RESEARCH ARTICLE | JULY 02 2021

Effect of dual vortex shedding on airfoil tonal noise

generation 
Y. Yang (杨延年) ; S. Pröbsting; Y. Liu (刘宇)  ; H. Zhang (张豪羽); C. Li (李辰昭); Y. Li (李晔)

Physics of Fluids 33, 075102 (2021)

https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0050002

CrossMark

 
View Export
Online Citation

Articles You May Be Interested In

Effect of Mach number on the aeroacoustic feedback loop generating airfoil tonal noise
Physics of Fluids (September 2022)

Airfoil flow receptivity to simulated tonal noise emissions

Physics of Fluids (April 2021)

Acoustic receptivity in the airfoil boundary layer: An experimental study in a closed wind tunnel
Physics of Fluids (April 2023)

01 September 2023 14:21:23

 Physics of Fluids ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf

Effect of dual vortex shedding on airfoil tonal noise

generation
Cite as: Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002
Submitted: 11 March 2021 . Accepted: 13 June 2021 .
Published Online: 2 July 2021

Y. Yang (杨延年),1,2,3,a) € bsting,4 Y. Liu (刘宇),1,2,3,b)

S. Pro H. Zhang (张豪羽),1 C. Li (李辰昭),1 and Y. Li (李晔)4

AFFILIATIONS
1
Department of Mechanics and Aerospace Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China
2
Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Turbulence Research and Applications, Southern University of Science and Technology,
Shenzhen 518055, China
3
Center for Complex Flows and Soft Matter Research, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China
4
Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200240, China

a)
Electronic mail: yangyn@sustech.edu.cn
b)
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed: liuy@sustech.edu.cn

ABSTRACT

01 September 2023 14:21:23

To improve understanding of dual vortex shedding over a trailing edge with regard to airfoil tonal noise generation, synchronized velocity
and noise measurements are conducted on a NACA (National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics) 0012 airfoil at angle of attack near zero
and a Reynolds number of 220 000. Instantaneous flow fields obtained by particle image velocimetry show the development of separated
shear layer, vortex roll-up, and vortex breakup near the airfoil trailing edge. The time-averaged flow fields feature separation bubbles on both
sides, and the root mean square values of streamwise velocity fluctuations show triple peak structures. The velocity spectra agree well with
the noise spectra in terms of broadband humps and discrete tones. Through proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) analysis, the most
energetic modes are identified, which represent global structures in the flow field. The trailing edge noise being an integral effect of the veloc-
ity fluctuation near the trailing edge, the POD analysis provides an alternative view for understanding the noise generation mechanism. The
first and second modes are dominated by out-of-phase vortex shedding along the airfoil surface and in the near wake, which dominates the
high amplitude noise emission process. The third and fourth modes represent in-phase vortex shedding, which dominates the low amplitude
noise emission process. The noise source region is determined by the correlation between the velocity and sound pressure, which shows
approximately the same periodic pattern as the first and second POD modes.
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0050002

I. INTRODUCTION characteristic is commonly referred to as “ladder type” structure. A dif-

Tonal noise emission on an airfoil occurs for specific operation
conditions and has been extensively reported for the Reynolds number
5
104 < Re < 2
106 and angle of attack jaj < 10 on NACA
0012 airfoils.1–5 Due to the growing applications on quad-copters and
small-size wind turbines, more demanding requirements for quiet
cooling fans in household appliances, and with the operation condi-
tion of these devices within the range of airfoil tonal noise generation,
this phenomenon has gained renewed interest in recent years.
Noise spectra at the aforementioned operation conditions can be
regarded as discrete tones superimposed on a broadband hump.6 The
frequency of the maximum tone fn;max approximately coincides with
the peak frequency of the broadband hump. The value of fn;max
increases locally according to a piecewise continuous relation of
fn;max  u0:8
1 and undergoes a number of jumps.1,7–9 This
ferent scaling power law of fs  u0:85 1 was also observed.
6,10,11
The
global trend of the frequency by smoothing out all jumps followed the
scaling law of fn;max  u1:5
1.
1,6–8
Other than in the tests in open-jet
wind tunnels with anechoic chambers, the secondary tones can also be
observed in closed-wall aerodynamic wind tunnel test sections as
reported by Nash et al.7 and Plogmann et al.10
Since the early report of discrete tones from airfoils by Hersh and
Hayden12 and Clark,13 different models have been proposed to explain
the mechanism of tonal noise generation. Paterson et al.1 proposed
that the airfoil tonal noise generation was similar to the vortex shed-
ding noise generation due to the wake downstream of a bluff body. A
constant Strouhal number f ð2dÞ=u1 ¼ 0.11 best fitted the measured
data, which was based on twice the boundary layer thickness d at the
airfoil trailing edge (approximated by the boundary layer thickness of

Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002 33, 075102-1

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Physics of Fluids
a flat plate). As a consequence, the average scaling law fs  u1:5 1 was
proposed.1 However, as pointed out by Tam,14 the wake vortices of
streamlined airfoils were fundamentally different from those of a bluff
body and simple vortex shedding cannot explain multiple tones.
Therefore, a feedback mechanism was proposed by Tam.14 Tam14
conjectured that the perturbations from the boundary layer propagate
downstream and grow due to instability, resulting in a sufficiently
strong lateral vibration in a highly localized region of the wake acting
as a noise source. The acoustic waves emitted in the upstream direc-
tion, in turn, enhanced the oscillation of the boundary layer. In this
model, the noise source region in the wake and the receptivity point at
the trailing edge form a feedback loop. The phase condition necessary
for the existence of such a self-excited feedback loop was consistent
with the existence of several distinct tones at a given velocity. By apply-
ing the neutral stability curve for a flat plate to the data of Paterson
et al.,1 Tam14 found that all the experimental data points were con-
tained within the frequency band required by stability consideration.
Since then, the concept of the feedback mechanisms has been
refined,6,7,11 with the main difference being the locations of the noise
source and receptivity region. The noise source region was suggested
to be at the trailing and the receptivity point assumed to be at the max-
imum velocity point6 or at the separation point11 around the airfoil.
The instability mechanism was later postulated to be the
Tollmien–Schlichting (T–S) waves,15 which are convected down-
stream, amplified through a separation bubble, and noise is radiated as
the resulting vortices pass the discontinuity posed by the trailing edge
of the airfoil. The fs  u1:5
1 law for the Strouhal frequency was derived
from classical hydrodynamic-stability theory.15 Several review articles
on the topic of airfoil tonal noise have been published in recent years
due to the continued interest in the topic.4,16
In order to gain further insight into the noise source, various
studies have described the unsteady flow field near the airfoil. At
a ¼ 6 and Re ¼ 1:6
105 for a NACA 0018 airfoil, Nakano,
Fujisawa, and Lee17 observed the development of spatially and tempo-
rally coherent vortices in the shear layer on the pressure side near the
trailing edge from PIV measurements. Based on numerical simula-
tions, Desquesnes et al.,2 noted coherent vortices on both the suction
and pressure sides for a ¼ 2 and Re ¼ 2
105 . Vortices were
observed from 0.96 c on the pressure side, and from 0.6 c on the suc-
tion side, which was related to the different transition points on the
two sides. The periodic amplitude modulation of the sound pressure
was found to be related to the phase difference of the vortices from
the two sides. When the vortices on the two sides were out-of-phase
(vortex cores passing the trailing edge at different times) the sound
pressure, when considering the delay due to sound propagation,
showed high amplitude at the observer location. The sound pressure
showed low amplitude when the vortex shedding was in-phase.
Pr€obsting and Yarusevych18 summarized different types of vortex roll-
up and their respective contribution to tonal noise generation for the
Reynolds number range of 6:5
104  1:5
105 and a ¼ 1:2 . The
amplification of disturbances in the separated shear layers of the sepa-
ration bubble on the suction and/or pressure side led to the formation
of vortices, which was dependent on Reynolds number. When these
structures formed sufficiently close to the trailing edge and retained
sufficient strength and coherence, their passage over the trailing edge
led to strongly periodic pressure fluctuations and tonal noise
generation.
Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf
Some controversy exists in the literature about the flow around a
symmetric NACA 0012 airfoil at zero AoA. In a numerical study, Tam
and Ju19 observed only a single tone and explained its presence by a
Kevin–Helmholtz type wake instability. The authors noted, however,
that this result may not be representative for experimental studies since
the simulated flow was free of environmental perturbations (free
stream turbulence and acoustic). More recently, Ricciardi et al.,20 sim-
ulated a NACA 0012 airfoil at a ¼ 0 and Re ¼ 1:0
105 . Vortex
roll-up upstream of the trailing edge was observed on one side, even
though the free stream and grids were symmetric for the case of
a ¼ 0 . The frequency of the main tone was proposed to be related to
flow instabilities that led to the development of vortical structures, and
the side tones were attributed to the flapping effect of the separation
bubble. Pr€obsting et al.,3 showed experimental results of a NACA 0012
under similar conditions at incidence near zero. Also these experimen-
tal results showed vortex roll-up upstream of the trailing edge and a
minor asymmetry in the mean flow field, with flow separation further
upstream on one side for some Reynolds number and on the opposite
side for other Reynolds numbers. As in those experiments, the inclina-
tion of the airfoil was not changed between measurements at different
Reynolds number; the separation behavior indicates a bifurcation
rather than a bias error due to misalignment or flow curvature.
To assess the features of the flow contributing to the noise gener-
ation mechanism, POD analysis has been proven to be an efficient
tool for data reduction of complex flow fields.21 POD analysis has
been applied to the velocity field for a cylinder wake and slat cove by
01 September 2023 14:21:23
Henning et al.,22 in which the correlation between dominant modes
and acoustic pressure was computed to identify the modes involved in
the sound generation.22 By applying frequency domain and filtered
POD to the flow over a NACA 0012 airfoil, coherent flow patterns
were identified in the leading modes23 and their frequency content
was consistent with the noise emission.24 Modal decomposition has
proven to be a valuable tool in flow-field analysis. Therefore, it is
employed here to advance understanding of the flow organization and
dynamic development contributing to tonal noise emission with the
particular characteristics described in the literature. The importance of
events on the two different sides of the trailing edge is examined in
greater detail than presently available in the literature. In particular,
this study seeks evidence for the impact of the phase difference in the
shedding of vortices from the two sides, potentially providing empiri-
cal support for the observations of Desquesnes et al.2
To this end, synchronized PIV and noise measurements were
conducted in the aeroacoustic wind tunnel at Southern University of
Science and Technology (SUSTech). The experimental setup and data
uncertainty are elaborated on in Sec. II. Noise emission is discussed in
Sec. III, followed by the flow structure, and development in Sec. IV.
Modal analysis involving both the acoustic and velocity signals is
addressed in Sec. V.
II. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND METHODOLOGY
A. Wind tunnel, airfoil model, and microphone
The tests were carried out in a low-speed, closed-loop, open-jet
anechoic wind tunnel at SUSTech [Fig. 1(a)]. The tunnel has a rectan-
gular test section measuring 0.6
0.55 m. The turbulence intensity is
less than 0.15% at a free stream velocity of 50 m/s. The inner dimen-
sions of the anechoic chamber are 3.8
5.7
3.0 m, with a cutoff
frequency of 100 Hz and a free field radius of 1.9 m. For further details
33, 075102-2
 Physics of Fluids ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf

FIG. 1. Experimental setup. (a) Setup inside the anechoic chamber; (b) illumination area of the PIV setup (bottom view).

on the aerodynamic and acoustic performance of the wind tunnel, the
reader may refer to Yang et al.25
A NACA 0012 airfoil with a span of 0.55 and chord length c of
0.3 m was chosen as the test model and mounted vertically between
the two end plates.
In order to compare the present test conditions with previous
studies, a summary of the airfoil type, chord length, test section size,
and Reynolds number is shown in Table I. The majority of previous
studies focused on the NACA 0012 airfoil,1,2,6,7,9,11,18,20 which is also
adopted in our research. Airfoils with the same chord length were
resulting in zero lift (CL ¼ 0), the CL values for two larger, geometric
angles of attack (62 ) were interpolated linearly to obtain an estimate
for the angle corresponding to a zero lift condition (aCL ¼0 ). The angle
was consequently adjusted to the interpolated value using a stepper
motor. Measurement during the actual experiment resulted in a lift
coefficient of CL ¼ 0:0042 (uncertainty of 0.0015 with 95% confidence
level) for this condition. With an estimated CL  a slope of 0.042 , the
actual angle of attack can be estimated to be equivalent to 0.1 .
The model consists of acrylic glass with a polished surface, ren-
dering the model transparent and thus allowing for light transmission.

01 September 2023 14:21:23

investigated using experimental methods7 and direct numerical simu- The airfoil leading edge was located 0.35 downstream of the nozzle
lations (DNS).2 Smaller models with chord lengths of 0.22,1 0.08 and exit, the trailing edge 0.2 m upstream of the end plate trailing edge as
0.16,6 0.1 and 0.2,9,18 and 0.067 m11 were commonly used in small shown in Fig. 1(b). The upper side of the airfoil is defined as the side
facilities. The test section size of the facility used in the experiment with the surface described by positive coordinates on the y axis with
described here allows for a blockage ratio of 11%, which is small com- the airfoil at zero incidence.
pared to several previous studies.6,11,17 The inflow velocity of the cur- For acoustic measurements, a microphone (Br€ uel & Kjr 4966)
rent study was set at u1 ¼ 11.2 m/s (corresponding to a chord-based was positioned at a distance of 1.5 m to the test section center axis and
Reynolds number of 0:22
106 ) and 0 AoA. This combination of aligned with the 0.25c position of the airfoil [see Fig. 1(a)]. The sam-
parameters locates in the tonal noise generation regime2,3 for the pling rate was 51.2 kHz for each measurement and the signal was
NACA 0012 airfoil. recorded for 10 s.
It should be noted that at a ¼ 0 a symmetric mean flow field is
difficult to attain for the highly dynamic flow field subject to this study B. PIV setup
as outlined in the introduction. Here, balance measurements have High repetition-rate planar PIV measurements were conducted
been employed to adjust the angle of attack. To identify the angle for the region around the trailing edge, where the noise source is
located.2,6,9,14 The measurement domain (approximately 10
8 cm2 )
TABLE I. Summary of test conditions from selected previous studies (not complete). is represented by a black rectangle in Fig. 1(b).
The flow was seeded with dioctyl sebacate particles of mean
Airfoil model c (m) Test section (m
m) Re diameter 1 lm. Illumination was provided by a Photonics Nd:YAG
laser (45 W at 1000 Hz). Light-sheet optics were located on the upper
NACA 0012 0.22 0:79
0:53 0:4  2:0
106
side of the airfoil, outside of the test section. The light sheet was
NACA 00181
affected by refraction at the tip of the trailing edge resulting in a shad-
NACA 00122 0.3 2 D DNS 0:1  0:2
106 owed region, where data are unavailable. Image acquisition was facili-
NACA 00126 0:08; 0:16 0:15
0:3 0:1  0:4
106 tated by a Phantom VEO410L (1280
780 pixels, 12 bit, pixel pitch
NACA 00127 0.3 0:85
0:6 1:45
106 20 lm) equipped with a Nikon 100 mm objective, operated at a focal
NACA 00129 0.1 d ¼ 0.6 (circular) 0:01  0:27
106 ratio of f =4. The corresponding optical magnification is M ¼ 0.2.
NACA 001211 0.067 0:275
0:075 0:05  0:15
106 Illumination and image acquisition were synchronized using a
NACA 001218 0.2 d ¼ 0.6 (circular) 0:065  0:45
106 LaVision Programmable Time Unit, operated using the LaVision
NACA 001817 0.08 0:19
0:19 0:16
106 DAVIS 10.0 software.
NACA 0012 0.3 0:6
0:55 0:22
106 Images were processed using an iterative multigrid and multipass
(current study) technique with window deformation and a final window size of
16
16 pixels. The overlap factor was 75%, resulting in a vector

Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002 33, 075102-3

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Physics of Fluids
spacing of 0.38 mm. The sampling rate of the PIV measurement was
2645 Hz, and the duration was 2 s. The PIV measurement was syn-
chronized with the acoustic measurements allowing for time-
correlation of the two signals.
C. Uncertainty analysis
The uncertainty analysis includes bias and random errors. The
bias error mainly considers the peak-locking as a result of the large
imaging aperture (f/4), which yields diffraction spots smaller than the
pixel diameter. This effect was mitigated by slightly defocusing the
images,26 adjusting the particle image diameter to approximately 2
pixels. The verification was performed by inspecting the histogram of
particles image displacement.27 The focal setup was adjusted until no
obvious peak-locking was noticed, and thus the bias error could be
regarded negligible in the current study. The error due to the finite
spatial resolution depends on the characteristic length to be accurately
measured in the PIV velocity fields, which is the distance between dis-
crete vortices in this case. It was reported that the measurement was
within 95% precision with a multipass cross correlation algorithm and
window deformation when the window size is smaller than 0.6 times
the length of the scale to be measured.28 Therefore, with a 1.52 window
size, flow structures down to 2.53 mm (1/8 of the distance between
adjacent shedding vortices) can be measured within 95% precision.
The random error in the PIV data was estimated by the image
matching method as introduced by Sciacchitano et al.,29 which
includes contributions from random Gaussian noise, particle image
size, and density, as well as in- and out-of-plane motion. The image
matching method uses the measured velocity field to match the parti-
cle images of the recordings based on the processing algorithm (for
example, by window deformation or window shift). The approach
detects particle images in each interrogation window. In the case of
exact velocity measurements, the particle images of the two recordings
would match perfectly. In real experiments, the paired particle images
do not match exactly and feature a positional disparity between them.
The positional disparity is computed as the distance between the cent-
roids of the particle images. The measurement uncertainty is deter-
mined within each interrogation window from the mean value and the
statistical dispersion of the positional disparity vector. The uncertainty
of the instantaneous velocity field is 1% of the local velocity in the free
stream and 6% in the boundary layer during the measurements.
D. POD method
POD analysis has been used as a powerful postprocessing tool to
identify dominant coherent flow patterns and to construct reduced-
order flow models that capture the largest amount of energy with the
smallest number of modes. When the flow is dominated by large-scale
convective structures, as is the case in the vortex shedding studied
here, POD modes are found to occur in pairs that represent the
orthogonal components of the harmonics of the vortex-shedding
process.30,31
The result of the PIV measurements is a set of consecutive veloc-
ity fields, i.e., velocity components (U ¼ ½u; v) in the two-
dimensional measurement domain X ¼ ½x; y [defined in Fig. 1(b)].
The fluctuating velocity component in the Reynolds decomposition is
 ðX; tÞ;
U 0 ðX; tÞ ¼ UðX; tÞ  U (1)
Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf
where U(X, t) is the instantaneous, U  ðX; tÞ the time-averaged, and
U 0 ðX; tÞ the fluctuating flow field. The proper decomposition is then
applied on the auto-correlation matrix CNs
Ns as reported in
Sirovich,32 Kourentis and Konstantinidis,33 Schrijer et al.,34 Chen,35
Yang et al.,36 which is defined as
ðð
1
Cij ¼ U 0 ðX; ti ÞU 0 ðX; tj ÞdX; (2)
NS
where Ns is the number of snapshots; the integral is evaluated here as a
summation for the discrete measurement points.
The eigenvalues kn and the eigenvectors An ðXÞ of the auto-
correlation matrix satisfy
CNs
Ns An ðXÞ ¼ kn An ðXÞ: (3)
The POD mode, which represents the coherent flow pattern, is
determined by
0
Un ðXÞ ¼ Rn¼N
n¼1 U ðX; tn ÞAn ðXÞ:
S
(4)
Furthermore, the measurement data contain temporal informa-
tion that can be retrieved by projecting each snapshot onto the basis
functions,
ðð
cn ðtÞ ¼ U 0 ðX; tm ÞUn ðXÞdX; (5)
where the coefficient cn indicates the correlation between the nth basis
01 September 2023 14:21:23
POD spatial mode and the instantaneous flow field.
III. ACOUSTIC EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS
Acoustic emissions are analyzed for comparison with previously
published results and to identify facility effects. An average periodo-
gram method (MATLAB pwelch function) was used to generate esti-
mates of the power spectra density (PSD). The number of samples per
window was 12 800, where a Hanning window was applied to each
segment, and this yielded a frequency resolution of 3.125 Hz. An over-
lap of 50% was applied for the windows. Figure 2 shows the noise
spectra featuring broadband humps with superimposed discrete tones.
Harmonics of the humps and tones are also observed at a higher fre-
quency. The discrete tones are located at the nondimensional fre-
quency of fn c=u1 ¼ 5:27; 5:77; 6:31; 6:85, and 7.38, whereas the
center frequency of the broadband hump is close to the maximum
tone as fs c=u1 ¼ 6:31. Validation of the measured data is performed
by comparing the frequency interval with the model of Arbey and
Bataille,6 which is presented in Sec. IV C using the calculated convec-
tive velocity as input.
In order to identify facility effects, the noise spectra of the empty
wind tunnel at the free stream velocity of u1 ¼ 11.2 m/s, the airfoil
noise spectra without PIV setup, and the airfoil noise spectra with the
PIV system in operation are shown in Fig. 2. For the empty wind tun-
nel case, the background noise level as shown in Fig. 2 is 50 dB lower
than the maximum, which confirms that the wind tunnel is quiet
enough for the study of airfoil tonal noise generation mechanisms.
The PIV system generates noise from the cooling fan of the camera
and the cooling water inside the laser head, and it was reported that
the airfoil transition was sensitive to environment disturbances.10
Comparison shows that the PIV system contributes with a broadband
component to the background noise level. It does not shift the tone
33, 075102-4
 Physics of Fluids
FIG. 2. Noise spectra of the airfoil and facility effects.
frequency or introduce new tones to the spectrum. Therefore, it can be
stated that the PIV system has little effect on the tonal noise generation
of the airfoil.
IV. FLOW FIELD NEAR THE AIRFOIL TRAILING EDGE
A. Time-averaged flow field
Figure 3(a) shows the time-averaged flow field with contours of
the streamwise velocity component u. The wall-tangential and wall-
normal coordinates are denoted by xt and xn, respectively. The flow is
separated near the airfoil trailing edge, and the nodal points inside the
separation bubbles are indicated by N1 (xt =c ¼ 0:88) and N2
(xt =c ¼ 0:92) on the upper and lower sides, respectively. The presence
of a separation bubble has been proposed earlier as a necessary condi-
tion for tonal noise generation.2,7 Although the airfoil AoA is intended
to be set at 0 , it can be found that there exist asymmetric effects dur-
ing the tests, which was explained in Sec. II A.
Wall-parallel velocity components are extracted from the time-
averaged flow field at the position of xt =c ¼ 0:15; 0:11; 0:07,
FIG. 3. (a) Contour of time-averaged flow field colored by horizontal velocity component u. Nodal points of separation bubbles are indicated by N1 and N2 on the upper and
lower sides, respectively. (b) Boundary layer velocity profiles at xt =c ¼ 0:15; 0:11; 0:07, and –0.03.
Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf
and –0.03 as shown in Fig. 3(b). At the same chordwise position, the
wall-parallel velocity at the lower side is slightly higher than that on
the upper side, which is a result of the earlier separation on the upper
side. The boundary layer thickness ðd99 Þ on the upper and lower sides
is approximately equal at 0:0228c at xt ¼ 0:03c. It has been shown
earlier that the tone generation occurred together with inflections in
the measured velocity profile.7 These inflections are clearly visible in
the boundary layer velocity profiles at xt =c ¼ 0:15; 0:11, and
–0.07 as shown in Fig. 3(b).
Significant streamwise and vertical velocity fluctuations are
observed in the boundary layer and near wake as shown in Fig. 4. The
contours for both velocity components are approximately symmetric
with the maximum fluctuation magnitude located more upstream on
the upper side than on the lower side. The maximum velocity fluctua-
tions appear at xt =c ¼ 0:94c and xt =c ¼ 0:97c on the upper and lower
sides, respectively, which are downstream of the reattachment point of
the separation bubble. There is also another local maximum of the ver-
tical velocity fluctuation located 0:05c downstream of the airfoil trail-
ing edge, which was observed at the same position by Chong and
Joseph.8 Figure 5 shows that the fluctuation profiles at xt =c ¼ 0:15;
0:11; 0:07, and –0.03 are extracted from the above contours. The
0
values of ut;rms show evidence of three peaks, which are discernible at
xt =c ¼ −0.15 as indicated by red circles. This triple-peak structure of
the streamwise velocity fluctuations is one of the features often
0
reported for tonal noise emission.2,7,9 The values of un;rms have one
peak in the measurement domain and the peak value increases from
01 September 2023 14:21:23
5%u1 to 15%u1 in the range of xt =c ¼ 0:15 to –0.03. The wall-
0
normal distances with peak values of un;rms are approximately the
same on the upper and lower sides, i.e., they are both 0.0096 c from
the airfoil surface.
B. Flow field development in time and space
Figure 6 depicts a time sequence of k2, which is used for vortex
identification.37 This time sequence thus illustrates the temporal evolu-
tion of trailing edge vortices. Vollmers38 showed that the k2 criterion,
which is mostly applied on three-dimensional flow fields, is also suited
for analyzing flow fields in which only two velocity components are
available. An application of the k2 criterion on the laminar separation
33, 075102-5
 Physics of Fluids
0 0
FIG. 4. Velocity fluctuation contours. (a) urms ; (b) vrms , and the dashed lines indicate the position with maximum un;rms values.
0 0
FIG. 5. Profiles of velocity fluctuations. (a) ut;rms on the upper side; (b) ut;rms on the lower side; (c) un;rms on the upper side; and (d) un;rms on the lower side. The red circles
represent the triple peaks.
bubble of a SD7003 airfoil with two velocity components from PIV
measurement has been reported.39 In the present case, vortices form-
ing over the separation bubble have a larger spanwise coherence. The
upstream vortex ridges are uniform in space and time domains.
For x=c  0.88, i.e., before the nodal point of the separation
bubble, the vorticity is concentrated in the laminar shear layer. For
FIG. 6. Space-time development of the vortex structures visualized by the k2
criterion.
Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf
0
01 September 2023 14:21:23
0 0
0.88 < x=c < 0.94, vortex roll-up is observed. Spatial coherence
reduces from x=c ¼ 0:94, which may be attributed to the vortex
breakup, as the vortex is convected downstream.39,40 The location of
vortex breakup corresponds to the location of accelerated increase in
velocity fluctuations seen in Fig. 4. The vortex breakup on the pressure
surface was also reported for a NACA 0012 airfoil at a ¼ 6 .17
Considering the vortex breakup as observed in the PIV results and the
significance of spanwise coherence for the aeroacoustic emissions at
the trailing edge, this indicates that results obtained from numerical
studies based on the 2D flow assumption have to be considered with
care as also noted by Pr€obsting et al.9 and Turner and Kim.41
The time history of the velocity showed periodic fluctuations.
Frequency spectra are used to analyze the energy content further. The
0
PSD values of un are shown in Fig. 7 for the probes located on the line
0
along maximum un;rms as indicated in Fig. 3(a) (the contour in Fig. 3 is
0
colored by vrms , but the dashed lines are plotted for the maximum
0
value of un;rms ). In order to achieve a similar frequency resolution as
for PSDp0 p0 , the number of samples per window for estimating
PSDu0n ;u0n was set to 660 with an overlap of 50%, which yielded a
33, 075102-6
 Physics of Fluids ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf

0
FIG. 7. PSD values of velocity fluctuation un . (a) Upper side and (b) lower side.

0
frequency resolution of 2.583 Hz. The velocity un was chosen for anal-
ysis as its contribution to the airfoil tonal noise generation prevails
over that of the wall-tangential velocity components.42 Both, similarity
between the two velocity spectra and between the velocity spectra and
the spectrum of acoustic pressure (Fig. 2) is observed. Discrete peaks
can be identified at fc=u1 ¼ 5.76, 6.31, 6.86, and 7.41. The broadband
spectra level increases downstream from xt =c ¼ 0:12 to –0.03,
which is consistent with the observation that the velocity fluctuation is
the main tone frequency fc=u1 ¼ 6.31. Amplitude modulation with
lower frequency corresponds to the frequency interval of discrete tones
fc=u1 ’ 0.5.
C. Convective velocity
Section IV B described the vortex roll-up and convection domi-
nating the flow field. Therefore, the spatiotemporal evolution of the

01 September 2023 14:21:23

vortices is examined in detail in this section. The convective velocity in
amplified toward the trailing edge.17 It should be mentioned that the space and frequency domains is determined, which is computed along
peak magnitude has a decreasing trend from xt =c ¼ 0:07 to –0.03, the line with a maximum magnitude of un;rms on the upper side. From
as the vortex breakup weakens the periodic vortex shedding near the the time delay between two probes as defined in the above correlation
airfoil trailing edge as shown in Fig. 6. The similarity between the spec- analysis [Eq. (6)], the convective velocity is determined as the distance
tra of wall-normal velocity near the trailing edge and the acoustic spec- divided by the time delay. As the distance between two probes may
tra is to be expected. As outlined in the introduction, the tonal sound have an impact on the convective velocity, the results for the spatial
emission is attributed to the convection of coherent hydrodynamic distance of Dxt ¼ 0.01c, 0.02c, and 0.04c are compared in Fig. 9. With
fluctuations past the impedance discontinuity posed by the trailing smaller distance, the convective velocity tends to decrease. It converges
edge. Ffowcs Williams and Hall42 and Amiet43 showed that convected when Dxt ¼ 0.02c, which is approximately the same as the dimension
surface pressure fluctuations (blocked pressure) act as an efficient of an individual, shed vortex core. The convective velocity has a
source of sound when interacting with an edge. A convecting surface
pressure field, which is almost periodic in the streamwise direction,
which may be induced, e.g., by a coherent vortex pattern, would thus
result in tonal noise when convected at a constant velocity. The gener-
ated tonal noise then excites the flow in the receptivity region (the
point where the feedback loop is closed). Through flow instability,
these perturbations are again amplified, where the separated shear
layer of a separation bubble acts as a strong amplifier, ultimately
resulting in the roll-up of coherent vortices.16
To gain further insight into the time-space relation of the flow
field, the two-point correlation coefficient is computed as

huðxref ; t þ sÞuðx; tÞi

Rxref ;x ðsÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi; (6)
hu2 ðxref ; tÞihu2 ðx; tÞi

where the angle bracket hi denotes ensemble averaging, xref is a fixed

reference location, and x is a downstream location with Dx ¼ xref  x.
The correlation coefficient between the data sampled at the
downstream (xt =c ¼ 0:02) and upstream (xt =c ¼ 0:04) locations
reaches 0.75. A time shift of tu1 =c ¼ −0.043 is observed in Fig. 8. The FIG. 8. Correlation coefficient between the probes on the upper side, xref is the
correlation coefficient shows a periodic fluctuation corresponding to location at xt =c ¼ 0:02, and x is at xt =c ¼ 0:04.

Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002 33, 075102-7

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Physics of Fluids
FIG. 9. Convergence study of convective velocity.
parabolic shape in the test domain with the minimum value being
located around xt =c ¼ 0:09 as shown in Fig. 9. The averaged con-
vection velocity is estimated to be 0.42 u1 .
Using the estimates of convective velocity, the discrete tone fre-
quencies are verified by the feedback loop model of Arbey and
Bataille.6 The tone frequency observed in the noise spectrum could be
fitted using the following equation:
  1
uc 1 uc
fn ¼ nþ 1þ ; (7)
L 2 c0  u 1
where L is the feedback loop length, c0 is sound speed, and n is a fitting
parameter restricted to positive integers. The convective velocity in
Eq. (7) is independent of the position, and thus the averaged value of
0.42 u1 is adopted. The feedback loop length is selected as the dis-
tance between the trailing edge and the maximum velocity point, and
it is approximated as 0.86 c which refers to the value reported by
Arbey and Bataille6 at the same angle of attack and similar Reynolds
number. By choosing the integer number of n ¼ 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14,
the predicted tone frequencies are fc=u1 ¼ 5:29; 5:80; 6:30; 6:81, and
7.31, which agree well with the acoustic data (Fig. 2).
As seen from the PSD of velocity fluctuations in Fig.7, the veloc-
ity has a large broadband contribution. Therefore, the convective
velocity is estimated as a function of frequency. Following a similar
procedure as that employed for the global convective velocity, the con-
vective velocities for different frequencies are estimated using bandpass
filtered data44 (as implemented in MATLAB Signal Processing
Toolbox) for the probe at xt =c ¼ 0:007c. The results are shown in
Fig. 10. The frequency band is 50 Hz and the convection frequency is
plotted for the center frequency. At high frequency, turbulence con-
vects faster, which is consistent with earlier results of airfoil vortex
shedding.18 For the vortex shedding frequency of fn c=u1 ¼ 6.31, the
convective velocity is determined from Fig. 10 along with relevant
wavelength and wave number presented in Table II.
As the convective velocity near the airfoil trailing edge has been
reported extensively for the cases with tonal noise generation, they are
summarized and compared with the estimation above. For the same
Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf
FIG. 10. Dependence of convective velocity on the frequency.
angle of attack of a ¼ 0 , the convective velocity corresponding to the
primary tone is 0.42 u1 for a Reynolds number of 150 00, which was
evaluated by the phase difference between the hot-wire and sound
pressure data.11 Using a method based on frequency-wavenumber
spectra the convective velocity was reported to be 0.59 u1 on the suc-
tion side and 0.44 u1 on the pressure side for a NACA 0012 airfoil
operating at a ¼1.5 .2 The convective velocities determined by velocity
01 September 2023 14:21:23
contours in the space-time domain were 0.64 u1 on the suction side,
and 0.32 u1 on the pressure side for a NACA 0012 airfoil operating at
a ¼1.5 .9 Summarizing these data, it is found that various methods
have been applied for the calculation of convection velocities at similar
Reynolds number and angle of attack. The results shown here are in
general agreement with the published data at similar operation
conditions.
V. MODAL ANALYSIS OF THE VORTICAL FLOW FIELD
A. POD modes
In order to reveal the statistical pattern of the most energetic fluc-
tuations as well as its contribution to the spikes in the velocity spectra,
the coherent structures in the flow are analyzed with the help of modal
analysis. All 5400 snapshots were used for the POD analysis following
the procedure described in Sec. II C. Similar to the POD analysis in the
wake flow of a square-section cylinder30 and jet flow,45 a large amount
of energy is captured by a small number of eigenmodes. Herein, the
contribution of the first 50 modes to the total disturbance energy is
80% as demonstrated in Fig. 11. The first and second modes represent
12.9% and 11.8% of the total turbulent kinetic energy, respectively, as
shown in Fig. 11. A pair of POD modes is expected with a phase shift
of p=2 to describe the convection behavior. These two modes usually
have the same turbulent kinetic energy,30,46 which are in line with the
results presented here.
TABLE II. Characteristics of vortex shedding at the trailing edge.
fn c=u1 uc =u1 ksh =c ksh c
6.31 0.42 0.067 93.7
33, 075102-8
 Physics of Fluids
FIG. 11. Energy distribution of the POD modes.
The POD mode time coefficients, which are defined in Eq. (5),
allow the phase identification of each PIV image for a specific mode.
The spectra of cn for low order POD modes are shown in Fig. 12 and
have been obtained using the parameters also used in the estimation of
0
the PSD for un with a frequency resolution of 2.583 Hz. The spectra of
mode 1–4 are similar and show a broadband hump and discrete tones,
which capture the dominant features of the velocity fluctuations,
whereas mode 5 and higher order modes only show broadband
components.
The first six POD modes are selected to depict the dominant
modal features, whereas the time-averaged flow field, which is typically
termed as the zeroth mode (stationary component) was shown in Fig. 3.
The velocity vectors superimposed by vertical velocity contours are
shown in Fig. 13. Modes 1 and 2 [Figs. 13(a) and 13(b)] are clearly cou-
pled. The velocity vectors are asymmetric (in the same direction) with
respect to the chord line. The wavelength of the velocity pattern has an
increasing trend further downstream. Modes 3 and 4 also show coher-
ent velocity fluctuations, and the velocity vectors are approximately
symmetric (in the opposite direction) with respect to the chord line, yet
FIG. 12. Frequency spectra of mode time coefficients cn.
Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf
the velocity fluctuation magnitudes of these two modes are obviously
lower than modes 1 and 2. Modes 5 and 6 show less coherent velocity
fluctuations in comparison with the aforementioned four modes.
B. Periodic amplitude modulation: Main contributions
from the first-fourth modes
The time history of far-field sound pressure is presented in
Fig. 14(a) and is characterized by high frequency oscillations with low
frequency amplitude modulation (the low amplitude regions of the
sound pressure are indicated by solid green lines and marked by “H1”
 “H3”). In order to find the contribution of flow fields to the sound
pressure generation, the time history of the dominant POD mode
coefficients cn are presented in Fig. 14. A comparison of the time histo-
ries of these POD mode coefficients can help identify the contribution
of the flow patterns to different sound pressure signatures.
The time axis is aligned between the sound pressure and cn after
the correction of sound propagation time, and the instants with low
amplitudes of sound pressure are represented by solid green lines and
marked by “L1”  “L3” in the plot of cn. As the time coefficients of the
second and fourth modes have a p=2 phase shift with respect to the first
and third modes, and the fifth and higher modes already do not show
strong contribution to the sound pressure, they are not shown here for
brevity (this is confirmed by presenting the spectra of cn in Fig. 12).
By comparing the time history of p0 to those of c1, c3, and c5, it is
found that the high amplitude region of p0 correlates with the high
amplitude domain of c1. In contrast, the low amplitude region of p0
01 September 2023 14:21:23
correlates with the high amplitude domain of c3. The fifth mode does
not show any recognizable similarity to the sound pressure.
It should be mentioned that c3 also has high amplitude in the
region corresponding to the high amplitude region of p0 , e.g., at
tu1 =c  44:5. However, as the value of c1 is high in this region as
well and mode 1 has higher turbulent kinetic energy, the contribution
of mode 3 is small.
The marked symbols of “J1”  “J4” indicate the high amplitude
instants of c1, which explain the high amplitude region of p0 . The flow
fields at these instants are displayed in Fig. 15. At instant “J1,” the
instantaneous flow field corresponding to a local maximum value of c1
is shown in Fig. 15(a). It can clearly be seen that discrete vortices are
shed from both sides with the vortices being out-of-phase near the
trailing edge. Half the period of the main tone later, at instant “J2,” the
value of c1 attains a local minimum, and the corresponding instanta-
neous flow field is shown in Fig. 15(b). With respect to “J1,” the dis-
crete vortices have an obvious displacement in the streamwise
direction. Another semi period of the main tone frequency later, at
instant “J3,” the value of c1 attains another local maximum. The corre-
sponding flow field in Fig. 15(c) looks similar to Fig. 15(a) at instant
“J1” in terms of vortex positions and phases. At instant “J4,” the shed
vortex continues traveling downstream and looks similar to that at
instant “J2.” Therefore, the first mode is ascribed to the periodic vortex
shedding in the streamwise direction with vortices out-of-phase near
the trailing edge. This is consistent with the pattern of mode 1 as
shown in Fig. 13.
The example flow fields corresponding to the high amplitude
instants of c3 at “K1”  “K4” are presented in Fig. 16, which help to
explain the low magnitude region of p0 . These snapshots show in-
phase vortex pairs near the trailing edge convecting downstream into
the wake. With the two vortices being in-phase Desquesnes et al.2
33, 075102-9
 Physics of Fluids
FIG. 13. The equivalent flow structures of the first to sixth mode (a)–(f).
have observed, based on the results of a numerical simulation, that the
emitted acoustic wave is weak in comparison to the case with out-of-
phase vortices. The results presented here confirm this description
experimentally. It should be mentioned that the shear layer without
vortex roll-up is also reported to be responsible for the low amplitude
region of sound pressure,7,9 yet the shear layer can be regarded as dis-
tributed vortex and they are “in-phase” on the two sides, and thus this
explanation is a special case for in-phase vortices. The lower acoustic
emission in the case of in-phase vortex shedding from the two sides
can be explained with the reduced pressure difference between the two
sides of the airfoil, and thus a lower pressure disturbances scattered by
the discontinuity posed by the trailing edge as suggested by the model
of Amiet.43
C. Comparison of noise source region with POD mode
pattern
A method for combining simultaneous PIV and acoustic mea-
surements, which has been used for the analysis of aeroacoustic
Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf
01 September 2023 14:21:23
sources,9,17,22 is utilized in this study. This method is based on the
cross correlation between the vertical velocity component measured
by PIV of vðxref ; tn Þ and the acoustic pressure pðx; tn Þ at the micro-
phone position x. The normalized cross correlation function with a
time shift s is defined by
1 N  
Rn¼1 vðxref ; tn Þp0 ðx; tn þ sÞ
Rv;p ðsÞ ¼ N pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ; (8)
hv2 ðxref ; tÞihp02 ðx; tÞi
where N is the number of PIV measurements rather than that of the
sound pressure measurements, as the latter sampling frequency is sig-
nificantly higher. The correlation map in Fig. 17 has an alternative pat-
tern of negative and positive values, which is similar to the results of
airfoils9,17 and cylinders22 with tonal noise generations. The region
with strong periodic patterns of the correlation coefficient was
reported to be dependent on the separation region.17 Comparing the
correlation map of qv;p in Fig. 17 with the first and second POD mode
patterns as shown in Figs. 13(a) and 13(b), a high similarity in terms
of periodic and asymmetric patterns is noticed. The POD modes
33, 075102-10
 Physics of Fluids ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf

FIG. 14. Time histories of sound pressure and POD mode time coefficients. (a)
Sound pressure; (b) POD mode coefficient c1; (c) c3; and (d) c5. The dashed lines

01 September 2023 14:21:23

represent the instants (“H1”  “H3”) with low amplitude of sound pressure, and the
solid green lines represent the corresponding retarded instants (“L1”  “L3”) of cn
after propagation time correction. “J1”  “J4” represent instants with large ampli-
tudes of c1, and “K1”  “K4” represent instants with large amplitudes of c3.

represent the velocity fluctuations in the flow field, which are the
source of hydrodynamic pressure fluctuations scattering noise into the
far field at the trailing edge. The region with strong velocity fluctua-
tions has a strong correlation with the far field noise, and thus the first
and second POD modes with higher turbulent energies show a similar
pattern to the correlation map.
The correlation coefficient between the first POD mode and
sound pressure is shown in Fig. 18. The maximum magnitude of the
correlation coefficient reaches 0.84 for the first mode, which is larger
than that (0.4) between a sing velocity probe and sound pressure as
shown in Fig. 17. This behavior implies that the POD analysis has FIG. 15. Flow fields in (a)–(d) correspond to instants of “J1”  “J4” as represented
in Fig. 14, respectively.
greatly suppressed the background noise22 and filtered out flow field
fluctuations that are incoherent with the large-scale motion.30 In the
case of the third mode, the correlation coefficient reaches a value of wall-parallel velocity fluctuations are observed, which were previ-
approximately 0.24 at its maximum which means its contribution to ously described as necessary conditions for the tonal noise genera-
the noise emission is relatively weak. tion on the airfoil. The instantaneous flow fields show the
development of shear layer, vortex roll-up, and vortex breakup
VI. CONCLUSION
from the upstream to the downstream region near the airfoil trail-
For the NACA 0012 airfoil subject to this study, the sound pres- ing edge. The coherent vortex shedding is explained by the acous-
sure spectrum shows a broadband hump superimposed by discrete tic feedback mechanism as outlined in the introduction. The
tones, which is consistent with results reported widely in literature. shape of the wall-normal velocity spectra agree well with the
The interval of the discrete tones agrees well with the feedback model acoustic ones. The energy content increases downstream for all
suggested by Arbey and Bataille.6 broadband components, yet the tone magnitude reaches a maxi-
The time-averaged flow field shows laminar separation bub- mum value around xt =c ¼ −0.07. Corresponding to the vortex
bles on both the upper and lower sides. The inflection point shedding, the convective velocity is around 0.42 u1 , and the wave-
on the time-averaged velocity profile and triple-peaks for the length is estimated to be 0.07c.

Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002 33, 075102-11

Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Physics of Fluids
FIG. 16. Flow fields in (a)–(d) correspond to instants of “K1”  “K4” as repre-
sented in Fig. 14, respectively.
POD analysis revealed the most energetic modes of the fluctu-
ating field. Time history comparison and correlation with the far-
field sound pressure linked these modes to the acoustic emission.
Amplitude modulation was observed for the coefficients of the first
(c1) and third (c3) POD modes, which is consistent with the far-
field sound pressure time history. The first and second modes rep-
resent out-of-phase vortex shedding on the upper and lower sides,
which accounts for the high amplitude region of noise emission.
On the contrary, the third and fourth modes represent in-phase
vortex shedding on the two sides, which accounts for the low
amplitude region of noise emission. The higher modes which only
show stochastic contributions to the turbulent kinetic energy are
regarded as insignificant for the flow field dynamics relating to
Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf
FIG. 17. Contour of the correlation coefficient between the vertical velocity compo-
nent and the acoustic pressure signal. The time delay has been corrected for the
propagation time between the trailing edge and the location of the microphone.
01 September 2023 14:21:23
FIG. 18. Correlation between the time coefficients of POD mode and sound
pressure.
noise generation. The correlation map between the vertical velocity
component and the far-field sound pressure is also calculated and
compared with the POD mode pattern. It is found that the correla-
tion map has a great similarity with the first and second POD
modes, which further confirms that the far-field noise emission is
strongly dependent on the most energetic POD modes.
The results thus provide empirical evidence for nature of the
interaction of vortex shedding from the two sides of the airfoil and its
influence on noise emission as described by Desquesnes et al.2 based
on simulation results.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Yannian Yang and Yu Liu would like to thank National Natural
Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 11802114 and 92052105), the
Department of Science and Technology of Guangdong Province (Grant
No. 2019B21203001), the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong
33, 075102-12
 Physics of Fluids
Province (Grant No. 2018A0303130142), and Science, Technology, and
Innovation Commission of Shenzhen Municipality (Grant No.
RCBS20200714114941227) for the support.
Stefan Pr€obsting and Ye Li would like to thank National
Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 51761135012
and 11872248) and Ministry of Science and Technology of China
(Grant No. 2017YFE0132000) for the support.
DATA AVAILABILITY
The data that support the findings of this study are available
from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
REFERENCES
1
R. W. Paterson, P. Vogt, M. R. Fink, and C. Munch, “Vortex noise of isolated
airfoils,” J. Aircraft 10(5), 296–302 (1973).
2
G. Desquesnes, M. Terracol, and P. Sagaut, “Numerical investigation of the
tone noise mechanism over laminar airfoils,” J. Fluid Mech. 591, 155–182
(2007).
3
S. Pr€obsting, F. Scarano, and S. C. Morris, “Regimes of tonal noise on an airfoil
at moderate reynolds number,” J. Fluid Mech. 780, 407–438 (2015).
4
V. Golubev, “Recent advances in acoustics of transitional airfoils with
feedback-loop interactions: A review,” Appl. Sci. 11(3), 1057 (2021).
5
L. Nguyen, V. Golubev, R. Mankbadi, G. Yakhina, and M. Roger, “Numerical
investigation of tonal trailing-edge noise radiated by low Reynolds number air-
foils,” Appl. Sci. 11(5), 2257 (2021).
6
H. Arbey and J. Bataille, “Noise generated by airfoil profiles placed in a uni-
form laminar flow,” J. Fluid Mech. 134, 33–47 (1983).
7
E. C. Nash, M. V. Lowson, and A. McAlpine, “Boundary-layer instability noise
on aerofoils,” J. Fluid Mech. 382, 27–61 (1999).
8
T. Chong and P. Joseph, “An experimental study of tonal noise mechanism of
laminar airfoil,” AIAA Paper No. 2009-3345 (2009).
9
S. Pr€obsting, J. Serpieri, and F. Scarano, “Experimental investigation of aerofoil
tonal noise generation,” J. Fluid Mech. 747, 656–687 (2014).
10
B. Plogmann, A. Herrig, and W. W€ urz, “Experimental investigations of a trail-
ing edge noise feedback mechanism on a NACA 0012 airfoil,” Exp. Fluid 54,
1480 (2013).
11
E. Arcondoulis, C. Doolan, A. C. Zander, L. A. Brooks, and Y. Liu, “An investi-
gation of airfoil dual acoustic feedback mechanisms at low-to-moderate
Reynolds number,” J. Sound Vib. 460, 114887 (2019).
12
A. Hersh and R. Hayden, “Aerodynamic sound radiation from lifting surfaces
with and without leading-edge serrations,” Report No. NASA CR-114370
(NASA, 1971).
13
L. Clark, “The radiation of sound from an airfoil immersed in a laminar flow,”
J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 93, 366–376 (1971).
14
C. K. W. Tam, “Discrete tones of isolated airfoils,” Acoust. Soc. Am 55(6),
1173–1177 (1974).
15
M. R. Fink, “Prediction of airfoil tone frequencies,” J. Aircraft 12, 118–120
(1975).
16
E. Arcondoulis, Doolan, A. C. Zander, and L. A. Brooks, “A review of trailing
edge noise generated by airfoils at low to moderate Reynolds number,” Acoust.
Australia 38(3), 135–139 (2011).
17
T. Nakano, N. Fujisawa, and S. Lee, “Measurement of tonal-noise characteris-
tics and periodic flow structure around NACA0018 airfoil,” Exp. Fluid 40(3),
482–490 (2006).
18
S. Pr€obsting and S. Yarusevych, “Laminar separation bubble development on
an airfoil emitting tonal noise,” J. Fluid Mech. 780, 167–191 (2015).
19
C. K. W. Tam and H. Ju, “Airfoil tones at moderate Reynolds number,” J. Fluid
Mech. 690, 536–570 (2012).
20
T. Ricciardi, W. Arias-Ramirez, and W. Wolf, “On secondary tones arising in
trailing-edge noise at moderate Reynolds numbers,” Eur. J. Mech. B Fluids 79,
54–66 (2020).
21
J. L. Lumley, “The structure of inhomogeneous turbulent flows,” in
Atmospheric Turbulence and Radio Wave Propagation, edited by A. Yaglom
and V. Tartarsky (Nauka, Moscow, 1967), pp. 166–178.
Phys. Fluids 33, 075102 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0050002
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/phf
22
A. Henning, K. Kaepernick, K. Ehrenfried, L. Koop, and A. Dillmann,
“Investigation of aeroacoustic noise generation by simultaneous particle image
velocimetry and microphone measurements,” Exp. Fluid 45, 1073–1085 (2008).
23
J. H. M. Ribeiro and W. Wolf, “Identification of coherent structures in the flow
past a NACA0012 airfoil via proper orthogonal decomposition,” Phys. Fluids
29, 085104 (2017).
24
T. Ricciardi, J. Ribeiro, and W. Wolf, “Analysis of coherent structures in large-
eddy simulations of a NACA0012 airfoil,” AIAA Paper No. 2019-0320 (2019).
25
Y. Yang, Y. Liu, R. Liu, C. Shen, P. Zhang, R. Wei, X. Liu, and P. Xu, “Design,
validation, and benchmark tests of the aeroacoustic wind tunnel in SUSTech,”
Appl. Acoust. 175, 107847 (2021).
26
M. Raffel, C. Willert, W. S, and J. Kompenhans, Parcile Image Velocimetry: A
Practical Guide (Springer, 1998).
27
B. Wieneke, “Piv uncertainty quantification from correlation statistics,” Meas.
Sci. Technol. 26, 074002 (2015).
28
F. F. J. Schrijer and F. Scarano, “Effect of predictor-corrector filtering on the
stability and spatial resolution of iterative PIV interrogation,” Exp. Fluid 45(5),
927–941 (2008).
29
A. Sciacchitano, B. Wieneke, and F. Scarano, “PIV uncertainty quantification
by image matching,” Meas. Sci. Technol. 24, 045302 (2013).
30
B. van Oudheusden, F. Scarano, N. van Hinsberg, and D. Watt, “Phase-
resolved characterization of vortex shedding in the near wake of a square-
section cylinder at incidence,” Exp. Fluid 39, 86–98 (2005).
31
Y. Yang, T. Zhou, A. Sciacchitano, L. L. M. Veldhuis, and G. Eitelberg,
“Experimental investigation of the impact of a propeller on a streamwise
impinging vortex,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 69, 582–594 (2017).
32
L. Sirovich, “Turbulence and the dynamics of coherent structures, part I:
Coherent structures,” Q. Appl. Math. 45, 561–571 (1987).
33
L. Kourentis and E. Konstantinidis, “Uncovering large-scale coherent struc-
tures in natural and forced turbulent wakes by combining PIV, POD, and
01 September 2023 14:21:23
FTLE,” Exp. Fluid 52, 749–763 (2012).
34
F. F. J. Schrijer, A. Sciacchitano, and F. Scarano, “Spatio-temporal and modal
analysis of unsteady fluctuations in a high-subsonic base flow,” Phys. Fluids 26
(8), 086101 (2014).
35
L. Chen, “Aspects of POD-based wall-layer modeling for the variational multi-
scale methods,” Ph.D. thesis (Delft University of Technology, 2015).
36
Y. Yang, A. Sciacchitano, L. L. M. Veldhuis, and G. Eitelberg, “Spatial-temporal
and modal analysis of propeller induced ground vortices by particle image
velocimetry,” Phys. Fluids 28, 105103 (2016).
37
J. Jeong and F. Hussain, “On the identification of a vortex,” J. Fluid Mech. 285,
69–94 (1995).
38
H. Vollmers, “Detection of vortices and quantitative evaluation of their main
parameters from experimental velocity,” Meas. Sci. Technol. 12, 1199
(2001).
39
R. Hain, C. K€ahler, and R. Radespiel, “Dynamics of laminar separation
bubbles at low-Reynolds-number aerofoils,” J. Fluid Mech. 630, 129–153
(2009).
40
M. Alam and N. D. Sandham, “Direct numerical simulation of short laminar
separation bubbles with turbulent reattachment,” J. Fluid Mech. 410, 1–28
(2000).
41
J. Turner and J. Kim, “Effect of spanwise domain size on direct numerical simu-
lations of airfoil noise during flow separation and stall,” Phys. Fluids 32,
065103 (2020).
42
J. E. Ffowcs Williams and L. H. Hall, “Aerodynamic sound generation by tur-
bulent flow in the vicinity of a scattering half plane,” J. Fluid Mech. 40,
657–670 (1970).
43
R. Amiet, “Noise due to turbulent flow past a trailing edge,” J. Sound Vib. 47,
387–393 (1976).
44
V. Goldschmidt, M. Young, and E. Ott, “Turbulent convective velocities
(broadband and wavenumber dependent) in a plane jet,” J. Fluid Mech. 105,
327–345 (1981).
45
M. Kirby, J. Boris, and L. Sirovich, “An eigenfunction analysis of axisymmetric
jet flow,” J. Comput. Phys. 90(1), 98–122 (1990).
46
D. Lengani, D. Simoni, M. Ubaldi, and P. Zunino, “POD analysis of the
unsteady behavior of a laminar separation bubble,” Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 58,
70–79 (2014).
33, 075102-13