Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “direct acoustics”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2009

Acoustically Induced Vibration of Structures: Reverberant Vs. Direct Acoustic Testing

Large reverberant chambers have been used for several decades in the aerospace industry to test larger structures such as solar arrays and reflectors to qualify and to detect faults in the design and fabrication of spacecraft and satellites. In the past decade some companies have begun using direct near field acoustic testing, employing speakers, for qualifying larger structures. A limited test data set obtained from recent acoustic tests of the same hardware exposed to both direct and reverberant acoustic field testing has indicated some differences in the resulting structural responses. In reverberant acoustic testing, higher vibration responses were observed at lower frequencies when compared with the direct acoustic testing. In the case of direct near field acoustic testing higher vibration responses appeared to occur at higher frequencies as well. In reverberant chamber testing and direct acoustic testing, standing acoustic modes of the reverberant chamber or the speakers and spacecraft parallel surfaces can strongly couple with the fundamental structural modes of the test hardware. In this paper data from recent acoustic testing of flight hardware, that yielded evidence of acoustic standing wave coupling with structural responses, are discussed in some detail. Convincing evidence of the acoustic standing wave/structural coupling phenomenon will be discussed, citing observations from acoustic testing of a simple aluminum plate. The implications of such acoustic coupling to testing of sensitive flight hardware will be discussed. The results discussed in this paper reveal issues with over or under testing of flight hardware that could pose unanticipated structural and flight qualification issues. Therefore, it is of paramount importance to understand the structural modal coupling with standing acoustic waves that has been observed in both methods of acoustic testing. This study will assist the community to choose an appropriate testing method and test setup in the planning stages.

Reverberant acoustic field↗
NASA NTRS1999

Direct Acoustic Test of QuikSCAT Spacecraft

A direct acoustic test was perfomed on the QuikSCAT spacecraft at Ball Aerospace Technology Corporation (BATC) in Boulder, Colorado, in October 1998. The QuikSCAT spacecraft was designed and built by BATC in an accelerated, one-year, program managed by the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

force↗
NASA NTRS1977

Aerodynamic and directional acoustic performance of a scoop inlet

Aerodynamic and directional acoustic performances of a scoop inlet were studied. The scoop inlet is designed with a portion of the lower cowling extended forward to direct upward any noise that is propagating out the front of the engine toward the ground. The tests were conducted in an anechoic wind tunnel facility at free stream velocities of 0, 18, 41, and 61 m/sec and angles of attack from -10 deg to 120 deg. Inlet throat Mach number was varied from 0.30 to 0.75. Aerodynamically, at a free stream velocity of 41 m/sec, the design throat Mach number (0.63), and an angle of attack of 50 deg, the scoop inlet total pressure recovery was 0.989 and the total pressure distortion was 0.15. The angles of attack where flow separation occurred with the scoop inlet were higher than those for a conventional symmetric inlet. Acoustically, the scoop inlet provided a maximum noise reduction of 12 to 15 db below the inlet over the entire range of throat Mach number and angle of attack at a free-stream velocity of 41 m/sec.

Abbott, J. M.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Acoustic Directivity of the DGEN Aero-propulsion Research Turbofan at Multiple Farfield Array Locations

The NASA Glenn Research Center's DGEN Aero-propulsion Research Turbofan (DART) is based on the Price Induction DGEN380 a small, ~500-lbf thrust class, high-bypass, geared-turbofan engine with a separate flow nozzle. The general characteristics of the DART make it an ideal candidate for utilization as a test bed for engine aeroacoustic research in a relevant performance environment. To provide a baseline acoustic profile for the DART, the system was tested in the NASA Glenn Research Center's Aero-Acoustic Propulsion Laboratory. Acoustic measurements from multiple external arrays locations were acquired over the nominal fan operating range of 50-95%. The acoustic data are evaluated and reported in terms of overall, broadband, and tonal components. The existence of interaction tones (a result of the physics of the dual-spool interactions) are noted and presented. The symmetry of the acoustic directivity was measured in preparation for potential testing in other facilities.

Turbofan Engine↗
NASA NTRS2018

Acoustic Directivity of the DGEN Aero-propulsion Research Turbofan at Multiple Farfield Array Locations

The NASA Glenn Research Center's DGEN Aero-propulsion Research Turbofan (DART) is based on the Price Induction DGEN380 - a small, ~500-lbf thrust class, high-bypass, geared-turbofan engine with a separate flow nozzle. The general characteristics of the DART make it an ideal candidate for utilization as a test bed for engine aeroacoustic research in a relevant performance environment. To provide a baseline acoustic profile for the DART, the system was tested in the NASA Glenn Research Center's Aero-Acoustic Propulsion Laboratory. Acoustic measurements from multiple external arrays locations were acquired over the nominal fan operating range of 50-95%. The acoustic data are evaluated and reported in terms of overall, broadband, and tonal components. The existence of interaction tones (a result of the physics of the dual-spool interactions) are noted and presented. The symmetry of the acoustic directivity was measured in preparation for potential testing in other facilities.

Turbofan↗
NASA NTRS1976

Directional acoustic measurements by laser Doppler velocimeters

Laser Doppler velocimeters (LDVs) are used as velocity microphones to measure sound pressure level in the range from 90 to 130 dB, spectral components, and two-point correlation functions for acoustic-noise source identification. Close agreement between LDV and microphone data is observed. Directional sensitivity and the ability to measure remotely make LDVs useful tools for acoustic measurement where placement of any physical probe is difficult or undesirable, as in the diagnosis of jet noise.

Mazumder, M. K.↗
NASA NTRS1976

Directional acoustic measurements by laser Doppler velocimeters

Laser Doppler velocimeters (LDVs) were used as velocity microphones to measure sound pressure level in the range of 90-130 db, spectral components, and two-point cross correlation functions for acoustic noise source identification. Close agreement between LDV and microphone data is observed. It was concluded that directional sensitivity and the ability to measure remotely make LDVs useful tools for acoustic measurement where placement of any physical probe is difficult or undesirable, as in the diagnosis of jet aircraft noise.

Mazumder, M. K.↗
NASA NTRS1974

High-directivity acoustic antenna

Acoustic antenna with unique electronic steering control is used to identify and define aerodynamic noise sources in free field, particularly in wind tunnel which is quite reverberant. Provision is made for high directivity as well as improved discrimination against unwanted background noise such as reverberation or echoes.

El-Sum, H. M. A.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Acoustic Directivity and Insertion Loss Measurements of Advanced Liners Installed the Inlet of the DGEN Aeropropulsion Research Turbofan

The NASA Glenn Research Center’s DGEN Aeropropulsion Research Turbofan (DART) is based on the Price Induction DGEN380—a small, ~500-lbf thrust class, high-bypass, geared-turbofan engine with a separate flow nozzle. The general characteristics of the DART make it an ideal candidate for utilization as a test bed for engine aeroacoustic research in a relevant performance environment. The DART was used to document the efficacy of acoustic liners installed in the inlet of the DGEN380. An advanced multi-degree-of-freedom liner (MDOF) was designed and tested, along with a traditional single-degree-of- freedom liner (SDOF), and those results compared to a hard-wall baseline inlet. Farfield acoustic data were acquired from an external array, evaluated, and reported here-in terms of overall, broadband, and tonal components of the insertion loss.

Noise Reduction↗
NASA NTRS2012

Reverberant Acoustic Testing and Direct Field Acoustic Testing Acoustic Standing Waves and their Impact on Structural Responses

The aerospace industry has been using two methods of acoustic testing to qualify flight hardware: (1) Reverberant Acoustic Test (RAT), (2) Direct Field Acoustic Test (DFAT). The acoustic field obtained by RAT is generally understood and assumed to be diffuse, expect below Schroeder cut-of frequencies. DFAT method of testing has some distinct advantages over RAT, however the acoustic field characteristics can be strongly affected by test setup such as the speaker layouts, number and location of control microphones and control schemes. In this paper the following are discussed based on DEMO tests performed at APL and JPL: (1) Acoustic wave interference patterns and acoustic standing waves, (2) The structural responses in RAT and DFAT.

vibro-acoustics↗
NASA NTRS2018

Investigation of Multi-Input, Multi-Output (MIMO) Random Control Applied to Direct Field Acoustic Testing

Direct Field Acoustic Testing (DFAT) offers potential cost and time savings over reverberant chamber acoustic testing of spacecraft. The NASA Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Program recently directed a series of acoustic tests on Orion structural test articles comparing DFAT and reverberant testing of the same test article with a view to qualifying DFAT for manned space flight vehicles. The verification process compared four parameters noise level compliance with the one third octave test specification, spatial uniformity of the acoustic field, spatial correlation of the acoustic field and vibration response of vehicle structure, including representative solar array panels. While the results of the verification were encouraging, MPCV Loads and Dynamics engaged Quartus Engineering to investigate whether alternative MIMO random control strategies might improve the spatial uniformity and/or the spatial correlation of the DFAT acoustic field. This paper presents the results of acoustic field simulations of the DFAT test and provides a better understanding of how MIMO random control systems originally developed for vibration and structural durability testing can be expected to perform in DFAT testing.

Direct Field↗
NASA NTRS2012

Impact of Acoustic Standing Waves on Structural Responses: Reverberant Acoustic Testing (RAT) vs. Direct Field Acoustic Testing (DFAT)

Loudspeakers have been used for acoustic qualification of spacecraft, reflectors, solar panels, and other acoustically responsive structures for more than a decade. Limited measurements from some of the recent speaker tests used to qualify flight hardware have indicated significant spatial variation of the acoustic field within the test volume. Also structural responses have been reported to differ when similar tests were performed using reverberant chambers. To address the impact of non-uniform acoustic field on structural responses, a series of acoustic tests were performed using a flat panel and a 3-ft cylinder exposed to the field controlled by speakers and repeated in a reverberant chamber. The speaker testing was performed using multi-input-single-output (MISO) and multi-input-multi-output (MIMO) control schemes with and without the test articles. In this paper the spatial variation of the acoustic field due to acoustic standing waves and their impacts on the structural responses in RAT and DFAT (both using MISO and MIMO controls for DFAT) are discussed in some detail.

speakers↗