A note on noise generation by large scale
turbulent structures in subsonic and
supersonic jets
Philip J. Morris
*
Department of Aerospace Engineering
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802, U.S.A. pjn@psu.edu
ABSTRACT
This paper describes a method to connect the measured spectral density in the acoustic far field
with the wavenumber/frequency spectrum of the near field fluctuations that produce the noise. A
relationship is first derived between the far field spectral density and the wavenumber/frequency
spectrum of the pressure fluctuations on a cylindrical surface surrounding the jet in the near field.
Measurements of the far field spectral density are then decomposed into contributions from the
Large Scale Similarity (LSS) and Fine Scale Similarity (FSS) spectra. The near field
wavenumber/frequency spectrum associated with the LSS spectral density alone is then
determined. It is shown to have a very similar form for a range of jet operating conditions and
Strouhal numbers. This form is consistent with an instability wave or wave packet model. Since
both subsonic and supersonic jet exit conditions are examined, it is argued that the noise
radiation in the peak radiation directions is controlled by the axial evolution of the turbulent large
scale structures and is not associated with a combination of source convection and mean flow
refraction effects.
1. INTRODUCTION
In spite of sixty years of research into the sources of noise generation in jets, no
consensus yet exists in the aeroacoustics community about the fundamental noise
source mechanisms. In addition, there is still no technique that enables the prediction
of jet noise on the basis of the jet operating conditions and the nozzle geometry alone.
It could be argued that Direct Numerical Simulations (DNS) and Large Eddy
Simulations (LES) have made steps in this direction, but they are computationally
expensive and, by themselves, do not provide an understanding of the noise generation
mechanisms: they are another form of jet noise experiment.
*
Boeing/A. D. Welliver Professor
Today, the aeroacoustics research community is faced with two different concepts
for the noise generation and radiation mechanisms. The first methods follow, in some
fashion, the original work of Lighthill [1, 2]. These approaches are called acoustic
analogies and are based on a rearrangement of the equations of motion into the form of
an equation with a wave propagator as the left hand side and the remaining terms acting
as equivalent sources on the right hand side. The effects of source convection were
considered by Ffowcs Williams [3] and the effect of the mean flow on the propagation
of the sound was included in acoustic analogies by Lilley [4] and Goldstein [5]. Many
reviews of the subsequent developments of these approaches are available, including
techniques to combine them with Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) to make noise
predictions. In general, these predictions are excellent at large angles to the jet
downstream axis, but not in the peak noise directions at smaller angles to the
downstream jet axis. Examples include predictions by Khavaran and Bridges [6],
Morris and Boluriaan [7], and Tam and Auriault [8]. The last approach is not based on
an acoustic analogy, but is closely related. Anotable recent exception is the analysis and
predictions by Goldstein and Leib. [9] The primary differences from previous acoustic
analogy approaches in this study are in the modeling of the source statistical properties
and the use of a propagator that accounts for the slow divergence of the jet flow.
The second point of view argues that the jet noise radiated in the peak noise
radiation directions can be associated with another source mechanism. When the jet
turbulence is convecting supersonically with respect to the ambient speed of sound, a
highly directional noise directivity is observed. Theoretical work by Tam and Morris
[10], Morris and Tam [11] and Tam and Burton [12] and experimental measurements
by McLaughlin et al.[13] have shown that this noise radiation is associated with the
large scale turbulent structures in the jet, and that they can be modeled as linear
instability waves. Tam et al. [14] examined a large database of supersonic jet noise
measurements and showed that the measured far field spectral density could be
collapsed using two similarity spectra. The spectrum shape that dominated in the peak
noise directions was designated as the Large Scale Similarity (LSS) spectrum, being
associated with the large scale structures in the jet shear layer. Asecond spectrum, the
Fine Scale Similarity (FSS) spectrum, was found to fit the data at larger angles to the
jet downstream axis. At intermediate angles, a combination of the two spectra was
needed to match the experimental measurements. Remarkably, the same two spectra
also permit the collapse of measured spectra at convectively subsonic jet operating
conditions. Additional experimental evidence by Viswanathan [15] and Tam et al. [16]
reinforce the idea that there are two separate noise generation mechanisms in jets at all
operating conditions. It is the latter idea that is pursued in the present paper. The goal
is to determine whether the properties of the LSS spectrum, measured in the far field,
are compatible with a consistent large scale structure model at both subsonic and
supersonic jet operating conditions.
The present paper follows, to some extent, the previous analyses and experiments by
Reba et al. [17], Suzuki and Colonius [18], Ladeinde et al. [19], and Reba et al. [20].
Each of these papers look for a connection between the near and far fields of a jet and
base their analyses on near field models and experiments. In the present paper, no model
302 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in
subsonic and supersonic jets
for the near field structure is assumed a priori. The behavior is deduced from far field
observations. In addition, only the near field fluctuations that contribute to the LSS
spectrum are extracted. Though, as discussed below, the present approach has
limitations, the consistency of the inferred near field behavior with a traveling wave
packet model for the noise source, at both subsonic and supersonic jet operating
conditions, provides additional evidence for the validity of such a representation.
In the next section, a relationship is developed between the wavenumber spectrum
on a cylindrical surface surrounding the jet and the spectral density in the far field. In
the following section, the far field spectrum is decomposed into the large scale and fine
scale similarity components. These data are then used to determine the magnitude of the
near field wavenumber spectrum associated with the large scale similarity spectrum
alone. Finally, it is shown how these wavenumber spectra conform to a physically
realizable representation of the evolution of large scale structures, modeled as
instability waves or wave packets, in the jet.
2. ANALYTICAL DEVELOPMENT
Consider a cylindrical surface of radius a surrounding an axisymmetric jet. It is
assumed that a is sufficiently close to the jet to sense both the radiating and non
radiating components of the turbulent pressure fluctuations. It is also assumed that the
cylinder is in a stationary ambient medium surrounding the jet.
In the stationary medium surrounding the jet the pressure fluctuation p(r,ϕ,z,t)
satisfies the threedimensional wave equation, written here in cylindrical polar
coordinates.
(1)
where (r,ϕ,z) are the coordinates in the radial, azimuthal, and axial directions,
respectively, relative to the jet downstream axis, and c
o
is the speed of sound in the
ambient medium.
The pressure can be represented in terms of its Fourier transform with respect to
time, t and axial distance, and a Fourier series in the azimuthal direction. That is,
(2)
and,
(3) P r k p r z t i kz n
n
( , , ) ( , , , ) exp[ ( ω ϕ
π
π
− +
− −∞
∞
−∞
∞
∫ ∫ ∫
ϕϕ ω ϕ − t d dzdt )] ,
p r z t P r k
n
n
, , , , , exp ϕ
π
ω ( )
( )
( )
−∞
∞
−∞
∞
−∞
∞
∫ ∫
∑
1
2
3
ii kz n t d dk + − ( )
]
]
ϕ ω ω ,
∂
∂
−
∂
∂
+
∂
∂
+
∂
∂
+
∂
∂

.
2
2
2
2
2 2
2
2
2
2
1 1 p
t
c
p
r r
p
r r
p p
z
o
ϕ
``
}
0,
aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 303
where, ω is the radian frequency and k is the axial wavenumber. Then, P
n
(r, k, ω )
satisfies the equation,
(4)
The general solution to Eqn. (4) involving either outgoing or decaying waves can be written,
(5)
Where is the Hankel function of the first kind of order n and argument ζ. Also,
(6)
The variation of A
n
(k, ω) is determined by the variation of the pressure on the
cylindrical surface surrounding the jet.
The pressure fluctuations on the cylindrical surface are not simply associated with
a single frequency and are not deterministic. There is a random or stochastic nature to
the pressure field. To account for this, following Tam and Chen [21] and Tam [22], the
wavenumber/frequency spectrum of the nth azimuthal mode of the pressure
fluctuations on the cylindrical surface is represented by,
(7)
where a
n
(ω) is a real random function of freqeuncy and, as a normalization condition,
(8)
Then, from Eqns. (5) and (7),
(9)
The pressure fluctuation external to and on the cylindrical surface, is given by the
inverse Fourier transforms,
(10)
p r z t a G k
n
n n
( , , , )
( )
( ) ( , ) ϕ
π
ω ω
−∞
∞
−∞
∞
−∞
∞
∑
1
2
3 ∫ ∫
HH r
H a
i kz n t d dk
n
n
( )
( )
( )
( )
exp[ ( )] .
1
1
λ
λ
ϕ ω ω + −
P r k a
H r
H a
G k
n n
n
n
n
( , , ) ( )
( )
( )
( , ).
( )
( )
ω ω
λ
λ
ω
1
1
∫
−∞
∞
G k dk
n
( , ) ω 1
P a k a G k
n n n
( , , ) ( ) ( , ), ω ω ω
λ ω π λ π − − ≤ ( / ) /
/ 2 2 2 1 2
2 c k
o
with <arg( ) /2.
H
n
( )
( )
1
ζ
r k A k H r
n n
( , , ) ( , ) ( ),
( )
ω ω λ
1
n
P
d P
dr r
dP
dr c
k
n
r
P
n n
o
n
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
0 + + − −

.
`
}
ω
.
304 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in
subsonic and supersonic jets
2.1. The far field spectral density
From Eqn. (10), the autocorrelation for the pressure is given by,
(11)
where the overbar denotes an ensemble average and
To provide a definition of the properties of the random variable, let the
autocorrelation of the pressure on the cylindrical surface at z = 0 be given by, (see Tam
[21] ),
(12)
This is equivalent to stating that there are no preferred frequencies or azimuthal mode
numbers: the initial pressure fluctuations have a “white noise” autospectrum at z 0.
Here, A is a nondimensional constant, and D
j,
ρ
j
,
and U
j
are the jet exit diameter,
density, and velocity, respectively. From Eqns. (11) and (12), as well as the
normalization condition, Eqn.( 8), it can be shown that,
(13)
From Tam [22] (Appendix A), noting the slightly different definitions of variables and
the associated choice of branch cuts, it can be shown that,
(14)
where an asterisk denotes a complex conjugate. Also, from the analytic continuation
properties of Hankel functions,
(15)
From its definition, it is also readily seen that,
(16)
It is also convenient to introduce the function F
n
(r, z,ω ) given by,
G k G k
n n −
− − ( , ) ( , ).
*
ω ω
H r H r
n n −
− −
]
]
( )
*
( )
*
( ) ( ) .
1 1
λ λ
λ ω λ ω ( , ) , )
*
− − k k ( −
a a A U D
n n j j j n n
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
,
.
ω ω π ρ δ ω ω δ
′
− ′ ′ + ′
2 4 2 3
2
p a t p a t A U D
j j j
( , , , ) ( , , , , ) ( ) ( ϕ ϕ χ τ ρ δ τ δ χ 0 0
2 2 3
+ + )).
′ − ′ λ ω ( / ) .
/
'
2 2 2 1 2
c k
o
p r z t p r z t a a
n n
, , , , , , ... ϕ ϕ τ
π
ω ω ( ) + ( )
( )
( ) ′ (
′
1
2
6
)) ( ) ′ ′ ( )
×
−∞
∞
−∞
∞
′−∞
∞
−∞
∞
′
∫ ∫
∑ ∑
, , G k G k
H
n
n n
n
ω ω
nn n
n n
r H r
H a H a
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
exp
1 1
1 1
λ λ
λ λ
( ) ′ ( )
( ) ′ ( )
′
′
ii k k z i n n i t i d d dkd + ′ ( ) + + ′ ( ) − + ′ ( ) − ′
[ ]
′ ′ ϕ ω ω ω τ ω ω kk ,
aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 305
exp
(17)
Substitution of these relationships into Eqn. (11), following integration with respect to
ω
′
, and a change of the variable k
′
to –k
′
, yields,
(18)
The spectral density of the pressure fluctuations is given by,
(19)
Then the integration with respect to τ can be performed and the spectral density is found
to be,
(20)
Before proceeding, a simplifying assumption will be made to only consider the n 0
case. This should be an adequate first step for the axisymmetric jet case. On a practical
level, the far field measurements used in the present paper are timeaveraged and only
made at one azimuthal angle. So, any attempt to extract the separate contributions from
the different azimuthal modes would require a much more comprehensive database. A
similar assumption was made by Tam [22] in his stochastic model of broadband shock
associated noise. So, the subsequent analysis can be considered to give an azimuthally
averaged result.
Equation (20) is valid for any value of r and z, (and ϕ), external to the cylindrical
surface. However, the measurements used in the present analysis are performed in the
far field. To obtain an expression for the spectral density in the far field, spherical polar
coordinates are introduced, such that
(21)
Also, in the limit of large argument, the Hankel function takes the asymptotic form,
(22)
Then, the method of stationary phase can be used to evaluate F (R, θ, ω). This gives,
H i
o
( )
( ) exp[ ( / )] .
1
2
4 ζ
πζ
ζ π ζ → − → ∞ as
z = R = R cos sin θ θ. , r
S r
A
U D F r z
j j j
n
n
( , ) ( , , ) . z,ω
π
ρ ω
−∞
∞
∑
2
2 3
2
2
S
r
p r t p r t (
, , ) ( ( , , ) ( , , , ) exp
–
ϕ ω
ϕ ϕ
τ z, z, z +
∞
∞
∫
(( ) . i d ω τ τ
p r t p r t
A
U D
j j j
n
( , , , ) ( , , , )
( )
ϕ ϕ τ
π
ρ z z +
−∞
∞ 2
2
2 3
2
∑∑
∞
∞
∫
–
( , , ) exp(– ) . F r z i d
n
ω ωτ ω
2
F r
G k
H k r
H
n
n
n
n
( , , )
( , )
[ ( , ) ]
[ (
–
( )
( )
z ω
ω
λ ω
λ
∞
∞
∫
1
1
kk a
ik
, ) ]
exp(
ω
z) dk
.
306 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in
subsonic and supersonic jets
(23)
Finally, using Eqns. (22) and (23), a relationship can be derived between the non
dimensional wavenumber/frequency spectrum of the pressure fluctuations on the
cylindrical surface and the far field spectral density. It is given by,
(24)
Note that Eqn. (24) only provides the near field wavenumber spectrum for
wavenumbers given by, k ≤ ω/c
o
.
In the next section, the measured far field spectral density is analyzed to extract the
component associated with the large scale structures. The resulting component is then
used in Eqn. (24) to determine the wavenumber/frequency spectrum of the near field
pressure fluctuations on the cylindrical surface that give rise to this observed far field
behavior. As noted already, it is clear from Eqn. (24) that only the supersonic phase
velocity or radiating components of the near field pressure fluctuations can be extracted
from the far field data. However, this does not mean that the method is only applicable to
jets with supersonically convecting turbulent structures, since the turbulent fluctuations at
any jet exit velocity will contain some components with supersonic phase speeds.
3. ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTAL MEASUREMENTS
The experiments were conducted in the Aeroacoustic Propulsion Facility at the NASA
Glenn Research Center. The measurements were made with both converging and
convergingdiverging nozzles. All the nozzles had a 2 inch exit diameter. The data have
been corrected to be lossless and the observer radius is at 100 jet diameters.
Descriptions of the test facility and the converging nozzle are given by Brown and
Bridges [23]. The test cases chosen are summarized in Table 1.
Nozzle C000 is a converging nozzle, and nozzles C015 and C018 are converging
diverging (CD) nozzles with design Mach numbers of 1.4 and 1.8 respectively. The total
temperature ratios have been selected so that the jet exit static temperature ratio is unity,
with the exception of the lowest velocity case where the jet is unheated. The CD nozzles
are operated on design.
The first step in the data analysis process is to separate the total spectrum into its
large scale similarity (LSS) and fine scale similarity (FSS) spectra, as developed by
Tam et al. [14]. Tam et al. [14] interrogated a large data base of acoustic measurements
made in the Jet Noise Laboratory at the NASA Langley Research Center. As noted in
the Introduction, they showed that the experimental data could be collapsed in terms of
two universal similarity spectra. They argued that the LSS spectrum, that fits the
measured spectra in the peak noise direction, is associated with the large scale turbulent
structures in the jet. Since they were examining supersonic data, and it is known that
the large scale turbulent structures generate instability wave noise radiation in the peak
A
G c
D
R
D
H a
o
j j
o
2
2
2
2
1
2
( cos / , )
( sin
( )
ω θ ω
π
ω

.
`
}
θθ
θ ω
ρ
/ )
( , , )
, c
S R
U D
o
j j j
2
2 3
F R
i
R
G c
H a c
o
o
( , , )
( cos / , )
( sin / )
e
( )
θ ω
ω θ
ω θ
−
2
1
ω
o
xxp( / ). i R c
o
ω
aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 307
noise direction, this is a reasonable assumption. Subsequently, several authors have
shown that the same LSS spectrum fits data at subsonic speeds as well (see
Viswanathan [15,24] , for example). The FSS spectrum fits the acoustic data at larger
angles to the jet downstream axis. The two similarity spectra are shown in Fig. 1.
Best fits, based on the two similarity spectra, have been determined for the spectral
density data for each operating condition. Many of the features of the data described by
Tam et al.[16] were noticed during this analysis. For example, the peak Strouhal
number for the FSS component varies only slightly with observer polar angle, whereas
the peak Strouhal number for the LSS component drops rapidly as the observer angle
moves closer to the jet downstream axis. However, here, only a few examples of the
308 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in
subsonic and supersonic jets
Figure 1: LSS and FSS similarity spectra.
10
−10
−20
−30
−40
10
−2
10
−1
10
0
10
1
0
S
p
e
c
t
r
a
l
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
,
d
B
r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
t
o
p
e
a
k
Frequency, f/f
peak
LSS spectrum
FSS spectrum
Table 1: Nozzles and operating conditions.
Design Nozzle Total Jet exit
Nozzle ID mach number pressure ratio temperature ratio velocity, U
j
m/s
C000 1.0 1.1916 1.000 171
C000 1.0 1.6883 1.160 308
C015 1.4 3.1820 1.392 480
C018 1.8 5.7450 1.648 618
decomposition are given. Fig. 2 shows the decomposition of the spectra at 25 and 45
degrees to the jet downstream axis for the lowest and highest speed cases as a function
of Strouhal number, St = f D
j
/U
j
. Note that in Fig. 2 (d) no significant contribution has
been assumed to be made by the FSS spectrum. Thus, the LSS and total spectra are
equal.
It should be noted that there is more than a little room for discretion in generating
the spectral decomposition. The peak frequency and level for both similarity spectra
need to be determined. In most cases, a perfect fit to the experimental data at all
frequencies is not possible. Some of this is due to the original similarity spectra being
generated for experimental data that was not corrected for atmospheric absorption:
aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 309
Figure 2: Decomposition of the spectral density into LSS and FSS similarity
components.
90
70
60
50
40
10
−2
10
−1
10
0
10
1
80
S
p
e
c
t
r
a
l
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
,
d
B
r
e
2
×
1
0

5
P
a
/
u
n
i
t
S
t
Strouhal number, St = fD
j
/U
j
(a) θ 45°, U
j
171 m/s.
Experiment
Total spectrum
LSS spectrum
FSS spectrum
90
70
60
50
40
10
−2
10
−1
10
0
10
1
80
S
p
e
c
t
r
a
l
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
,
d
B
r
e
2
×
1
0

5
P
a
/
u
n
i
t
S
t
Strouhal number, St = fD
j
/U
j
(b) θ 25°, U
j
171 m/s.
140
120
110
100
90
10
−2
10
−1
10
0
10
1
130
S
p
e
c
t
r
a
l
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
,
d
B
r
e
2
×
1
0

5
P
a
/
u
n
i
t
S
t
Strouhal number, St = fD
j
/U
j
Experiment
Total spectrum
LSS spectrum
FSS spectrum
(c) θ 45°, U
j
618 m/s.
(d) θ 25°, U
j
618 m/s.
140
120
110
100
90
10
−2
10
−1
10
0
10
1
130
S
p
e
c
t
r
a
l
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
,
d
B
r
e
2
×
1
0

5
P
a
/
u
n
i
t
S
t
Strouhal number, St = fD
j
/U
j
Experiment
Total spectrum
LSS spectrum
FSS spectrum
Experiment
Total spectrum
LSS spectrum
FSS spectrum
whereas the present data has been made lossless. In addition, Viswanathan[24] has
shown that the jet total temperature ratio affects the LSS spectral shape: particularly at
higher frequencies. However, the focus of the present study is at Strouhal numbers close
to the peak noise Strouhal number: in fact Strouhal numbers of 0.05, 0.1, 0.2 and 0.4
have been selected. In addition, only information concerning the LSS similarity
spectrum has been used and its peak frequency and level are easier to identify,
especially at relatively small angles to the jet downstream axis, where it dominates the
radiated noise.
Once the measured spectra at all angles have been decomposed, the spectral density
at the selected Strouhal numbers as a function of observer angle can be determined.
Then the near field wavenumber spectra at those Strouhal numbers can be calculated.
This process is described in the next section.
4. NEAR FIELD LSS WAVENUMBER SPECTRUM
In the previous section a method by which the variation of the LSS similarity spectral
density with observer angle can be determined was described. In this section this
information is used in Eqn. (24) to determine the wavenumber spectra at selected
frequencies on the cylindrical surface in the near field.
Figure 3 shows the LSS spectral density for Strouhal number St 0.1 as a function
of observer angle for the lowest and highest speed cases. The symbols show the
observer angles at which the data were taken with a spacing of 5 degrees. The data at θ
15 degrees are sometimes affected by the jet flow field itself. But this data has been
included in all the cases. It should be noted that the spectral density is shown with a
linear scale, so it represents S (R, θ, ω) in Pa
2
/Hz. Clearly the levels associated with the
highest velocity case are much greater.
These spectra, for all four jet exit velocity cases and four Strouhal numbers, are used
in the evaluation of the right hand side of Eqn. (24). The remaining terms are all known
quantities, so that the wavenumber spectra can be evaluated. The quantity AG (ωcos
θ/c
o
,ω) is shown for all the cases in Fig. 4. The data conform to a remarkably consistent
310 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in
subsonic and supersonic jets
Figure 3: LSS spectral densities. St = 0.1.
2E05
1E05
0
L
S
S
s
p
e
c
t
r
a
l
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
,
P
a
ˆ
2
/
H
z
Angle to downstream axis θ, degrees
(a) U
j
171 m/s.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
2
2.5
1.5
0.5
1
0
L
S
S
s
p
e
c
t
r
a
l
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
,
P
a
ˆ
2
/
H
z
Angle to downstream axis θ, degrees
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
(b) U
j
618 m/s.
pattern. As the jet exit velocity increases so the levels of the wavenumber spectra at a
given wavenumber decrease slightly. But all the spectra follow the same pattern with
increasing wavenumber that is shown in the most complete manner at the highest
velocity. It should be noted that the most reliable values of the LSS spectral density
correspond to higher end of the wavenumber range for each velocity condition, as this
aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 311
Figure 4: Wavenumber spectra of pressure fluctuations on a cylindrical surface of
radius D
j
.
0.001
0.0005
0
W
a
v
e
n
u
m
b
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
r
u
m
a
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e
,
A
/
G
(
ω
c
o
s
θ
/
c
o
,
θ
)
/
D
j
Wavenumber, kD
j
(c) St 0.20. (d) St 0.40.
(a) St 0.05.
(b) St 0.10.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
U
j
618 m/s
U
j
480 m/s
U
j
308 m/s
U
j
171 m/s
0.001
0.0005
0
W
a
v
e
n
u
m
b
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
r
u
m
a
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e
,
A
/
G
(
ω
c
o
s
θ
/
c
o
,
θ
)
/
D
j
Wavenumber, kD
j
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
U
j
618 m/s
U
j
480 m/s
U
j
308 m/s
U
j
171 m/s
0.001
0.0005
0
W
a
v
e
n
u
m
b
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
r
u
m
a
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e
,
A
/
G
(
ω
c
o
s
θ
/
c
o
,
θ
)
/
D
j
Wavenumber, kD
j
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
U
j
618 m/s
U
j
480 m/s
U
j
308 m/s
U
j
171 m/s
0.001
0.0005
0
W
a
v
e
n
u
m
b
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
r
u
m
a
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e
,
A
/
G
(
ω
c
o
s
θ
/
c
o
,
θ
)
/
D
j
Wavenumber, kD
j
0 1 2 3 4 5
U
j
618 m/s
U
j
480 m/s
U
j
308 m/s
U
j
171 m/s
is related to the smaller observer angles to the jet downstream axis where the LSS
spectrum dominates. Values at the lower end of the wavenumber range should be
regarded with more suspicion as they are related to the approximate decompositions,
examples of which are shown in Fig. 2, where both FSS and LSS spectra contribute
almost equally to the total spectrum. It should be remembered that only those
wavenumbers that have a sonic phase velocity in the direction of a far field observer,
can actually radiate noise. This is discussed further in the next section, where the
wavenumber spectra are analyzed and the implications for the noise source mechanism
are considered.
5. DISCUSSION
In the case of a jet where the turbulence is convecting supersonically with respect to the
ambient speed of sound, it has been shown that the large scale structures, modeled as
instability waves, radiate directly to the far field (see Morris and Tam [11] and Tam and
Burton [12]). As the instability wave travels downstream, its amplitude increases and
eventually decays. A very simple model consists of a wave packet with a Gaussian
amplitude distribution and a constant phase velocity. The wavenumber spectrum
associated with this simple model has a peak at a wavenumber given by k
peak
ω/U
c
where ω is the radian frequency of the instability wave and U
c
is its phase velocity. The
width of the wavenumber spectrum has an inverse dependence on the width of the
Gaussian envelope. This simple model can be used to examine the wavenumber spectra
determined in the previous section.
Consider the highest velocity case. The wavenumber peak can be estimated from the
spectra and the radian frequency is determined from the Strouhal number. The inferred
phase velocity is shown in Table 2. These are quite realistic numbers based on
experimental measurements of turbulence convection velocities. It should be
remembered that there are some potential inaccuracies in determining the LSS spectrum
and also in estimating the peak wavenumber. However, the trend of increasing phase
velocity with increasing Strouhal number is very encouraging. It should be noted that
in the two lowest Strouhal number cases the convective Mach number is only just
supersonic. This is consistent with the wavenumber spectra ending very close to the
peak.
Before considering some additional implications of the wavenumber spectra shown
in Fig. 4, some general comments are relevant. As mentioned in the last section, the
spectra from a wide range of operating conditions conform to a systematic pattern on a
312 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in
subsonic and supersonic jets
Table 2: Estimated convection velocity as a function of Strouhal number.
St k
peak
D
j
U
c
/U
j
0.05 0.533 0.59
0.10 1.07 0.59
0.20 1.93 0.65
0.40 3.71 0.68
linear scale. The same level of pressure fluctuations, relative to mean dynamic pressure
of the jet ρ
j
U
j
2
, result in radiated noise levels, as shown in Fig. 3 that differ by five
orders of magnitude. This difference in levels can be attributed to the wavenumber
content of the near field pressure fluctuations, since the jet’s mean dynamic head only
varies by a factor of approximately 13 over the range of conditions considered.
Now consider the hypothesis that the wavenumber spectra associated with the lower
velocity cases would have the same amplitude variation with wavenumber as the
highest velocity case. Of course, on the basis of the far field measurements alone, the
peak in the spectra would not be observed, since this wavenumber would be associated
with subsonic phase velocities. However, the peak in the near field wavenumber
spectrum would be expected to remain relatively independent of the jet exit velocity,
since,
(25)
Though this ratio is known to be relatively insensitive to jet exit velocity a gradual
decrease in the ratio with increase in jet exit velocity would provide an improved
collapse of the near field wavenumber spectra shown in Fig. 4.
There are additional reasons why a perfect collapse of the wavenumber spectra would
not be expected, if ideas from linear instability analysis are invoked. For example, as the
jet exit Mach number increases, so the rate of growth of the jet shear layer decreases. This
would provide a greater axial distance for the instability waves or large scale structures to
develop. At the same time, the rate of growth of the instabilities waves is known to decrease
as the jet Mach number increases, which would offset the effect of the decreasing shear
layer growth rate. Finally, the choice of a cylindrical control surface, though convenient, is
a less than ideal choice, since the distance from the edge of the jet to the control surface,
in terms of jet shear layer thicknesses, is a strong function of axial distance. An improved
formulation would involve a conical control surface as used by Reba et al. [20] or the use
of the method of matched asymptotic expansions as employed by Tam and Burton [12].
Even with these provisos, it can be argued that the observations are consistent with
the same fundamental noise generation mechanism by the large scale structures in the jet
being present at subsonic as well as supersonic convective Mach numbers. The essential
difference in the radiated noise levels is associated with their wavenumber content. At
high convective Mach numbers, the most energetic wavenumber components radiate
directly to the far field. The peak noise direction is controlled by their phase velocity:
being given by θ
peak
= cos
–1
(C
o
/U
c
).
At convectively subsonic conditions, only the low
wavenumber components in the tail of the wavenumber spectrum radiate noise.
However, the peak noise direction would not be directly downstream, θ 0, since the
weighting effect of the Hankel function, 1/H
o
(1)
( ωa sin θ/C
o
) causes the far field levels
to reduce as the downstream axis is approached. Some simple estimates indicate that this
effect causes the peak in the noise spectrum to have a maximum at approximately 30
degrees to the jet downstream axis for all convectively subsonic conditions.
U
U k U
St
D k
c
j peak j j peak
ω π 2
.
aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 313
Clearly, additional theoretical work and analysis of experimental data is necessary.
A key difficulty with using far field experimental data is the limit that it places on the
range of near field wavenumbers that can be deduced, especially at the lower velocities.
But, it is in the far field alone that, at the moment, it is straightforward to separate the
contribution of the LSS spectrum to the total radiated noise. However, given these
difficulties and questions, in the author’s opinion, this paper has provided additional
evidence, supported by experimental data, that the noise radiation in the peak noise
directions is generated by the large scale turbulent structures in the jet. And this applies
to both subsonic and supersonic jet conditions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am very grateful to Dr. James Bridges and his experimental support team at the NASA
Glenn Research Center for supplying the acoustic data in electronic form  already
corrected for facility and atmospheric factors. I would also like to acknowledge the
many discussions I have had with Dr. K. Viswanathan of the Boeing Company on the
topic of this paper. Some of these ideas have been bounced around with Dr. Dennis
McLaughlin, my colleague at Penn State, who has always emphasized the importance
of experimental data in theoretical modeling. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the
many contributions by Dr. Christopher Tam. I have made use of some of his analysis
and hopefully some of his insight.
REFERENCES
[1] Lighthill, M. J., “On sound generated aerodynamically: I. General theory,”
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Vol. A 211, 1952, pp. 564–587.
[2] Lighthill, M. J., “On sound generated aerodynamically. II. Turbulence as a source
of sound,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Vol. A 222, 1954, pp.
1–32.
[3] Ffowcs Williams, J. E., “The noise from turbulence convected at high speed,”
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Vol. A255, 1963, pp.
469–503.
[4] Lilley, G. M., “On the noise from jets,” Noise Mechanisms, AGARDCP131,
1974, pp. 13.1–13.12.
[5] Goldstein, M. E., Aeroacoustics, McGrawHill, New York, 1976.
[6] Khavaran, A. and Bridges, J. E., “Modelling of finescale turbulence mixing
noise,” Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 279, 2005, pp. 1131–1154.
[7] Morris, P. J. and Boluriaan, S., “The Prediction of Jet Noise from CFD Data,”
AIAA Paper 2004–2977, 2004.
[8] Tam, C. K. W. and Aurialt, L., “Jet mixing noise from finescale turbulence,”
AIAA Journal, Vol. 37, No. 2, 1999, pp. 145–153.
314 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in
subsonic and supersonic jets
[9] Goldstein, M. E. and Leib, S. J., “The aeroacoustics of slowly diverging
supersonic jets,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 600, 2008, pp. 291–337.
[10] Tam, C. K. W. and Morris, P. J., “The radiation of sound by the instability waves
of a compressible plane turbulent shear layer,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol.
98, No. 2, 1980, pp. 349–381.
[11] Morris, P. J. and Tam, C. K. W., “Near and far field noise from largescale
instabilities of axisymmetric jets,” AIAA Paper 77–1351, 1977.
[12] Tam, C. K. W. and Burton, D. E., “Sound generation by the instability waves of
supersonic flows. Part 2. Axisymmetric jets.” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol.
138, 1984, pp. 273–295.
[13] McLaughlin, D. K., Morrison, G. L., and Troutt, R. R., “Experiments on the
instability waves in a supersonic jet and their acoustic radiation,” Journal of Fluid
Mechanics, Vol. 69, 1975, pp. 73–95.
[14] Tam, C. K. W., Golebiowski, M., and Seiner, J. M., “On the two components
of turbulent mixing noise from supersonic jets,” AIAA Paper 96–1716, 1996.
[15] Viswanathan, K., “Analysis of the two similarity components of turbulent mixing
noise,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 40, 2002, pp. 1735–1744.
[16] Tam, C. K. W., Viswanathan, K., Ahuja, K. K., and Panda, J., “The sources of jet
noise: experimental evidence,” AIAA Paper 2007–3641, 2007.
[17] Reba, R., Narayanan, S., Colonius, T., and Suzuki, T., “Modeling jet noise from
organized structures using nearfield hydrodynamic pressure,” AIAA Paper
2005–3093, 2005.
[18] Suzuki, T. and Colonius, T., “Instability waves in a subsonic round jet detected
using a nearfield phased microphone array,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol.
565, 2006, pp. 197–226.
[19] Ladeinde, F., Cai, X., Alabi, K., Reba, R., Schlinker, R. H., and Simonich, J., “On
the connection between nearfield and farfield solutions of highspeed jet noise,”
AIAA Paper 2008–0011, 2008.
[20] Reba, R., Simonich, J., and Schlinker, R., “Measurements of source wavepackets
in high speed jets and connection to farfield sound,” AIAAPaper 2008–2891, 2008.
[21] Tam, C. K. W. and Chen, K. C., “A statistical model of turbulence in two
dimensional shear layers,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 92, 1979, pp. 303–326.
[22] Tam, C. K. W., “Stochastic model theory of broadband shock associated noise from
supersonic jets,” Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 116, No. 2, 1987, pp. 265–302.
[23] Brown, C. and Bridges, J., “Small hot jet acoustic rig validation,” TM
2006–214234, NASA, 2006.
[24] Viswanathan, K., “Aeroacoustics of hot jets,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol.
516, 2004, pp. 39–82.
aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 315
[16] reinforce the idea that there are two separate noise generation mechanisms in jets at all operating conditions. in some fashion. 2]. the previous analyses and experiments by Reba et al. The goal is to determine whether the properties of the LSS spectrum. the same two spectra also permit the collapse of measured spectra at convectively subsonic jet operating conditions. are compatible with a consistent large scale structure model at both subsonic and supersonic jet operating conditions. was found to fit the data at larger angles to the jet downstream axis. but not in the peak noise directions at smaller angles to the downstream jet axis. When the jet turbulence is convecting supersonically with respect to the ambient speed of sound. but is closely related. and that they can be modeled as linear instability waves. measured in the far field. the Fine Scale Similarity (FSS) spectrum. Examples include predictions by Khavaran and Bridges [6]. being associated with the large scale structures in the jet shear layer. [19]. A notable recent exception is the analysis and predictions by Goldstein and Leib. It is the latter idea that is pursued in the present paper. Suzuki and Colonius [18]. these predictions are excellent at large angles to the jet downstream axis. no model . including techniques to combine them with Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) to make noise predictions. [14] examined a large database of supersonic jet noise measurements and showed that the measured far field spectral density could be collapsed using two similarity spectra. to some extent. Ladeinde et al. The last approach is not based on an acoustic analogy. and Tam and Auriault [8]. Theoretical work by Tam and Morris [10]. [20]. [9] The primary differences from previous acoustic analogy approaches in this study are in the modeling of the source statistical properties and the use of a propagator that accounts for the slow divergence of the jet flow. The first methods follow. [17].302 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in subsonic and supersonic jets Today. a highly directional noise directivity is observed. a combination of the two spectra was needed to match the experimental measurements. Remarkably. the original work of Lighthill [1. the aeroacoustics research community is faced with two different concepts for the noise generation and radiation mechanisms.[13] have shown that this noise radiation is associated with the large scale turbulent structures in the jet. Many reviews of the subsequent developments of these approaches are available. Additional experimental evidence by Viswanathan [15] and Tam et al. In the present paper. The second point of view argues that the jet noise radiated in the peak noise radiation directions can be associated with another source mechanism. The present paper follows. A second spectrum. Each of these papers look for a connection between the near and far fields of a jet and base their analyses on near field models and experiments. Morris and Tam [11] and Tam and Burton [12] and experimental measurements by McLaughlin et al. The effects of source convection were considered by Ffowcs Williams [3] and the effect of the mean flow on the propagation of the sound was included in acoustic analogies by Lilley [4] and Goldstein [5]. Morris and Boluriaan [7]. Tam et al. These approaches are called acoustic analogies and are based on a rearrangement of the equations of motion into the form of an equation with a wave propagator as the left hand side and the remaining terms acting as equivalent sources on the right hand side. In general. and Reba et al. The spectrum shape that dominated in the peak noise directions was designated as the Large Scale Similarity (LSS) spectrum. At intermediate angles.
provides additional evidence for the validity of such a representation. ANALYTICAL DEVELOPMENT Consider a cylindrical surface of radius a surrounding an axisymmetric jet. It is assumed that a is sufficiently close to the jet to sense both the radiating and nonradiating components of the turbulent pressure fluctuations. In addition.ϕ. only the near field fluctuations that contribute to the LSS spectrum are extracted. ∂t 2 ∂r r ∂r r 2 ∂ϕ 2 ∂z 2 (1) where (r. and a Fourier series in the azimuthal direction.z) are the coordinates in the radial. modeled as instability waves or wave packets.z. at both subsonic and supersonic jet operating conditions. z. as discussed below. ∂2 p 2 ∂2 p 1 ∂p 1 ∂2 p ∂2 p − co 2 + + + = 0. a relationship is developed between the wavenumber spectrum on a cylindrical surface surrounding the jet and the spectral density in the far field. Though. ω ) = ∑ P (r. The behavior is deduced from far field observations. The pressure can be represented in terms of its Fourier transform with respect to time. That is. In the following section. (3) . it is shown how these wavenumber spectra conform to a physically realizable representation of the evolution of large scale structures. t and axial distance. the consistency of the inferred near field behavior with a traveling wave packet model for the noise source. azimuthal.t) satisfies the threedimensional wave equation. t ) exp[−i(kz + nϕ − ωt )]dϕdzdt. the present approach has limitations. k. z. ϕ. In the next section. (2 π ) ∫ ∫ 3 n =−∞ −∞ −∞ n ∞ ∞ π 1 ∞ ∞ ∞ (2) −∞ −∞ − π ∫ ∫ ∫ p(r. It is also assumed that the cylinder is in a stationary ambient medium surrounding the jet. Pn (r . and axial directions. and co is the speed of sound in the ambient medium. Finally. In the stationary medium surrounding the jet the pressure fluctuation p(r. in the jet. ω ) exp i (kz + nϕ − ωt ) dωdk.ϕ. 2. t ) = and.aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 303 for the near field structure is assumed a priori. respectively. p (r . These data are then used to determine the magnitude of the near field wavenumber spectrum associated with the large scale similarity spectrum alone. written here in cylindrical polar coordinates. relative to the jet downstream axis. the far field spectrum is decomposed into the large scale and fine scale similarity components. ϕ. k.
k. p(r . (6) The variation of An (k. ω ) satisfies the equation. dr 2 r dr co r (4) The general solution to Eqn. −∞ ∫ Gn (ω. There is a random or stochastic nature to the pressure field. ω ) H n1) ( λr ). ω ). (7) where an(ω) is a real random function of freqeuncy and. ( H n1) ( λa ) n (9) The pressure fluctuation external to and on the cylindrical surface. ω ) = an (ω )Gn ( k. ω ) = An ( k. the wavenumber/frequency spectrum of the nth azimuthal mode of the pressure fluctuations on the cylindrical surface is represented by. z. To account for this. from Eqns. Pn (r. is given by the inverse Fourier transforms. following Tam and Chen [21] and Tam [22]. Pn ( r. ω ) = an (ω ) ( H n1) ( λr ) G ( k. (5) and (7). ω ). t ) = 1 ( 2 π )3 n =−∞ −∞ −∞ ∑ ∫ ∫ a (ω )G (k. k. k )dk = 1 ∞ (8) Then. The pressure fluctuations on the cylindrical surface are not simply associated with a single frequency and are not deterministic. k. ω is the radian frequency and k is the axial wavenumber. d 2 Pn 1 dPn ω 2 n2 + + 2 − k 2 − 2 Pn = 0. Then. k. ( Pn ( r. ω ) H n n ∞ ∞ ∞ ( H n1) ( λr ) exp[i( kz + nϕ − ωt )]dωdk. 2 λ = (ω 2 / co − k 2 )1/ 2 with − π / 2 < arg(λ ) ≤ π /2.304 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in subsonic and supersonic jets where. Also. ϕ. as a normalization condition. (5) Where H n(1) (ζ) is the Hankel function of the first kind of order n and argument ζ. (4) involving either outgoing or decaying waves can be written. Pn ( a. (10) (1 ) ( λa ) n . ω) is determined by the variation of the pressure on the cylindrical surface surrounding the jet.
* G− n ( − k. p (r . noting the slightly different definitions of variables and the associated choice of branch cuts. the autocorrelation for the pressure is given by.. 2 2 3 p( a. it can be shown that. respectively.( 8). (10).aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 305 2. it can be shown that. ( ( H n1) ( λr ) H n1) ( λ ′r ) ′ exp ( ( H n1) ( λa ) H n1) ( λ ′a ) ′ (12) This is equivalent to stating that there are no preferred frequencies or azimuthal mode numbers: the initial pressure fluctuations have a “white noise” autospectrum at z = 0. Eqn. let the autocorrelation of the pressure on the cylindrical surface at z = 0 be given by. The far field spectral density From Eqn. (11) and (12). and Dj. ϕ + χ.− n′ . . 2 2 2 1/ 2 where the overbar denotes an ensemble average and λ ′ = (ω' / c o − k ′ ) . ϕ. A is a nondimensional constant. ϕ. To provide a definition of the properties of the random variable. t ) p (r . and velocity. −ω ) = Gn ( k. t + τ ) = × 1 ∞ ∞ ∫ . ( ( H −1n) ( − λ* r ) = − H n1) ( λr ) . from the analytic continuation properties of Hankel functions. − ω ) = − λ * (k . z. (see Tam [21] ). ω ). ω ) Gn′ ( k ′. * (15) From its definition. Here. Also. 0. it is also readily seen that. z. ∫ a (ω ) an′ (ω ′ ) Gn ( k . t. 0. From Eqns. λ ( − k .ω ) given by. ω ′ ) ( 2π )6 n∑ n∑ −∞ −∞ n =−∞ ′=−∞ (11) ∞ ∞ exp [ i ( k + k ′ ) z + i ( n + n ′ ) ϕ − i ( ω + ω ′ ) t − iω ′τ ] d ωd ω ′ dkdk ′.1. (13) From Tam [22] (Appendix A). ρj. and Uj are the jet exit diameter. (16) It is also convenient to introduce the function Fn(r. ω ) (14) where an asterisk denotes a complex conjugate. ϕ. 2 4 2 3 an (ω )an′ (ω ′ ) = A ( 2 π) ρj U j D j δ(ω + ω ′ )δ n. z.. density. as well as the normalization condition. t ) p( a. + τ ) = A ρj U j D j δ( τ )δ( χ).
the subsequent analysis can be considered to give an azimuthally averaged result. the far field measurements used in the present paper are timeaveraged and only made at one azimuthal angle. t + τ) exp (iωτ ) d τ. A similar assumption was made by Tam [22] in his stochastic model of broadband shockassociated noise. r = R sin θ. z. ω ) 2 exp(– i ωτ) dω.ω ) = (20) Before proceeding. spherical polar coordinates are introduced. However. z. Equation (20) is valid for any value of r and z. ω ) = H ∫ G ( k. t + τ ) = ρj U j D j ∑ ( 2 π)2 n =−∞ ∫ ∞ Fn ( r . 2π n −∞ ∞ (19) Then the integration with respect to τ can be performed and the spectral density is found to be. –∞ ∞ 2 A2 2 3 ρj U j D j ∑ Fn (r. 2 exp[i (ζ − π / 4 )] as ζ → ∞ . ϕ . ω) = ∫ (p (r . . S (r . ω ) . following integration with respect to ω′ . πζ ( H o1) (ζ) → (22) Then. (11). S (r. θ. (21) Also. [λ ( k . This should be an adequate first step for the axisymmetric jet case. So.306 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in subsonic and supersonic jets Fn (r . in the limit of large argument. and a change of the variable k′ to –k′. ω ) a] (17) Substitution of these relationships into Eqn. the measurements used in the present analysis are performed in the far field. ∞ A2 2 3 p(r . z. ϕ. a simplifying assumption will be made to only consider the n = 0 case. (18) –∞ The spectral density of the pressure fluctuations is given by. any attempt to extract the separate contributions from the different azimuthal modes would require a much more comprehensive database. ϕ. t ) p(r . z. z. z. the method of stationary phase can be used to evaluate F (R. z. ϕ. z. such that z = R cos θ. ω ) H n –∞ ∞ (1 ) n (1 ) n [λ ( k . On a practical level.ϕ . yields. the Hankel function takes the asymptotic form. So. z . (and ϕ). ω).t) p(r . external to the cylindrical surface. To obtain an expression for the spectral density in the far field. ω ) r ] exp (ikz) dk. This gives.
In the next section. that fits the measured spectra in the peak noise direction. As noted already. Tam et al. The total temperature ratios have been selected so that the jet exit static temperature ratio is unity. All the nozzles had a 2 inch exit diameter. (24) to determine the wavenumber/frequency spectrum of the near field pressure fluctuations on the cylindrical surface that give rise to this observed far field behavior. using Eqns. (24) that only the supersonic phase velocity or radiating components of the near field pressure fluctuations can be extracted from the far field data. ( R H o1) (ω a sin θ / co ) (23) Finally. as developed by Tam et al. G (ω cos θ / co . The resulting component is then used in Eqn. and nozzles C015 and C018 are convergingdiverging (CD) nozzles with design Mach numbers of 1. The test cases chosen are summarized in Table 1. ω ) D2 j 2 A 2 π R ( = H o1) (ωa sin θ / co ) 2 Dj 2 2 S ( R. ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTAL MEASUREMENTS The experiments were conducted in the Aeroacoustic Propulsion Facility at the NASA Glenn Research Center. a relationship can be derived between the nondimensional wavenumber/frequency spectrum of the pressure fluctuations on the cylindrical surface and the far field spectral density. [14] interrogated a large data base of acoustic measurements made in the Jet Noise Laboratory at the NASA Langley Research Center. The data have been corrected to be lossless and the observer radius is at 100 jet diameters. it is clear from Eqn. they showed that the experimental data could be collapsed in terms of two universal similarity spectra. (24) only provides the near field wavenumber spectrum for wavenumbers given by.8 respectively. However. As noted in the Introduction. Descriptions of the test facility and the converging nozzle are given by Brown and Bridges [23]. ω ) = − 2i G (ω cos θ / co . The first step in the data analysis process is to separate the total spectrum into its large scale similarity (LSS) and fine scale similarity (FSS) spectra. θ. since the turbulent fluctuations at any jet exit velocity will contain some components with supersonic phase speeds. and it is known that the large scale turbulent structures generate instability wave noise radiation in the peak .aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 307 F ( R. the measured far field spectral density is analyzed to extract the component associated with the large scale structures.4 and 1. Since they were examining supersonic data. ω ) . It is given by. is associated with the large scale turbulent structures in the jet. The measurements were made with both converging and convergingdiverging nozzles. [14]. this does not mean that the method is only applicable to jets with supersonically convecting turbulent structures. The CD nozzles are operated on design. ρj2U 3 D j j (24) Note that Eqn. (22) and (23). with the exception of the lowest velocity case where the jet is unheated. ω ) exp(iω R / co ). 3. They argued that the LSS spectrum. Nozzle C000 is a converging nozzle. k ≤ ω/co. θ.
160 1.308 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in subsonic and supersonic jets Table 1: Nozzles and operating conditions.1916 1. noise direction.8 Nozzle pressure ratio 1.[16] were noticed during this analysis. this is a reasonable assumption.0 1. 1. based on the two similarity spectra.000 1. dB relative to peak −10 −20 LSS spectrum FSS spectrum −30 −40 −2 10 10−1 Frequency.7450 Total temperature ratio 1.1820 5. However. for example). f/fpeak 100 101 Figure 1: LSS and FSS similarity spectra. Uj m/s 171 308 480 618 0 Spectral density. The two similarity spectra are shown in Fig. only a few examples of the .6883 3. here.648 Jet exit velocity. For example. Nozzle ID C000 C000 C015 C018 10 Design mach number 1. the peak Strouhal number for the FSS component varies only slightly with observer polar angle.4 1. have been determined for the spectral density data for each operating condition. Best fits.0 1.24] . Many of the features of the data described by Tam et al. Subsequently. whereas the peak Strouhal number for the LSS component drops rapidly as the observer angle moves closer to the jet downstream axis. several authors have shown that the same LSS spectrum fits data at subsonic speeds as well (see Viswanathan [15. The FSS spectrum fits the acoustic data at larger angles to the jet downstream axis.392 1.
dB re 2×105 Pa/unit St 140 130 120 110 100 90 10−2 Experiment Total spectrum LSS spectrum FSS spectrum Spectral density. 101 Spectral density. It should be noted that there is more than a little room for discretion in generating the spectral decomposition. Uj = 171 m/s. St = fDj/Uj (c) θ = 45°. the LSS and total spectra are equal. The peak frequency and level for both similarity spectra need to be determined. Uj = 618 m/s. dB re 2×105 Pa/unit St 140 130 120 110 100 90 10−2 Experiment Total spectrum LSS spectrum FSS spectrum 10−1 100 Strouhal number. In most cases. 2 shows the decomposition of the spectra at 25 and 45 degrees to the jet downstream axis for the lowest and highest speed cases as a function of Strouhal number. a perfect fit to the experimental data at all frequencies is not possible. St = fDj/Uj (a) θ = 45°. 101 Figure 2: Decomposition of the spectral density into LSS and FSS similarity components. Thus. Note that in Fig. decomposition are given. Uj = 618 m/s. St = fDj/Uj (d) θ = 25°. 101 10−1 100 Strouhal number. Some of this is due to the original similarity spectra being generated for experimental data that was not corrected for atmospheric absorption: .aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 309 Spectral density. dB re 2×105 Pa/unit St 90 80 70 60 50 40 10−2 Experiment Total spectrum LSS spectrum FSS spectrum Spectral density. 2 (d) no significant contribution has been assumed to be made by the FSS spectrum. St = fDj/Uj (b) θ = 25°. Uj = 171 m/s. Fig. dB re 2×105 Pa/unit St 90 80 70 60 50 40 10−2 Experiment Total spectrum LSS spectrum FSS spectrum 10−1 100 Strouhal number. 101 10−1 100 Strouhal number. St = f Dj /Uj .
05. 0. 4. It should be noted that the spectral density is shown with a linear scale. The data conform to a remarkably consistent . Paˆ2/Hz (a) Uj = 171 m/s. degrees (b) Uj = 618 m/s. so it represents S (R. Clearly the levels associated with the highest velocity case are much greater.1. for all four jet exit velocity cases and four Strouhal numbers.4 have been selected. so that the wavenumber spectra can be evaluated. 0 2E05 1E05 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Angle to downstream axis θ. In addition. the focus of the present study is at Strouhal numbers close to the peak noise Strouhal number: in fact Strouhal numbers of 0. This process is described in the next section.1.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Angle to downstream axis θ. whereas the present data has been made lossless. only information concerning the LSS similarity spectrum has been used and its peak frequency and level are easier to identify. especially at relatively small angles to the jet downstream axis. Then the near field wavenumber spectra at those Strouhal numbers can be calculated. Viswanathan[24] has shown that the jet total temperature ratio affects the LSS spectral shape: particularly at higher frequencies. The remaining terms are all known quantities. In this section this information is used in Eqn.ω) is shown for all the cases in Fig.310 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in subsonic and supersonic jets LSS spectral density.1 as a function of observer angle for the lowest and highest speed cases. Once the measured spectra at all angles have been decomposed. ω) in Pa2/Hz. These spectra. where it dominates the radiated noise. are used in the evaluation of the right hand side of Eqn. 4. (24).5 2 1. θ. The data at θ = 15 degrees are sometimes affected by the jet flow field itself. However. 2. 0. Figure 3 shows the LSS spectral density for Strouhal number St = 0.5 1 0. The quantity AG (ωcos θ/co. degrees 0 Figure 3: LSS spectral densities.2 and 0. St = 0. The symbols show the observer angles at which the data were taken with a spacing of 5 degrees. NEAR FIELD LSS WAVENUMBER SPECTRUM In the previous section a method by which the variation of the LSS similarity spectral density with observer angle can be determined was described. Paˆ2/Hz LSS spectral density. But this data has been included in all the cases. In addition. (24) to determine the wavenumber spectra at selected frequencies on the cylindrical surface in the near field. the spectral density at the selected Strouhal numbers as a function of observer angle can be determined.
as this .5 1 1.001 Uj = 618 m/s Uj = 480 m/s Uj = 308 m/s Uj = 171 m/s 0.001 Uj = 618 m/s Uj = 480 m/s Uj = 308 m/s Uj = 171 m/s 0. As the jet exit velocity increases so the levels of the wavenumber spectra at a given wavenumber decrease slightly. 1. 0.θ)/Dj 0.8 1 Wavenumber.θ)/Dj 0.6 0.05.0005 0 0 0.θ)/Dj 0.001 Uj = 618 m/s Uj = 480 m/s Uj = 308 m/s Uj = 171 m/s Wavenumber spectrum amplitude. A/G(ωcosθ/co.2 0.001 Uj = 618 m/s Uj = 480 m/s Uj = 308 m/s Uj = 171 m/s Wavenumber spectrum amplitude. A/G(ωcosθ/co.5 0 0 1 2 3 4 Wavenumber. But all the spectra follow the same pattern with increasing wavenumber that is shown in the most complete manner at the highest velocity. 2. A/G(ωcosθ/co.2 Wavenumber spectrum amplitude.40. kDj (b) St = 0.2 0.4 0. kDj (c) St = 0.5 2 Wavenumber. A/G(ωcosθ/co. kDj (a) St = 0.20.4 Wavenumber.0005 0 0 0.6 0 0 0. 5 Figure 4: Wavenumber spectra of pressure fluctuations on a cylindrical surface of radius D j. pattern.10.0005 0.θ)/Dj 0. It should be noted that the most reliable values of the LSS spectral density correspond to higher end of the wavenumber range for each velocity condition. kDj (d) St = 0.0005 0.aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 311 Wavenumber spectrum amplitude.
This is consistent with the wavenumber spectra ending very close to the peak. It should be remembered that only those wavenumbers that have a sonic phase velocity in the direction of a far field observer. the spectra from a wide range of operating conditions conform to a systematic pattern on a . 5.59 0.40 kpeakDj 0. DISCUSSION In the case of a jet where the turbulence is convecting supersonically with respect to the ambient speed of sound. This is discussed further in the next section. As the instability wave travels downstream. 4. The width of the wavenumber spectrum has an inverse dependence on the width of the Gaussian envelope. This simple model can be used to examine the wavenumber spectra determined in the previous section. The wavenumber spectrum associated with this simple model has a peak at a wavenumber given by kpeak = ω/Uc where ω is the radian frequency of the instability wave and Uc is its phase velocity. Values at the lower end of the wavenumber range should be regarded with more suspicion as they are related to the approximate decompositions. These are quite realistic numbers based on experimental measurements of turbulence convection velocities.05 0. can actually radiate noise.93 3. The wavenumber peak can be estimated from the spectra and the radian frequency is determined from the Strouhal number. where both FSS and LSS spectra contribute almost equally to the total spectrum.10 0. 2. the trend of increasing phase velocity with increasing Strouhal number is very encouraging. However.20 0. radiate directly to the far field (see Morris and Tam [11] and Tam and Burton [12]).65 0.533 1. Consider the highest velocity case. It should be noted that in the two lowest Strouhal number cases the convective Mach number is only just supersonic.71 Uc/Uj 0. its amplitude increases and eventually decays. St 0. It should be remembered that there are some potential inaccuracies in determining the LSS spectrum and also in estimating the peak wavenumber. it has been shown that the large scale structures. examples of which are shown in Fig. The inferred phase velocity is shown in Table 2. As mentioned in the last section. where the wavenumber spectra are analyzed and the implications for the noise source mechanism are considered.07 1. A very simple model consists of a wave packet with a Gaussian amplitude distribution and a constant phase velocity. Before considering some additional implications of the wavenumber spectra shown in Fig.68 is related to the smaller observer angles to the jet downstream axis where the LSS spectrum dominates. modeled as instability waves.312 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in subsonic and supersonic jets Table 2: Estimated convection velocity as a function of Strouhal number. some general comments are relevant.59 0.
the peak noise direction would not be directly downstream. θ = 0. However. The same level of pressure fluctuations. since the distance from the edge of the jet to the control surface. it can be argued that the observations are consistent with the same fundamental noise generation mechanism by the large scale structures in the jet being present at subsonic as well as supersonic convective Mach numbers. as the jet exit Mach number increases. Now consider the hypothesis that the wavenumber spectra associated with the lower velocity cases would have the same amplitude variation with wavenumber as the highest velocity case. so the rate of growth of the jet shear layer decreases. is a less than ideal choice. 1/Ho(1) ( ω a sin θ/Co ) causes the far field levels to reduce as the downstream axis is approached. There are additional reasons why a perfect collapse of the wavenumber spectra would not be expected. though convenient. At convectively subsonic conditions. is a strong function of axial distance. At high convective Mach numbers. However. the peak in the spectra would not be observed. [20] or the use of the method of matched asymptotic expansions as employed by Tam and Burton [12]. Some simple estimates indicate that this effect causes the peak in the noise spectrum to have a maximum at approximately 30 degrees to the jet downstream axis for all convectively subsonic conditions. only the low wavenumber components in the tail of the wavenumber spectrum radiate noise. The peak noise direction is controlled by their phase velocity: being given by θpeak = cos–1(Co /Uc). result in radiated noise levels. as shown in Fig. Even with these provisos. 4. At the same time. if ideas from linear instability analysis are invoked. This difference in levels can be attributed to the wavenumber content of the near field pressure fluctuations. in terms of jet shear layer thicknesses. . since. which would offset the effect of the decreasing shear layer growth rate. the rate of growth of the instabilities waves is known to decrease as the jet Mach number increases. the peak in the near field wavenumber spectrum would be expected to remain relatively independent of the jet exit velocity. For example. the choice of a cylindrical control surface. An improved formulation would involve a conical control surface as used by Reba et al.aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 313 linear scale. 3 that differ by five orders of magnitude. The essential difference in the radiated noise levels is associated with their wavenumber content. This would provide a greater axial distance for the instability waves or large scale structures to develop. Of course. relative to mean dynamic pressure of the jet ρjUj 2. Uc ω 2 πSt = = . the most energetic wavenumber components radiate directly to the far field. Finally. since this wavenumber would be associated with subsonic phase velocities. since the weighting effect of the Hankel function. on the basis of the far field measurements alone. since the jet’s mean dynamic head only varies by a factor of approximately 13 over the range of conditions considered. U j k peakUj D j k peak (25) Though this ratio is known to be relatively insensitive to jet exit velocity a gradual decrease in the ratio with increase in jet exit velocity would provide an improved collapse of the near field wavenumber spectra shown in Fig.
who has always emphasized the importance of experimental data in theoretical modeling.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London.. and Bridges. K.. [5] Goldstein.. J. [2] Lighthill. Vol. A 255. S. 469–503. and Aurialt. [8] Tam. However. my colleague at Penn State. 2. “On sound generated aerodynamically: I. 1974. A 211. M. pp. And this applies to both subsonic and supersonic jet conditions. A 222. K. in the author’s opinion. and Boluriaan. Aeroacoustics. J. Vol. pp. pp. Viswanathan of the Boeing Company on the topic of this paper. 145–153. A key difficulty with using far field experimental data is the limit that it places on the range of near field wavenumbers that can be deduced. 1–32. E.. additional theoretical work and analysis of experimental data is necessary. I have made use of some of his analysis and hopefully some of his insight. E. . 1963. M. McGrawHill. pp.already corrected for facility and atmospheric factors. Vol. 2004. AGARDCP131. P. C. E. W. “Jet mixing noise from finescale turbulence. II.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. that the noise radiation in the peak noise directions is generated by the large scale turbulent structures in the jet. 1131–1154. 1954. Turbulence as a source of sound. J. Finally. “On the noise from jets. M. pp. No. Vol.. “The noise from turbulence convected at high speed. 2005. 1976.314 A note on noise generation by large scale turbulent structures in subsonic and supersonic jets Clearly. 37. I would like to acknowledge the many contributions by Dr. [6] Khavaran.” Journal of Sound and Vibration. Christopher Tam. REFERENCES [1] Lighthill. J. 1999.12.” Noise Mechanisms. J. it is in the far field alone that. [3] Ffowcs Williams. at the moment. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am very grateful to Dr.” AIAA Journal. supported by experimental data. “On sound generated aerodynamically. L. A. especially at the lower velocities. 13. James Bridges and his experimental support team at the NASA Glenn Research Center for supplying the acoustic data in electronic form . this paper has provided additional evidence. 1952. Vol. New York.1–13. “Modelling of finescale turbulence mixing noise.” AIAA Paper 2004–2977. 279.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. I would also like to acknowledge the many discussions I have had with Dr. it is straightforward to separate the contribution of the LSS spectrum to the total radiated noise. 564–587. G. But. given these difficulties and questions. pp. [4] Lilley.. Some of these ideas have been bounced around with Dr. Dennis McLaughlin. General theory.. “The Prediction of Jet Noise from CFD Data. M.. [7] Morris.
G. pp. J. H. R.... 69. 1979. C. K. T... Vol. [16] Tam. and Panda. Vol.. T. W. C.. D. “Stochastic model theory of broadband shock associated noise from supersonic jets. 1980. R. J. “The radiation of sound by the instability waves of a compressible plane turbulent shear layer.. Vol. K. 349–381.” Journal of Fluid Mechanics. K. [19] Ladeinde. Vol. 39–82. C. 116. 2008. 516. 600. C. “Analysis of the two similarity components of turbulent mixing noise. [24] Viswanathan. F. [11] Morris. Alabi. “Modeling jet noise from organized structures using nearfield hydrodynamic pressure. Golebiowski. “Instability waves in a subsonic round jet detected using a nearfield phased microphone array..” Journal of Fluid Mechanics. . Narayanan. NASA. and Leib. J. [12] Tam. M. Colonius.. R. K. T. and Simonich. [13] McLaughlin. 2006. J.. C. J. J.. 138..” AIAA Paper 2008–0011.. R. R. and Tam.” AIAA Paper 2005–3093. X. W. W. pp. D. “Small hot jet acoustic rig validation. C.. K. Vol. pp. M. pp. “Experiments on the instability waves in a supersonic jet and their acoustic radiation. 1987.aeroacoustics volume 8 · number 4 · 2009 315 [9] Goldstein. [17] Reba.” Journal of Fluid Mechanics... P. “Aeroacoustics of hot jets. R. 1984.. C. 1996.” Journal of Fluid Mechanics.” Journal of Fluid Mechanics. and Bridges.” Journal of Fluid Mechanics. “Measurements of source wavepackets in high speed jets and connection to farfield sound. “Sound generation by the instability waves of supersonic flows. [15] Viswanathan. “Near and far field noise from largescale instabilities of axisymmetric jets. 2002. Simonich... pp.. 2008. “On the two components of turbulent mixing noise from supersonic jets. “A statistical model of turbulence in twodimensional shear layers. 40. 197–226. K. Ahuja. 303–326. [21] Tam. and Seiner. [10] Tam.. K. 2004. Viswanathan. 1977. Vol. Part 2. Vol. 265–302. and Chen. Morrison. W. K.. pp. 2007. 2...” AIAA Journal.” Journal of Sound and Vibration. 73–95. pp. 98. [20] Reba. 2. E. [14] Tam.” AIAA Paper 96–1716.. Vol. 291–337. J. L.. pp. 2008.. 1975. C. and Morris. Cai. “The sources of jet noise: experimental evidence. “The aeroacoustics of slowly diverging supersonic jets.” Journal of Fluid Mechanics. “On the connection between nearfield and farfield solutions of highspeed jet noise.. and Colonius. and Schlinker. 565. 2005. No. K. K. W. 92. S. K. and Suzuki. Vol.” AIAA Paper 2008–2891. 1735–1744.. Reba.. K. 2006. No. E. P. R.” AIAA Paper 2007–3641.” TM 2006–214234. K. pp. Schlinker. and Burton. [22] Tam. [18] Suzuki. Axisymmetric jets. J. S... C. and Troutt.” AIAA Paper 77–1351. W. T. K. 273–295. [23] Brown. K. W. M.