Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Horvath, Csaba

Publications and source records attributed to Horvath, Csaba.

5 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Limitations of Phased Array Beamforming in Open Rotor Noise Source Imaging

Phased array beamforming results of the F31/A31 historical baseline counter-rotating open rotor blade set were investigated for measurement data taken on the NASA Counter-Rotating Open Rotor Propulsion Rig in the 9- by 15-Foot Low-Speed Wind Tunnel of NASA Glenn Research Center as well as data produced using the LINPROP open rotor tone noise code. The planar microphone array was positioned broadside and parallel to the axis of the open rotor, roughly 2.3 rotor diameters away. The results provide insight as to why the apparent noise sources of the blade passing frequency tones and interaction tones appear at their nominal Mach radii instead of at the actual noise sources, even if those locations are not on the blades. Contour maps corresponding to the sound fields produced by the radiating sound waves, taken from the simulations, are used to illustrate how the interaction patterns of circumferential spinning modes of rotating coherent noise sources interact with the phased array, often giving misleading results, as the apparent sources do not always show where the actual noise sources are located. This suggests that a more sophisticated source model would be required to accurately locate the sources of each tone. The results of this study also have implications with regard to the shielding of open rotor sources by airframe empennages.

Horvath, Csaba↗
NASA NTRS2013

An Update on Phased Array Results Obtained on the GE Counter-Rotating Open Rotor Model

Beamform maps have been generated from 1) simulated data generated by the LINPROP code and 2) actual experimental phased array data obtained on the GE Counter-rotating open rotor model. The beamform maps show that many of the tones in the experimental data come from their corresponding Mach radius. If the phased array points to the Mach radius associated with a tone then it is likely that the tone is a result of the loading and thickness noise on the blades. In this case, the phased array correctly points to where the noise is coming from and indicates the axial location of the loudest source in the image but not necessarily the correct vertical location. If the phased array does not point to the Mach radius associated with a tone then some mechanism other than loading and thickness noise may control the amplitude of the tone. In this case, the phased array may or may not point to the actual source. If the source is not rotating it is likely that the phased array points to the source. If the source is rotating it is likely that the phased array indicates the axial location of the loudest source but not necessarily the correct vertical location. These results indicate that you have to be careful in how you interpret phased array data obtained on an open rotor since they may show the tones coming from a location other than the source location. With a subsonic tip speed open rotor the tones can come form locations outboard of the blade tips. This has implications regarding noise shielding.

Podboy, Gary↗
NASA NTRS2010

Phased Array Noise Source Localization Measurements Made on a Williams International FJ44 Engine

A 48-microphone planar phased array system was used to acquire noise source localization data on a full-scale Williams International FJ44 turbofan engine. Data were acquired with the array at three different locations relative to the engine, two on the side and one in front of the engine. At the two side locations the planar microphone array was parallel to the engine centerline; at the front location the array was perpendicular to the engine centerline. At each of the three locations, data were acquired at eleven different engine operating conditions ranging from engine idle to maximum (take off) speed. Data obtained with the array off to the side of the engine were spatially filtered to separate the inlet and nozzle noise. Tones occurring in the inlet and nozzle spectra were traced to the low and high speed spools within the engine. The phased array data indicate that the Inflow Control Device (ICD) used during this test was not acoustically transparent; instead, some of the noise emanating from the inlet reflected off of the inlet lip of the ICD. This reflection is a source of error for far field noise measurements made during the test. The data also indicate that a total temperature rake in the inlet of the engine is a source of fan noise.

Podboy, Gary G.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Shock Characteristics Measured Upstream of Both a Forward-Swept and an Aft-Swept Fan

Three different types of diagnostic data-blade surface flow visualization, shroud unsteady pressure, and laser Doppler velocimeter (LDV)--were obtained on two fans, one forward-swept and one aft-swept, in order to learn more about the shocks which propagate upstream of these rotors when they are operated at transonic tip speeds. Flow visualization data are presented for the forward-swept fan operating at 13831 rpm(sub c), and for the aft-swept fan operating at 12500 and 13831 rpm(sub c) (corresponding to tip rotational Mach numbers of 1.07 and 1.19, respectively). The flow visualization data identify where the shocks occur on the suction side of the rotor blades. These data show that at the takeoff speed, 13831 rpm(sub c), the shocks occurring in the tip region of the forward-swept fan are further downstream in the blade passage than with the aft-swept fan. Shroud unsteady pressure measurements were acquired using a linear array of 15 equally-spaced pressure transducers extending from two tip axial chords upstream to 0.8 tip axial chords downstream of the static position of the tip leading edge of each rotor. Such data are presented for each fan operating at one subsonic and five transonic tip speeds. The unsteady pressure data show relatively strong detached shocks propagating upstream of the aft-swept rotor at the three lowest transonic tip speeds, and weak, oblique pressure disturbances attached to the tip of the aft-swept fan at the two highest transonic tip speeds. The unsteady pressure measurements made with the forward-swept fan do not show strong shocks propagating upstream of that rotor at any of the tested speeds. A comparison of the forward-swept and aft-swept shroud unsteady pressure measurements indicates that at any given transonic speed the pressure disturbance just upstream of the tip of the forward-swept fan is much weaker than that of the aft-swept fan. The LDV data suggest that at 12500 and 13831 rpm(sub c), the forward-swept fan swallowed the passage shocks occurring in the tip region of the blades, whereas the aft-swept fan did not. Due to this difference, the flows just upstream of the two fans were found to be quite different at both of these transonic speeds. Nevertheless, despite distinct differences just upstream of the two rotors, the two fan flows were much more alike about one axial blade chord further upstream. As a result, the LDV data suggest that it is unwise to attempt to determine the effect that the shocks have on far field noise by focusing only on measurements (or CFD predictions) made very near the rotor. Instead, these data suggest that it is important to track the shocks throughout the inlet.

Podboy, Gary G.↗