Flowfield dynamics in blunt fin-induced shock wave/turbulent boundary layer interactions

Fluctuating wall pressure measurements have been made on centerline upstream of a blunt fin in a Mach 5 turbulent boundary layer. By examining the ensemble averaged wall pressure distributions for different separation shock foot positions, it has been shown that local fluctuating wall pressure measurements are due to a distinct pressure distribution, Rho(sub i), which undergoes a stretching and flattening effect as its upstream boundary translates aperiodically between the upstream influence and separation lines. The locations of the maxima and minima in the wall pressure standard deviation can be accurately predicted using this distribution, providing quantitative confirmation of the model. This model also explains the observed cross-correlations and ensemble average measurements within the interaction. Using the Rho(sub i) model, wall pressure signals from under the separated flow region were used to reproduce the position-time history of the separation shock foot. Further, the negative time delay peak in the cross-correlation between the predicted and actual shock foot histories suggests that the separated region fluctuations precede shock foot motion. The unsteady behavior of the primary horseshoe vortex and its relation to the unsteady separation shock are described

Acoustic Phased Array Quantification of Quiet Technology Demonstrator 3 Advanced Inlet Liner Noise Component

Acoustic phased array flyover noise measurements were acquired as part of the Boeing 737 MAX-7 NASA Advanced Inlet Liner segment of the Quiet Technology Demonstrator 3 (QTD3) flight test program. This paper reports on the processes used for separating and quantifying the engine inlet, exhaust and airframe noise source components and provides sample phased array-based comparisons of the component noise source levels associated with the inlet liner treatment configurations. Full scale flyover noise testing of NASA advanced inlet liners was conducted as part of the Quiet Technology Demonstrator 3 flight test program in July and August of 2018. Details on the inlet designs and testing are provided in the companion paper of Reference 1. The present paper provides supplemental details relating to the acoustic phased array portion of the analyses provided in Ref. 1. In brief, the test article was a Boeing 737MAX-7 aircraft with a modified right hand (starboard side) engine inlet, which consisted of either a production inlet liner, a NASA designed inlet liner or a simulated hard wall configuration (accomplished by applying speed tape over the inlet acoustic treatment areas). In all three configurations, the engine forward fan case acoustic panel was replaced with a unperforated (hardwall) panel. No other modifications to any other acoustic treatment areas were made. The left hand (port side) engine was a production engine and was flown at idle thrust for all measurements in order to isolate the effects of the inlet liners to the right hand engine. As described in Ref. 1, the NASA inlet treatment consists of laterally cut slots (cut perpendicular to the flow direction) which are designed to reduce excrescence drag while maintaining or exceeding the liner acoustic noise reduction capabilities. The NASA inlet liner consists of a Multi-Degree of Freedom (MDOF) design with two breathable septum layers inserted into each honeycomb cell [1]. The aircraft noise measurements were acquired for both takeoff (flaps 1 setting, gear up) and approach (flaps 30 gear up and gear down) configurations. The inlet and flight test configurations are summarized in Table 1. Table 1: Inlet Treatment and Flight Configurations Inlet Forward Fan Case Aircraft Production Hardwall Flaps 1, gear up; flaps 30 gear up; flaps 30 gear down NASA Hardwall Flaps 1, gear up; flaps 30 gear up; flaps 30 gear down Hardwall Hardwall Flaps 1, gear up; flaps 30 gear up; flaps 30 gear down III.Test Description and Hardware The flight testing was conducted at the Grant County airport in Moses Lake, WA, between 27 July and 6 August 2018. The noise measurement instrumentation included 8 flush dish microphones arranged in a noise certification configuration as well as an 840 microphone phased array. The flush dish microphones were used to quantify the levels and differences in levels between the various inlet treatments. The phased array was used to separate and quantify the narrowband (tonal) and broadband noise component levels from the engine inlet/exhaust and from the airframe. Phased array extraction of the broadband component was critical to this study because it allowed for the separation of the inlet component from the total airplane level noise even when it was significantly below the total level. Figure 1 provides an overview of the phased array microphone layout as well as a detailed image of an individual phased array microphone mounted in a plate holder (the microphone sensor is the dot in the center of the plate). The ground plane ensemble array microphones (referred to as ensemble array in this paper) were mounted in plates with flower petal edges designed to minimize edge scattering effects. Fig. 1 Flyover test microphone layout. The phased array configuration was the result of a progressive development of concepts originally implemented in Ref. 2 and refined over the following years, consisting namely of multiple multi-arm logarithmic spiral subarrays designed to cover overlapping frequency ranges and optimized for various aircraft emission angles. For the present case, the signals from all 840 microphones were acquired on a single system. The 840 microphones were parsed into 11 primary subarray sets spanning from smallest to largest aperture size and labeled accordingly as a, b, , k, where a corresponds to the smallest fielded subarray and k corresponds to the largest aperture subarray. The apertures ranged from approximately 10 ft to 427 ft in size (in the flight direction) with the subarrays consisting of between 215 and 312 microphones. Figure 2 shows three such subarrays, k, h and a. As done in Ref. 2, microphones were shared between subarrays in order to reduce total channel count. Fig. 2 Sample subarray sizes (20 from overhead refer to Figure 3a discussion). In addition to the above, each of the 11 primary subarray sets consisted of four subarrays optimized to provide near equivalent array spatial resolution in both the flight and lateral directions within 30 degrees of overhead (i.e., airplane directly above the center of the array), namely, at angles of 0, 10, 20 and 30 degrees relative to overhead where angle is defined as shown in Figure 3a. This allowed for optimized aircraft noise measurements from 60 to 120 degree emission angle.6 An example of this pletharray design is shown in Figure 3b for the k subarray. When the aircraft is at overhead, the microphones indicated by the blue markers are used for beamforming. When the aircraft is at angles 10 degrees from overhead, both the blue and red colored microphones are used, and so on for the 20 and 30 degree aircraft locations. See Ref. 3 for extensive details on pletharray design for aeroacoustic phased array testing. 6 In the discussions that follow, emission angle values are used. These are the angles at the time sound is emitted relative to the engine axis and are calculated based on flight path angle, body aircraft body angle with respect to the relative wind direction, and engine axis angle relative to aircraft body angle

Flaperon Modification Effect on Jet-Flap Interaction Noise Reduction for Chevron Nozzles

Jet-flap interaction (JFI) noise can become an important component of far field noise when a flap is immersed in the engine propulsive stream or is in its entrained region, as in approach conditions for under-the-wing engine configurations. We experimentally study the effect of modifying the flaperon, which is a high speed aileron between the inboard and outboard flaps, at both approach and take-off conditions using scaled models in a free jet. The flaperon modifications were of two types: sawtooth trailing edge and mini vortex generators (vg s). Parametric variations of these two concepts were tested with a round coaxial nozzle and an advanced chevron nozzle, with azimuthally varying fan chevrons, using both far field microphone arrays and phased microphone arrays for source diagnostics purposes. In general, the phased array results corroborated the far field results in the upstream quadrant pointing to JFI near the flaperon trailing edge as the origin of the far field noise changes. Specific sawtooth trailing edges in conjunction with the round nozzle gave marginal reduction in JFI noise at approach, and parallel co-rotating mini-vg s were somewhat more beneficial over a wider range of angles, but both concepts were noisier at take-off conditions. These two concepts had generally an adverse JFI effect when used in conjunction with the advanced chevron nozzle at both approach and take-off conditions

Phased Acoustic Array Measurements of a 5.75 Percent Hybrid Wing Body Aircraft

Detailed acoustic measurements of the noise from the leading-edge Krueger flap of a 5.75 percent Hybrid Wing Body (HWB) aircraft model were recently acquired with a traversing phased microphone array in the AEDC NFAC (Arnold Engineering Development Complex, National Full Scale Aerodynamics Complex) 40- by 80-Foot Wind Tunnel at NASA Ames Research Center. The spatial resolution of the array was sufficient to distinguish between individual support brackets over the full-scale frequency range of 100 to 2875 Hertz. For conditions representative of landing and take-off configuration, the noise from the brackets dominated other sources near the leading edge. Inclusion of flight-like brackets for select conditions highlights the importance of including the correct number of leading-edge high-lift device brackets with sufficient scale and fidelity. These measurements will support the development of new predictive models

Airframe Noise Results from the QTD II Flight Test Program

With continued growth in air travel, sensitivity to community noise intensifies and materializes in the form of increased monitoring, regulations, and restrictions. Accordingly, realization of quieter aircraft is imperative, albeit only achievable with reduction of both engine and airframe components of total aircraft noise. Model-scale airframe noise testing has aided in this pursuit; however, the results are somewhat limited due to lack of fidelity of model hardware, particularly in simulating full-scale landing gear. Moreover, simulation of true in-flight conditions is non-trivial if not infeasible. This paper reports on an investigation of full-scale landing gear noise measured as part of the 2005 Quiet Technology Demonstrator 2 (QTD2) flight test program. Conventional Boeing 777-300ER main landing gear were tested, along with two noise reduction concepts, namely a toboggan fairing and gear alignment with the local flow, both of which were down-selected from various other noise reduction devices evaluated in model-scale testing at Virginia Tech. The full-scale toboggan fairings were designed by Goodrich Aerostructures as add-on devices allowing for complete retraction of the main gear. The baseline-conventional gear, faired gear, and aligned gear were all evaluated with the high-lift system in the retracted position and deployed at various flap settings, all at engine idle power setting. Measurements were taken with flyover community noise microphones and a large aperture acoustic phased array, yielding far-field spectra, and localized sources (beamform maps). The results were utilized to evaluate qualitatively and quantitatively the merit of each noise reduction concept. Complete similarity between model-scale and full-scale noise reduction levels was not found and requires further investigation. Far-field spectra exhibited no noise reduction for both concepts across all angles and frequencies. Phased array beamform maps show inconclusive evidence of noise reduction at selective frequencies (1500 to 3000 Hz) but are otherwise in general agreement with the far-field spectra results (within measurement uncertainty)

DAMAS2 VALIDATION FOR FLIGHT TEST AIRFRAME NOISE MEASUREMENTS

ABSTRACT The DAMAS2 algorithm is a deconvolution method which can be used to quantify aircraft noise subcomponent spectral levels obtained using phased array measurements. This paper examines the effectiveness of the DAMAS2 algorithm for accurately determining flight test aircraft noise subcomponent spectral levels. First, the DAMAS2 subcomponent spectral levels are shown to be qualitatively correct through comparison with the expected behavior as seen in the phased array beamform maps. The DAMAS2 spectra are then compared to sample output from the original DAMAS algorithm and are seen to be generally within 0.1 dB of DAMAS algorithm spectral levels. Lastly, the shape of the cumulative DAMAS2 spectral levels are compared with single microphone spectra and are seen to be in very good agreement. The DAMAS2 algorithm is seen to be an effective tool for flight test aircraft noise subcomponent spectral measurement

Data Treatment in Food Proteomics

14 pagesFood proteomics can be defined as the large-scale analysis of the proteins in a particular biological food system. Proteomics includes not only the study of the structure and function of proteins but also the quantification of their abundance, the interactions between them, their intracellular location and the analysis of protein modifications. This powerful -omics methodology is achieving a large impact in the research community of modern food science. In fact, a new discipline called foodomics that studies food and nutrition domains through the application of -omics technologies has been reported. The recent successes of proteomic methodologies make them an encouraging strategy for food science studies, where research institutions, industries, agencies and regulatory laboratories are combining efforts to acquire the needed knowledge of composition, quality and safety on food products. In fact, proteins can act as ideal molecular indicators of a characteristic food/nutritional state or condition in food science. Currently, mass spectrometry (MS), mainly matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time of flight (MALDI-TOF) and electrospray-ion trap (ESI-IT) MS, has been recognized as an indispensable tool to detect multiple features of a complex protein sample for the majority of proteomics studies. Moreover, the bioinformatics treatment of MS data has increased the scale of proteomics tools, representing a powerful strategy for high-throughput protein and peptide identification and quantificationN