Validation of High-Fidelity Numerical Simulations of Acoustic Liners Under Grazing Flow

High-fidelity numerical simulations with the lattice-Boltzmann method are carried out to characterize the response of an acoustic liner in the presence and in the absence of grazing flow. The liner’s impedance is numerically computed with different methods, i.e. in-situ, mode matching and Prony-like Kumaresan-Tufts, and the results are compared against experimental data, measured in the Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC) liner test rig, and the Goodrich semiempirical model. The no-flow results show a reasonable agreement with the semiempirical model but some differences with respect to the experimental educed results are present. It is found that, even in the absence of grazing flow, when applying the in-situ method, there are large variations of the local impedance depending on the sampling location on the face sheet. In presence of grazing flow, simulations with acoustic plane wave propagating in the same direction and in the direction opposite to the mean flow are carried out. Results show that, with the current grid resolution, the numerical educed impedance still overestimates the experimental one particularly at low frequencies, while better agreement is obtained with the in-situ numerical estimation, for both cases. The effects of the grazing flow on the local impedance measurements show high influence of near-orifice wake development. A drastic reduction of the effective percentage of open area is observed when there is grazing flow, as a result of the formation of vortices in the orifices of the liner

A Comparison of Impedance Eduction Test Rigs with Different Flow Profiles

The experimental characterization of acoustic liners applied for turbofan engines has been in the spotlight of the community for the last few decades. In general, such characterization is done by measurements of the liner acoustic impedance using different techniques in conditions as close as possible to those encountered in turbofan engines. Although a great amount of work has been published related to these techniques, few comparisons between different experimental setups using identical samples are available. The goal of the present study is to provide a comparison between educed acoustic impedances for two nominally identical liner samples in the UFSC Impedance Test Rig and the NASA Langley Research Center Grazing Flow Impedance Tube (GFIT). Due to the geometrical differences between the test rigs, it is possible to consider the effect of different grazing flow profiles on the educed impedance. Impedance measurements between the two facilities show similar results in absence of grazing flow, and different results when the grazing flow is present. Results are presented with both test rigs targeted to two different conditions: (i) same centerline Mach number and; (ii) same average Mach number. Both comparisons suggest a higher acoustic resistance obtained with the UFSC Impedance Test Rig. A comparison using semiempirical predictive models was also conducted. The results suggest that the main source for the observed difference is the grazing flow profile, represented by its boundary layer displacement thicknes

A comparison of in situ and impedance eduction experimental techniques for acoustic liners with grazing flow and high sound pressure level

Several techniques are available to characterize acoustic liners when subject to grazing flow and high sound pressure level (SPL). Although the in situ technique started as the primary experimental procedure, impedance eduction techniques have gained popularity over the past years. However, there is a lack of comparison between these group of methods, especially at conditions typically found in turbofan engines. In this work, in situ and impedance eduction techniques are compared at high flow velocities and SPL using typical acoustic liner test samples and considering uniform flow. Both upstream and downstream acoustic wave propagation will also be considered in view of thediscrepancies recently observed by eduction methods. A new method to compensate the instrumentation effect in the in situ technique is proposed and validated. Results are obtained for bulk Mach numbers up to 0.5 and SPLs up to 145 dB for both in situ and two eduction techniques. The three methods presents good agreement in the absence of flow. Unexpected results are observedwith higher flow Mach numbers using the eduction technique