

Overview

Background noise in both open-jet and closed wind tunnels adversely affects the signal-to-noise ratio of acoustic measurements. To measure the noise of increasingly quieter aircraft models, the background noise will have to be reduced by physical means or through signal processing. In a closed wind…

Pages
·
4

Key points

  • The main sources of background noise in the NASA Ames 40- by 80-Foot Wind Tunnel include fan drive noise, microphone self-noise, and noise from test-dependent hardware.
  • At low frequencies and test section velocities below 120 knots, wind tunnel fans are the dominant source of noise, primarily below 500 Hz.
  • Microphone self-noise becomes the main source of background noise for measurements above 500 Hz, influenced by factors such as boundary layer noise and onset turbulence.
  • Eliminating strut braces and junctions in microphone designs significantly reduces background noise, leading to the development of thicker airfoils that delay transition and prevent laminar flow separation.
  • Advanced signal processing methods have been employed to enhance the signal-to-noise ratio in the wind tunnel, maximizing its effectiveness for aeroacoustic testing.
Frequently asked questions
What are the primary sources of background noise in the wind tunnel?

The primary sources of background noise include fan drive noise, microphone self-noise, noise from test-dependent hardware, and noise from the test section walls and vane set.

How does fan speed affect background noise in the wind tunnel?

Lowering the fan speed below 180 RPM and controlling the test section velocity with the fan blade angle can help reduce drive noise, particularly at low test section velocities.

What is the significance of the FITE nose cone?

The FITE (Flow-Induced Tone Eliminator) nose cone was developed to eliminate high frequency tones generated at the nose cone screen, addressing part of the microphone self-noise issue.

What design changes were made to reduce microphone self-noise?

The elimination of strut braces and junctions in microphone designs significantly reduced background noise, leading to the use of maximum thickness airfoils that are strong and effective.

What methods are used to improve the signal-to-noise ratio?

Various signal processing methods, including cross-spectrum measurements and time-delayed dual-microphone measurements, have been employed to discriminate against background noise and enhance the signal-to-noise ratio.

Reduction of Background Noise in the NASA Ames 40- by 80- Foot Wind Tunnel Stephen M. Jaeger* Christopher S. Allen* Sterling Federal Systems NASA Ames Division Moffett Field, California and Paul T. Sodermant NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California September 12, 1994 Abstract Background noise in both open-jet and closed wind tunnels adversely affects the signN-to-noise ratio of acoustic measurements. To measure the noise of increasingly quieter aircraft models, the background noise will have to be reduced by physical means or through signal processing. In a closed wind tunnel, such as the NASA Ames 40- by 80- Foot Wind Tunnel, the principle background noise sources can be classified as: 1) fan drive noise 2) microphone self-noise 3) aerodynamically induced noise from test-dependent hardware such as model struts and junctions, and 4) noise from the test section walls and vane set. This paper describes the steps taken to minimize the influence of each of these background noise sources in the 40 x 80.

Aeroacoustics Engineer, Member AIAA.

t Group Leader, Aeroacoustics and Test Techniques, Associate Fellow AIAA.

At low frequencies andat testsectionvelocitieslower than 120knots,the wind tunnel

fans arethe dominant sourceof tonal andbroadbandnoise.In the 40 x 80 most of this

noise is observedat frequenciesbelow 500 Hz.I Soundintensity mapping of the test

section,diffuser, and contractioncone,was done with the drive fans at flat pitch. The

resultsindicatedthat mostof thefan noisetendsto propagate upstream from the diffuser

exceptfor frequencies below500Hz wheresoundpropagates equallyfrom the contraction

coneandthe diffuser.The diffuseractslike a hornto allow efficientradiationof noiseinto

the testsection.The contractionconereflects noisebecause of the relatively abruptarea

change. Acoustictreatment on thevanesetsupstream of the contraction conealsoattenuate

someof the fan noise.

Partof the solution for reducingthedrive noiseof thewind tunnelis to lower the fan

speedbelow 180 RPM and control the test sectionvelocity with the fan blade angle. 2

Recent testsindicatethattheeffectof varyingthefan angleis mostadvantageous atlow test

sectionvelocities but has little effect at high velocities where the background noise is

dominated by the microphone self-noise.

Microphone self-noise appears to be the main source of background noise for measurements above 500 Hz. 2 Microphone self noise comes from several sources including: 1) boundary layer noise on the microphone, 2) noise created by onset turbulence striking the microphone 3 and 3) high frequency nose cone tones. One solution was the development of the FITE (Now-Induced Tone Eliminator) nose cone which eliminated high frequency tones generated at the nose cone screen, a Coherence measurements were made between two closely spaced in-flow microphones in the test section. The results show high coherence for frequencies below 500 Hz which is attributed to the wind tunnel fan tones. The maximum level of the coherence drops with increasing wind tunnel speed indicating the presence of increased incoherent self-noise. 5 The phase between the two microphones is also ambiguous above 500 Hz indicating the presence of uncorrelated self-noise at each microphone.

Noise created by test hardware in the test section have a wide range of characteristics depending on the particular source. Noise from microphone struts, model struts etc. have haystack-shaped frequency spectra, but sharp tones may also result from steady vortex shedding from cylinders and other objects. 6 During a test of various microphone strut designs, it was found that elimination of strut braces and junctions reduced the background noise significantly. This lead to the development of struts with maximum thickness airfoils

such as the McMasters-Henderson airfoil 7 which is designedto delay transition and

eliminatelaminarflow separation at high Reynoldsnumbers. Maximum thicknessairfoils

arestrongandcanoftenbeusedwithoutbraces.

Various signal processing methodshavebeenemployedfor discriminating against

background noiseto increase the signal-to-noise ratio.The paperwill includesomeresults

from cross-spectrummeasurements, multiple-element arrays, and time-delayed dual-

microphonemeasurements. With carefulattentiondevotedto elimination of background

noisesources andutilizing advanced signalprocessing methods, the signal-to-noise ratio in

the 40- by 80- Foot Wind Tunnel testsectionwill be maximizedfor the future needsof

aeroacoustic wind tunneltesting.

Reference_ .

Hudgins, L. H., "Advanced Sensor Study for NASA's 40' x 80' NFAC Wind Tunnel," Contract No. NAS2-13699, Final Report, March 1993.

, Soderman, P. T., "Sources and Levels of Background Noise in the NASA Ames 40- x 80- Foot Wind Tunnel - A Status Report," NASA TM 100077, May 1988.

.

Young, K. J., "Noise Characteristics of a 1/4-Inch Brtiel and Kjrer Microphone with UA 0385 Nose Cone in Airflow," Presented at the NASA Ames Workshop on Aeroacoustics Tunnel Testing Techniques, March 1979, also: NASA TM 84219, 1982.

.

Allen, C. S., and Soderman, P. T., "Aeroacoustic Probe Design for Microphone to Reduce Flow-Induced Self-Noise," AIAA 15th Aeroacoustics Conference, October 1993, AIAA Paper 93-4343.

Bendat, J. S., and Piersol, A. G., Engineering Applications of Correlation and Spectral Analysis, pp. 167 - 176, John Wiley & Sons, 1980.

o Brooks, T. F., Pope, D. S., and Marcolini, M. A., "Airfoil Self-Noise and Prediction," NASA Ref. Pub. 1218, July 1989.

o McMasters, J. H., Nordvik, R. H., Henderson, M. L., and Sandvig, J. H., "Two Airfoil Sections Designed for Low Reynolds Number," Technical Soaring, Vol. VI, No. 4, XVIIth OSTIV Congress, Paderborn, Germany, May 1981.

Source & rights

Source: ntrs.nasa.gov. Public-domain U.S. Government work (17 USC §105) — freely reproducible.

Permanent URL — we don’t break links.

Report a problem or request removal

Document details

Doc number
·
Publisher
·
NASA (NTRS)
Year
·
1995
Pages
·
4
File size
·
138 KB