Engineering topics

Dittmar, J. H.

Publications and source records attributed to Dittmar, J. H..

At least 19 records

NASA NTRS1986

Cruise noise of counterrotation propeller at angle of attack in wind tunnel

The noise of a counterrotation propeller at angle of attack was measured in the NASA Lewis 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel at cruise conditions. Noise increases of as much as 4 dB were measured at positive angles of attack on the tunnel side wall, which represented an airplane fuselage. These noise increases could be minimized or eliminated by operating the counterrotation propeller with the front propeller turning up-inboard. This would require oppositely rotating propellers on opposite sides of the airplane. Noise analyses at different bandwidths enabled the separate front- and rear-propeller tones, as well as the total noise, at each harmonic to be determined. A simplified noise model was explored to show how the observed circumferential noise patterns of the separate propeller tones might have occurred. The total noise pattern, which represented the sum of the front- and rear-propeller tones at a particular harmonic, showed trends that would be hard to interpret without the separate-tone results. Therefore it is important that counterrotation angle-of-attack noise data be taken in such a manner that the front- and rear-propeller tones can be separated.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1986

An experimental investigation of reducing advanced turboprop cabin noise by wing shielding

An experimental investigation was undertaken to determine if wing shielding could reduce the noise impacting the fuselage of an advanced turboprop airplane. Four wings were tested behind two eight-bladed propeller models. Significant shielding of the propeller noise was observed and a particular wing-propeller geometry was identified to provide the most shielding. Specifically, an up-inboard rotation would be needed for a low-wing airplane and a down-inboard rotation for a high-wing airplane. As the axial Mach number was increased, the position where the shielding starts moved farther downstream. This shift in the start of shielding was roughly a straight line with respect to Mach number between M = 0.7 and M = 0.8. At M = 0.85 the start of shielding does not shift any farther downstream. A simple barrier noise-reduction model gave the same trends with transducer positions as did the data, and, if corrected for Mach number shift, the model might be used to provide estimates of the wing shielding. Besides providing a barrier to the noise reaching the shielded area, the wing also reflects some of the noise back onto the unshielded area. This can make the noise difference between the unshielded and shielded areas of the fuselage larger than would be expected by simple wind shielding.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1986

An estimate of the enroute noise of an advanced turboprop airplane NASA-TM-87302 E-3020 NAS 1.15:87302 HC A02/MF A01

The enroute noise of an Advanced Turboprop powered aircraft was estimated. The measured noise levels were roughly equivalent in annoyance to the noise 15.24 m from an automobile traveling at 80 km/h. It is felt that these levels would not illicit noise complaints from urban areas during the day but might be a slight annoyance in rural areas or in urban areas at night. Although it is not felt that the enroute noise is a major problem, it is indicated that a reduction in the enroute noise could improve the acceptability of advance turboprop airplanes.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1986

An experimental investigation of reducing advanced turboprop cabin noise by wing shielding

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1985

Laboratory experiments on active suppression of advanced turboprop noise

The noise generated by supersonic tip speed propellers may be a cabin environment problem for future propeller-driven airplanes. Active suppression from speakers inside the airplane cabin has been proposed for canceling out this noise. The potential of active suppression of advanced turboprop noise was tested by using speakers in a rectangular duct. Experiments were first performed with sine wave signals. The results compared well with the ideal cancellation curve of noise as a function of phase angle. Recorded noise signals from subsonic and supersonic tip speed propellers were than used in the duct to deterthe potential for canceling their noise. The subsonic propeller data showed significant cancellations but less than those obtained with the sine wave. The blade-passing-tone cancellation curve for the supersonic propeller was very similar to the subsonic curve, indicating that it is potentially just as easy to cancel supersonic as subsonic propeller blade-passing-tone noise. Propeller duct data from a recorded propeller source and spatial data taken on a propeller-drive airplane showed generally good agreement when compared versus phase angle. This agreement, combined with the similarity of the subsonic and supersonic duct propeller data, indicates that the area of cancellation for advanced supersonic propellers will be similar to that measured on the airplane. Since the area of cancellation on the airplane was small, a method for improving the active noise suppression by using outside speakers is discussed.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1985

Preliminary measurement of the noise from the 2/9 scale model of the Large-scale Advanced Propfan (LAP) propeller, SR-7A

Noise data on the Large-scale Advanced Propfan (LAP) propeller model SR-7A were taken into the NASA Lewis 8- by 6-Foot Wind Tunnel. The maximum blade passing tone decreases from the peak level when going to higher helical tip Mach numbers. This noise reduction points to the use of higher propeller speeds as a possible method to reduce airplane cabin noise while maintaining high flight speed and efficiency. Comparison of the SR-7A blade passing noise with the noise of the similarly designed SR-3 propeller shows good agreement as expected. The SR-7A propeller is slightly noisier than the SR-3 model in the plane of rotation at the cruise condition. Projections of the tunnel model data are made to the full-scale LAP propeller mounted on the test bed aircraft and compared with design predictions. The prediction method is conservative in the sense that it overpredicts the projected model data.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1985

Some design philosophy for reducing the community noise of advanced counter-rotation propellers

Advanced counter-rotation propellers have been indicated as possibly generating an unacceptable amount of noise for the people living near an airport. This report has explored ways to reduce this noise level, which is treated as being caused by the interaction of the upstream propeller wakes and vortices with the downstream propeller. The noise reduction techniques fall into two categories: (1) reducing the strength of the wakes and vortices, and (2) reducing the response of the downstream blades to them. The noise from the wake interaction was indicated as being reduced by increased propeller spacing and decreased blade drag coefficient. The vortex-interaction noise could be eliminated by having the vortex pass over the tips of the downstream blade, and it could be reduced by increased spacing or decreased initial circulation. The downstream blade response could be lessened by increasing the reduced frequency parameter omega or by phasing of the response from different sections to have a mutual cancellation effect. Uneven blade to blade spacing for the downstream blading was indicated as having a possible effect on the annoyance of counter-rotation propeller noise. Although there are undoubtedly additional methods of noise reduction not covered in this report, the inclusion of the design methods discussed would potentially result in a counter-rotation propeller that is acceptably quiet.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1985

Further comparison of wind tunnel and airplane acoustic data for advanced design high speed propeller models

Comparisons were made between the SR-2 and SR-3 model propeller noise data taken in the NASA 8-by-6 wind tunnel, in the United Technologies Research Center (UTRC) anechoic tunnel, and with boom and fuselage microphones on the NASA Jetstar airplane. Plots of peak blade passage tone noise versus helical tip Mach number generally showed good agreement. The levels of the airplane fuselage data were somewhat lower than the boom data by an approximately uniform value. The curve shapes were similar except for the UTRC data which was flatter than the other sets. This was attributed to the UTRC data being taken at constant power while the other data were taken at constant advance ratio. General curves of the peak blade passage tone versus helical tip Mach number fit through all the data are also presented. Directivity shape comparisons at the cruise condition were similar for the airplane and 8-by-6 tunnel data. The UTRC data peaked farther forward but, when an angle correction was made for the different axial Mach number used in the UTRC tests, the shape was similar to the others. The general agreement of the data from the four configurations enables the formation of a good consensus of the noise from these propellers.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1984

An experimental investigation of the effect of boundary layer refraction on the noise from a high-speed propeller

Models of supersonic propellers were previously tested for acoustics in the Lewis 8- by 6-Foot Wind Tunnel using pressure transducers mounted in the tunnel ceiling. The boundary layer on the tunnel ceiling is believed to refract some of the propeller noise away from the measurement transducers. Measurements were made on a plate installed in the wind tunnel which had a thinner boundary layer than the ceiling boundary layer. The plate was installed in two locations for comparison with tunnel ceiling noise data and with fuselage data taken on the NASA Dryden Jetstar airplane. Analysis of the data indicates that the refraction increases with: increasing boundary layer thickness; increasing free stream Mach number; increasing frequency; and decreasing sound radiation angle (toward the inlet axis). At aft radiation angles greater than about 100 deg there was little or no refraction. Comparisons with the airplane data indicated that not only is the boundary layer thickness important but also the shape of the velocity profile. Comparisons with an existing two-dimensional theory, using an idealized shear layer to approximate the boundary layer, showed that the theory and data had the same trends. Analysis of the data taken in the tunnel at two different distances from the propeller indicates a decay with distance in the wind tunnel at high Mach numbers but the decay at low Mach numbers is not as clear.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1984

Observations from varying the lift and drag inputs to a noise prediction method for supersonic helical tip speed propellers

Previous comparisons between calculated and measured supersonic helical tip speed propeller noise show them to have different trends of peak blade passing tone versus helical tip Mach number. It was postulated that improvements in this comparison could be made first by including the drag force terms in the prediction and then by reducing the blade lift terms at the tip to allow the drag forces to dominate the noise prediction. Propeller hub to tip lift distributions were varied, but they did not yield sufficient change in the predicted lift noise to improve the comparison. This result indicates that some basic changes in the theory may be needed. In addition, the noise predicted by the drag forces did not exhibit the same curve shape as the measured data. So even if the drag force terms were to dominate, the trends with helical tip Mach number for theory and experiment would still not be the same. The effect of the blade shock wave pressure rise was approxmated by increasing the drag coefficient at the blade tip. Predictions using this shock wdave approximation did have a curve shape similar to the measured data. This result indicates that the shock pressure rise probably controls the noise at supersonic tip speed and that the linear prediction method can give the proper noise trend with Mach number.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1984

Why credible propeller noise measurements are possible in the acoustically untreated NASA Lewis 8 ft by 6 ft wind tunnel

An explanation is presented for the lack of acoustic reflections in noise studies of propfan models in the NASA-Lewis 8 x 6 ft wind tunnel, where trials were run at Mach numbers 0.5-0.85. The highly directional propeller noise, i.e., mainly in the plane of rotation, experiences a convective effect due to the high subsonic axial Mach number. Reflected sounds are carried downstream, out of range of the acoustic sensors in the tunnel. Furthermore, reflected noise is less audible, and therefore does not affect measurements near peak values. It is suggested that some data contamination may occur below Mach 0.6, and that measurements be performed on higher harmonics generated by low level reflected noise.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1984

Fan noise reduction achieved by removing tip flow irregularities behind the rotor - forward arc test configurations

The noise source caused by the interaction of the rotor tip flow irregularities (vortices and velocity defects) with the downstream stator vanes was studied. Fan flow was removed behind a 0.508 meter (20 in.) diameter model turbofan through an outer wall slot between the rotor and stator. Noise measurements were made with far-field microphones positioned in an arc about the fan inlet and with a pressure transducer in the duct behind the stator. Little tone noise reduction was observed in the forward arc during flow removal; possibly because the rotor-stator interaction noise did not propagate upstream through the rotor. Noise reductions were maded in the duct behind the stator and the largest decrease occurred with the first increment of flow removal. This result indicates that the rotor tip flow irregularity-stator interaction is as important a noise producing mechanism as the normally considered rotor wake-stator interaction.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1983

A possible explanation for the present difference between linear noise theory and experimental data for supersonic helical tip speed propellers

High speed turboprops are attractive candidates for future aircraft because of their high propulsive efficiency. However, the noise of their propellers may create a cabin environment problem for the aircraft powered by these propellers. The noise of some propeller models was measured, and predictions of the noise using a method based on the Ffowcs Williams-Hawkins equation were made. The predictions and data agree well at lower helical tip Mach numbers but deviate above Mach 1.0. Some possible reasons why the theory does not predict the data and focuses on improvement of the aerodynamic inputs as the most likely remedy are investigated. In particular, it is proposed that an increase in the drag and a decrease in the lift near the tip of the blade where the majority of the noise is generated, is warranted in the input to the theory.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1983

Noise of the SR-6 propeller model at 2 deg and 4 deg angles of attack

The noise generated by supersonic-tip-speed propellers creates a cabin noise problem for future airplanes powered by these propellers. Noise of a number of propeller models were measured in the NASA Lewis 8- by 6-Foot Wind Tunnel with flow parallel to the propeller axis. In flight, as a result of the induced upwash from the airplane wing, the propeller is at an angle of attack with respect to the incoming flow. Therefore, the 10-blade SR-6 propeller was operated at angle of attack to determine its noise behavior. Higher blade passage tones were observed for the propeller operating at angle of attack in a 0.6 axial Mach number flow. The noise increase was not symmetrical, with one wall of the wind tunnel showing a larger noise increase than the other wall. No noise increase was observed at angle of attack in a 0.8 axial Mach number flow. For this propeller the dominance of thickness noise, which does not increase with angle of attack, explains the lack of noise increase at the higher 0.8 Mach number.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1983

Noise of the 10-bladed 60 deg swept SR-5 propeller in a wind tunnel

Noise generated by supersonic helical tip speed propellers is a possible cabin environment problem for future airplanes powered by these propellers. Noise characteristics of one of these propellers, designated SR-5, are presented. A matrix of tests was conducted to provide as much acoustic information as possible. During aerodynamic testing it was discovered that the propeller had an aeroelastic instability which prevented testing the propeller at its design advance ratio of 4.08 at axial Mach numbers over 0.7. Plots of the variation of the maximum blade passage tone with helical tip Mach number indicate that, at higher helical tip Mach numbers, the propeller operated on sharply increasing portion of the noise curve; therefore, extrapolations to the design condition would not be accurate. A possible extrapolation indicated that SR-5 at its design point should be quieter than SR-3 at its design point. Directivity plots at the higher helical tip Mach numbers indicate a lobed directivity pattern as was observed previously on the SR-3 propeller.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1983

A preliminary comparison between the SR-6 propeller noise in flight and in a wind tunnel

High speed turboprops offer an attractive candidate for aircraft because of their high propulsive efficiency. However, one of the possible problems associated with these propellers is their high noise level at cruise condition that may create a cabin environment problem. Models of these propellers were tested for acoustics in the 8 by 6-foot wind tunnel and on the Jet Star airplane. Comparisons between the airplane and wind tunnel data for the SR-6 propeller are shown. The comparison of maximum blade passing tone variation with helical tip Mach number between the tunnel and flight data was good when corrected to the same test conditions. Directivity comparisons also showed fairly good agreement. These good comparisons indicate that the wind tunnel is a viable location for measuring the blade passage tone noise of these propellers.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1982

Noise of the 10-bladed, 40 deg swept SR-6 propeller in a wind tunnel

The noise generated by supersonic helical-tip-speed propellers is a likely cabin environment problem for future airplanes powered by these propellers. Three propeller models with different tip sweeps. SR-1M, SR-2, and SR-3, designed for 244 m/sec (800 ft/sec) tip speed at a flight Mach number of 0.8 were previously tested in the NASA Lewis 8- by 6-Foot Wind Tunnel. In order to investigated another design point condition, the SR-6 propeller was designed for 213 m-sec (700 ft/sec) tip speed at a flight Mach number of 0.8. The noise data from this propeller are reported herein. Curves of blade passing frequency noise versus tip Mach number (at constant advance ratio) showed that the SR-6 propeller behaved similarly to the SR-1M propeller. The noise of the SR-6 propeller at its design condition, helical tip Mach number of 1.07, is approximately 3 dB quieter than the SR-2 propeller at its higher design helical tip Mach number of 1.15, but about 2.5 dB noisier than SR-3 at its design condition. The helical tip Mach number shift of the steep noise rise followed the same progression as the blade sweep angle for all of the propellers. When operated at the SR-3 design point, the SR-6 propeller was approximately 1.5 dB quieter than SR-2 and 4 dB noisier than SR-3.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1982

In-flight acoustic results from an advanced-design propeller at Mach numbers to 0.8

Acoustic data for the advanced-design SR-3 propeller at Mach numbers to 0.8 and helical tip Mach numbers to 1.14 are presented. Several advanced-design propellers, previously tested in wind tunnels at the Lewis Research Center, are being tested in flight at the Dryden Flight Research Facility. The flight-test propellers are mounted on a pylon on the top of the fuselage of a JetStar airplane. Instrumentation provides near-field acoustic data for the SR-3. Acoustic data for the SR-3 propeller at Mach numbers up to 0.8, for propeller helical tip Mach numbers up to 1.14, and comparison of wind tunnel to flight data are included. Flowfield profiles measured in the area adjacent to the propeller are also included.

Mackall, K. G.↗