0
Research Papers

The Impact of Low-Speed Fan Design on Noise: An Exploratory Study

[+] Author and Article Information
Antoine Moreau

Department of Engine Acoustics,
Institute of Propulsion Technology,
German Aerospace Center (DLR),
Berlin 10623, Germany
e-mail: antoine.moreau@dlr.de

Sébastien Guérin

Department of Engine Acoustics,
Institute of Propulsion Technology,
German Aerospace Center (DLR),
Berlin 10623, Germany

Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI) of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TURBOMACHINERY. Manuscript received December 15, 2015; final manuscript received January 15, 2016; published online March 22, 2016. Editor: Kenneth C. Hall.

J. Turbomach 138(8), 081006 (Mar 22, 2016) (13 pages) Paper No: TURBO-15-1304; doi: 10.1115/1.4032678 History: Received December 15, 2015; Revised January 15, 2016

The steady evolution since the 1950s toward higher bypass ratio engines has enhanced the acoustic role of the fan compared to the jet. This paper addresses the following question: Does a further decrease in fan pressure ratio (FPR) and rotor tip speed provide a significant reduction of fan broadband and tonal noise? The paper presents two conceptual parametric studies conducted with a fast analytical aerodynamic and acoustic prediction tool. The tool includes an aerodynamic fan design model which provides the quantities necessary to assess the tradeoff between efficiency and noise at given thrust conditions. The fan acoustic model has a theoretical formulation for broadband and tonal noise sources which is not based on empirical correlations; it is applied on conventional and contrarotating fan concepts. The first study proposes a variation of the design FPR and evaluates for each concept its impact on noise at three acoustic off-design points. The results obtained, which are in line with a past NASA study, indicate that the optimum pressure ratio in terms of fan noise is well below the fuel-burn optimum. Significant noise reductions of the broadband and tonal interaction components can be achieved with fans operating in a fully subsonic domain. Alternatively, designing at higher speed and pressure ratio near the fuel-burn optimum may invite to consider the contrarotating fan as a candidate: it performs very well in terms of buzz-saw and broadband noise compared to the conventional fan. The second study addresses the variation of design rotor tip speed at constant FPR. Although reduced tip speed may suppress buzz-saw noise, the increased loading related to it implies large blade solidities and wakes which causes a significant increase in broadband noise. Thus, there is an optimum loading that will depend on the severity of fan inflow distortion and on the onset of buzz-saw noise. Here again these conclusions confirm some experimental work performed by NASA on two different fans, and by Rolls-Royce on a third one.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Relation between FPR and BPR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Simplified engine model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Structure of the prediction tool

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Validation of the predicted power spectral density for forward- and rearward-radiated broadband noise

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Variation of fan performance and geometry with design FPR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Accuracy of the prediction of some fan design parameters

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Variations of single- and contrarotating-fan efficiency with pressure ratio and axial Mach number

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Validation of predicted pressure ratio at off-design conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Validation of predicted efficiency at off-design conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Relative Mach numbers at blade tip of front and rear rotors for SL, CB, and AP conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Wake size relative to blade spacing for SL, CB, and AP conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Variation of expanded jet Mach number and overall sound power of jet noise with design FPR at various operating points

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Overall sound power of fan noise sources at SL condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Overall sound power of fan noise sources at CB condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Overall sound power of fan noise sources at AP condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Variation of fan performance and geometry with fan loading for two different values of design FPR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Relative mach numbers at blade tip for SL, CB, and AP conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Velocity triangles for an axial-flow fan with different degree of reaction/loading

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Wake size relative to blade spacing for SL, CB, and AP conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Overall sound power of fan noise sources at SL condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Overall sound power of fan noise sources at CB condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Overall sound power of fan noise sources at AP condition

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In