Aplicação da teoria de superfície helicoidal na predição de ruído de pequenas hélices

Application of the helicoidal surface theory for noise prediction of small propeller

Martins, M. H. M Laboratório de Vibrações e Acústica, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brasil, marcelo.martins@lva.ufsc.br

da Silva, A. R Laboratório de Vibrações e Acústica, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brasil, andrey.rs@ufsc.br

Bonomo, L. A Laboratório de Vibrações e Acústica, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brasil, lucas.bonomo@lva.ufsc.br

Cordioli, J. A Laboratório de Vibrações e Acústica, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brasil, julio.cordioli@ufsc.br4

Resumo

A última década tem presenciado um notável crescimento das atividades relacionadas ao uso de pequenos sistemas aéreos não tripulados (sUAS). Entre os desafios que envolvem o desenvolvimento e a regulamentação destes veículos, a redução do ruído produzido por hélices é um dos que mais se destaca. O ruído de hélices tradicionais é comumente estimado por modelos numéricos de alta ordem ou por modelos analíticos de baixa ordem. Embora sejam mais precisos, modelos numéricos possuem um elevado custo computacional, e exigem um maior tempo de simulação. Em vista disso, modelos de baixa ordem que forneçam bons resultados de forma rápida são essenciais nas etapas iniciais de projeto. Existem diversos modelos para predição do ruído de hélices tradicionais. Entretanto, não se conhece aplicabilidade destes modelos na predição de ruído de hélices de pequeno porte utilizadas em SUAS, cujos parâmetros de trabalhos são bastante distintos daqueles encontrados em hélices tradicionais de grande porte. Este trabalho avalia a aplicação de uma teoria bem estabelecida na predição do ruído de hélices tradicionais (Teoria de Superfície Helicoidal) para a predição do ruido de sUAS. Para tanto, resultados experimentais e teóricos para o ruído em campo distante são comparados, considerando diferentes dimensões de hélices e velocidades de rotação. Os resultados indicam que teoria é valida na predição do nível de pressão sonora do primeiro harmônico para ângulos entre 45° e 135°, medidos a partir do eixo da hélice na direção frontal. Entretanto, a teoria subestima os resultados para harmônicos de ordem superior, os quais possuem pouca contribuição no cômputo do ruído global. Por conta disso, a teoria constitui uma poderosa ferramenta na predição do ruído tonal e OASPL produzido por hélices de sUAS.

Palavras-chaves:

Ruído de drones

Drones

sUAS

ruído.

Abstract

The last half decade has witnessed an extraordinary growth of activities that rely on the use of small Unmanned Aerial Systems (sUAS). Among all the challenges related with the development and certification of sUAS, the mitigation of aerodynamic noise produced by the propeller seems to be the one of the most significant. The noise prediction of traditional propellers is normally assessed by high-order numerical schemes or low-order analytical models. Numerical schemes are able to capture more complex noise generation mechanisms, but require a great deal of time and computational effort. Analytical methods can provide a rapid estimation of a propeller noise, at the cost of less accurate results and limited operational conditions. In spite of that, analytical methods are essential tools for assessing propeller noise at early design stages. There are many existing theories to predict propeller noise. However, little is known about the applicability of these theories to the specific size and operations conditions that sUAS propellers work. This work evaluates the application of a well-established theory in the noise prediction of traditional propellers (Helicoidal Surface Theory) for the noise prediction of sUAS. In that manner, experimental and theoretical results for far-field noise are compared, considering different propeller dimensions and rotation speeds. The results indicate that the theory is adequate predicting the sound pressure level of the first harmonic for angles between 45° and 135°, measured from the helix axis in the frontal direction. However, the theory underestimates the results for higher order harmonics, which have little contribution to the global noise computation. Because of this, theory is a powerful tool in predicting the tonal and OASPL noise produced by SUAS.

Keywords:

Drone noise

dones

sUAS

noise.

Referências

[1] Casalino, Damiano; Velden, Wouter C. e Romani, Gi anluca. Community noise of urban air transportation vehicles. Em AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum. Ameri can Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Janeiro 2019. doi: 10.2514/6.2019-1834. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2019-1834.

[2] Jones, Therese. International commercial drone regu lation and drone delivery services. Technical report, RAND, 2017.

[3] Federal Aviation Administration. Uas by the numbers. Avaiable in: https://bit.ly/3lsS7mw. accessed in: 17 September 2021, 2019.

[4] Markets and Markets. Unmanned aerial vehicle (uav) market. Avaiable in: https://bit.ly/3l8JZsn. accessed in: 04 Outubro 2021, 2021.

[5] Newswire. Global drone service market report 2019. Avaiable in: https://bit.ly/3ClYRJF. accessed in: 17 September 2021, 2019.

[6] FAA. Operation and certification of small unmanned aircraft systems, 2014. Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 81, No. 124, June 28, 2016, pp. 42064-42214. To be codified 14 CFR Parts 21, 43, 61, 91, 101, 107, 119, 133, and 183.

[7] Mueller, Thomas J. e DeLaurier, James D. Aerodyna mics of small vehicles. Annual Review of Fluid Me chanics, 35(1):89–111, Janeiro 2003. doi: 10.1146/an nurev.fluid.35.101101.161102. Disponível em: https: //doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fluid.35.101101.161102.

[8] Vascik, Parker D e Hansman, R John. Scaling cons traints for urban air mobility operations: air traffic con trol, ground infrastructure, and noise. Em 2018 Avia tion Technology, Integration, and Operations Confe rence, pág. 3849, 2018.

[9] Romani, Gianluca; Grande, Edoardo; Avallone, Fran cesco; Ragni, Daniele e Casalino, Damiano. Perfor mance and noise prediction of low-reynolds number propellers using the lattice-boltzmann method. Aeros pace Science and Technology, pág. 107086, Setembro 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2021.107086. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2021.107086.

[10] Hambrey, Jason. Computational Aeroacoustic Predic tion of Propeller Noise Using Grid-Based and Grid Free CFD Methods. Tese de doutorado, Carleton University, 2017.

[11] Self, Rod H. Propeller noise, Dezembro 2010. Dis ponível em: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470686652. eae339.

[12] Metzger, F Bruce. A review of propeller noise predic tion methodology: 1919-1994. 1995.

[13] Lynam, EJH. The emission of sound by airscrews. Reports and memoranda, 624:3–12, 1919.

[14] Bryan, GH. The acoustics of moving sources with application to airscrews. r. & m. no. 684. British ARC, 1920.

[15] Gutin, L. On the sound field of a rotating propeller. Physikalische Zeitschrit der Sowjetinion: Physical magazine of the Soviet Union volume 9 number 1, 9 (NACA-TM-1195), 1948.

[16] Demming, AF. Noise from propellers with symme trical sections at zero blade angle. NACA TM, 679, 1938.

[17] Deming, Arthur F. Propeller rotation noise due to torque and thrust. The Journal of the Acousti cal Society of America, 12(1):173–182, Julho 1940. doi: 10.1121/1.1916089. Disponível em: https: //doi.org/10.1121/1.1916089.

[18] Garrick, IE e Watkins, Charles E. A theoretical study of the effect of forward speed on the free-space sound pressure field around propellers. 1953.

[19] Farassat, F. e Succi, G.P. A review of propel ler discrete frequency noise prediction technology with emphasis on two current methods for time do main calculations. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 71(3):399–419, Agosto 1980. doi: 10.1016/0022 460x(80)90422-8. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10 .1016/0022-460x(80)90422-8.

[20] Lighthill, Michael James. On sound generated ae rodynamically i. general theory. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 211(1107):564–587, Março 1952. doi: 10.1098/rspa.1952.0060. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1952.0060.

[21] Curle, N. The influence of solid boundaries upon aerodynamic sound. Proceedings of the Royal So ciety of London. Series A. Mathematical and Phy sical Sciences, 231(1187):505–514, Setembro 1955. doi: 10.1098/rspa.1955.0191. Disponível em: https: //doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1955.0191.

[22] Williams, JE Ffowcs e Hawkings, David L. Sound generation by turbulence and surfaces in arbitrary motion. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 264(1151):321–342, Maio 1969. doi: 10.1098/rsta.1969.0031. Disponível em: https: //doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1969.0031.

[23] Hambrey, Jason; Herniczek, Mark Kotwicz; Feszty, Daniel; Meslioui, Sid-Ali e Park, Jong. Compa rison of three popular methods for the prediction of high speed propeller noise. Em 23rd AIAA/ CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. American Insti tute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Junho 2017. doi: 10.2514/6.2017-4181. Disponível em: https: //doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-4181.

[24] Herniczek, Mark Kotwicz; Feszty, Daniel; Mesli oui, Sid-Ali e Park, Jong. Applicability of early acoustic theory for modern propeller design. Em 23rd AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. Ameri can Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Junho 2017. doi: 10.2514/6.2017-3865. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-3865.

[25] Herniczek, Mark T. Kotwicz; Feszty, Daniel; Mesli oui, Sid-Ali; Park, Jong e Nitzsche, Fred. Evaluation of acoustic frequency methods for the prediction of propeller noise. AIAA Journal, 57(6):2465–2478, Ju nho 2019. doi: 10.2514/1.j056658. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2514/1.j056658.

[26] Haddaoui, Mohammed. Development of a propeller source noise model. 2019.

[27] Chen, Li; Batty, Trevor; Giacobello, Matteo e Wid jaja, Ronny. Prediction of small-scale rotor noise using a low-fidelity model-based framework. Em Proceedings of ACOUSTICS, volume 10, 2019.

[28] Chen, Li; Batty, Trevor; Widjaja, Ronny e Giaco bello, Matteo. Prediction of small-scale UAS ro tor noise. Em Australasian Fluid Mechanics Confe rence (AFMC). The University of Queensland, De zembro 2020. doi: 10.14264/0c3685a. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.14264/0c3685a.

[29] Hanson, Donald B. Influence of propeller design parameters on far-field harmonic noise in forward flight. AIAA Journal, 18(11):1313–1319, Novembro 1980. doi: 10.2514/3.50887. Disponível em: https: //doi.org/10.2514/3.50887.

[30] Hanson, Donald B. Helicoidal surface theory for harmonic noise of propellers in the far field. AIAA Journal, 18(10):1213–1220, Outubro 1980. doi: 10.2514/3.50873. Disponível em: https://do i.org/10.2514/3.50873.

[31] Zawodny, Nikolas S.; Boyd, D. Douglas e Burley, Casey L. Acoustic characterization and prediction of representative, small-scale rotary-wing unmanned aircraft system components. 2016.

[32] Pelletier, Alain e Mueller, Thomas J. Low reynolds number aerodynamics of low-aspect-ratio, thin/flat/cambered-plate wings. Journal of Aircraft, 37(5):825–832, Setembro 2000. doi: 10.2514/2.2676. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2514/2.2676.

[33] GOLDSTEIN, M. E. A generalized acoustic analogy. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 488:315–333, Julho 2003. doi: 10.1017/s0022112003004890. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022112003004890.

[34] Kurtz, DW e Marte, JE. A review of aerodynamic noise from propellers, rotors, and lift fans. 1970.

[35] Hanson, D.B. e Fink, M.R. The importance of qua drupole sources in prediction of transonic tip speed propeller noise. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 62(1):19–38, Janeiro 1979. doi: 10.1016/0022 460x(79)90554-6. Disponível em: https://doi.or g/10.1016/0022-460x(79)90554-6.

[36] Magliozzi, B.; Hanson, D. B. e Amiet, R. K. Propel ler and propfan noise. Em Aeroacoustics of Flight Vehicles: Theory and Practice. Volume 1: Noise Sour ces, volume 1, pág. 1, Agosto 1991.

[37] Tinney, Charles E. e Sirohi, Jayant. Multirotor drone noise at static thrust. AIAA Journal, 56(7):2816–2826,Julho 2018. doi: 10.2514/1.j056827. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2514/1.j056827.

[38] Serrano, David; Ren, Max; Qureshi, Ahmed Jawad e Ghaemi, Sina. Effect of disk angle-of-attack on aerodynamic performance of small propellers. Aeros pace Science and Technology, 92:901–914, Setembro 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2019.07.022. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2019.07.022.

[39] McCrink, Matthew e Gregory, James W. Blade ele ment momentum modeling of low-re small uas elec tric propulsion systems. Em 33rd AIAA Applied Ae rodynamics Conference, pág. 3296, 2015.

[40] Ol, Michael; Zeune, Cale e Logan, Michael. Analy tical/experimental comparison for small electric un manned air vehicle propellers. Em 26th AIAA Ap plied Aerodynamics Conference. American Insti tute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Junho 2008. doi: 10.2514/6.2008-7345. Disponível em: https: //doi.org/10.2514/6.2008-7345.

[41] Carroll, Joseph Ray. Time-averaged surrogate mode ling for small scale propellers based on high-fidelity CFDsimulations. Mississippi State University, 2013.

[42] Moita, Nuno SM e Marta, André C. Optimization of the propeller-driven propulsion system for a small uav. Em International Conference on Engineering Optimization, págs. 1372–1384. Springer, 2018.

[43] Klein, Peter. Parametric modeling and optimization of advanced propellers for next-generation aircraft. 2017.

[44] Drela, Mark. Qprop formulation. Massachusetts Inst. of Technology Aeronautics and Astronautics, Cambridge, MA, 2006.

[45] Madsen, H Aa; Mikkelsen, R; Øye, S; Bak, C e Johan sen, J. A detailed investigation of the blade element momentum (BEM) model based on analytical and numerical results and proposal for modifications of the BEM model. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 75:012016, Julho 2007. doi: 10.1088/1742 6596/75/1/012016. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10 .1088/1742-6596/75/1/012016.

[46] Morgado, J.; Silvestre, M. Â. R. e Páscoa, J. C. Va lidation of new formulations for propeller analysis. Journal of Propulsion and Power, 31(1):467–477, Ja neiro 2015. doi: 10.2514/1.b35240. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2514/1.b35240.

[47] Loureiro, Eric Vargas; Oliveira, Nicolas Lima; Hal lak, Patricia Habib; Souza Bastos, Flávia; Rocha, Lucas Machado; Delmonte, Rafael Grande Pancini e Castro Lemonge, Afonso Celso. Evaluation of low fidelity and CFD methods for the aerodynamic performance of a small propeller. Aerospace Sci ence and Technology, 108:106402, Janeiro 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2020.106402. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2020.106402.

[48] Anemaat, Willem A.; Dommelen, Dennis; Johnson, Shalom; Sargent, Pierson B. e Liu, Wanbo. Comparison of Aerodynamic Analysis Tools for Rotorcraft in Hover. doi: 10.2514/6.2018-2069. Disponível em: https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2018-2069.

[49] Drela, Mark. XFOIL: An analysis and design system for low reynolds number airfoils. Em Lecture Notes in Engineering, págs. 1–12. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1989. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-84010-41. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-84010-4_1.

[50] Morgado, J; Vizinho, R; Silvestre, MAR e Páscoa, JC. Xfoil vs cfd performance predictions for high lift low reynolds number airfoils. Aerospace Science and Technology, 52:207–214, 2016.

[51] Günel, Onur; Koç, Emre e Yavuz, Tahir. Cfd vs. xfoil of airfoil analysis at low reynolds numbers. Em 2016 IEEE International Conference on Renewable Energy Research and Applications (ICRERA), págs. 628–632, 2016. doi: 10.1109/ICRERA.2016.7884411.

[52] Albert, Maelle; Bousquet, Philippe e Lizarazu, Delphine. Ground effects for aircraft noise certifica tion. Em 23rd AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Junho 2017. doi: 10.2514/6.2017-3845. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-3845.

[53] Giannakis, James M. Evaluation of a correction factor for flyover-noise ground plane microphones. EmAIAA AVIATION 2020 FORUM. American Ins titute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Junho 2020. doi: 10.2514/6.2020-2612. Disponível em: https: //doi.org/10.2514/6.2020-2612.

[54] Mobley, Frank S. Aircraft characterization with ground boards and inverted microphones. Em 25th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Maio 2019. doi: 10.2514/6.2019-2442. Disponível em: https: //doi.org/10.2514/6.2019-2442.