Engineering topics

Lasagna, P. L.

Publications and source records attributed to Lasagna, P. L..

At least 19 records

NASA NTRS1983

In-flight acoustic test results for the SR-2 and SR-3 advanced-design propellers

Several advanced-design propellers, previously tested in the wind tunnel at the Lewis Research Center, have been tested in flight at the Dryden Flight Research Facility. The flight-test propellers were mounted on a pylon on the top of the fuselage of a JetStar airplane. Acoustic data for the advanced-design SR-2 and SR-3 propellers at Mach numbers to 0.8 and helical-tip Mach numbers to 1.15 are presented; maximum blade-passage frequency sound-pressure levels are also compared.

Lasagna, P. L.↗

NASA NTRS1983

A preliminary comparison between the SR-6 propeller noise in flight and in a wind tunnel

High speed turboprops offer an attractive candidate for aircraft because of their high propulsive efficiency. However, one of the possible problems associated with these propellers is their high noise level at cruise condition that may create a cabin environment problem. Models of these propellers were tested for acoustics in the 8 by 6-foot wind tunnel and on the Jet Star airplane. Comparisons between the airplane and wind tunnel data for the SR-6 propeller are shown. The comparison of maximum blade passing tone variation with helical tip Mach number between the tunnel and flight data was good when corrected to the same test conditions. Directivity comparisons also showed fairly good agreement. These good comparisons indicate that the wind tunnel is a viable location for measuring the blade passage tone noise of these propellers.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1982

In-flight acoustic results from an advanced-design propeller at Mach numbers to 0.8

Acoustic data for the advanced-design SR-3 propeller at Mach numbers to 0.8 and helical tip Mach numbers to 1.14 are presented. Several advanced-design propellers, previously tested in wind tunnels at the Lewis Research Center, are being tested in flight at the Dryden Flight Research Facility. The flight-test propellers are mounted on a pylon on the top of the fuselage of a JetStar airplane. Instrumentation provides near-field acoustic data for the SR-3. Acoustic data for the SR-3 propeller at Mach numbers up to 0.8, for propeller helical tip Mach numbers up to 1.14, and comparison of wind tunnel to flight data are included. Flowfield profiles measured in the area adjacent to the propeller are also included.

Mackall, K. G.↗

NASA NTRS1982

A preliminary comparison between the SR-3 propeller noise in flight and in a wind tunnel

The noise generated by supersonic-tip-speed propellers is addressed. Models of such propellers were tested for acoustics in the Lewis 8-by-6-foot wind tunnel. One of these propeller models, SR-3, was tested in flight on the Jetstar airplane and noise data were obtained. Preliminary comparisons of the maximum blade passing tone variation with helical tip Mach number taken in flight with those taken in the tunnel showed good agreement when corrected to the same test conditions. This indicated that the wind tunnel is a viable location for measuring the noise of these propeller models. Comparisons of the directivities at 0.6 and 0.7 axial Mach number showed reasonable agreement. At 0.75 and 0.8 axial Mach number the tunnel directivity data fell off more towards the front than did the airplane data. A possible explanation for this is boundary layer refraction which could be different in the wind tunnel from that in flight. This may imply that some corrections should be applied to both the airplane and wind tunnel data at the forward angles. At and aft of the peak noise angle the boundary layer refraction does not appear to be significant and no correction appears necessary.

Dittmar, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS1981

Recent propulsion system flight tests at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center

The article presents a summary of the propulsion system tests conducted on a number of aircraft at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. The tests included digital engine control systems, engine-inlet compatibility, inlet-airframe interactions, nozzle-boattail drag and advanced turboprop acoustics. Among the aircraft evaluated were the F-15, HiMAT, F-14, and the JetStar.

Burcham, F. W., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS1980

Landing approach airframe noise measurements and analysis

Flyover measurements of the airframe noise produced by the AeroCommander, JetStar, CV-990, and B-747 airplanes are presented for various landing approach configurations. Empirical and semiempirical techniques are presented to correlate the measured airframe noise with airplane design and aerodynamic parameters. Airframe noise for the jet-powered airplanes in the clean configuration (flaps and gear retracted) was found to be adequately represented by a function of airplane weight and the fifth power of airspeed. Results show the airframe noise for all four aircraft in the landing configuration (flaps extended and gear down) also varied with the fifth power of airspeed, but this noise level could not be represented by the addition of a constant to the equation for clean-configuration airframe noise.

Lasagna, P. L.↗

NASA NTRS1978

Measurements and predictions of flyover and static noise of a TF30 afterburning turbofan engine

The noise of the TF30 afterburning turbofan engine in an F-111 airplane was determined from static (ground) and flyover tests. A survey was made to measure the exhaust temperature and velocity profiles for a range of power settings. Comparisons were made between predicted and measured jet mixing, internal, and shock noise. It was found that the noise produced at static conditions was dominated by jet mixing noise, and was adequately predicted by current methods. The noise produced during flyovers exhibited large contributions from internally generated noise in the forward arc. For flyovers with the engine at nonafterburning power, the internal noise, shock noise, and jet mixing noise were accurately predicted. During flyovers with afterburning power settings, however, additional internal noise believed to be due to the afterburning process was evident; its level was as much as 8 decibels above the nonafterburning internal noise. Power settings that produced exhausts with inverted velocity profiles appeared to be slightly less noisy than power settings of equal thrust that produced uniform exhaust velocity profiles both in flight and in static testing.

Burcham, F. W., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS1977

Static and flyover noise measurements of an inverted profile exhaust jet

Tests using a TF30 mixed flow afterburning turbofan engine in an F-111 airplane were conducted to study the noise characteristics of an inverted velocity profile jet. Full-authority digital engine control allowed the inverted profile jet to be compared to a uniform jet of equal thrust statically and in flight. An exhaust velocity survey showed that the ratio of the outer to inner stream velocities was 1.37; therefore, only small noise reductions were expected. At static conditions, the inverted profile jet was approximately 3 decibels quieter than the uniform jet at peak noise angles. During a flyover it was approximately 1 decibel quieter.

Burcham, F. W., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS1976

Semiempirical airframe noise prediction model and evaluation with flight data

A semiempirical maximum overall sound pressure level (OASPL) airframe noise model was derived. Noise radiated from aircraft wings was modeled on the trailing edge diffractes quadrupole sound theory. The acoustic dipole sound theory was used to model noise from the landing gear. The model was correlated with maximum OASPL flyover noise measurements obtained for three jet aircraft. One third octave band sound pressure level flyover data was correlated and interpreted.

Hersh, A. S.↗

NASA NTRS1976

Flight-test measurement of the noise reduction of a jet transport delayed flap approach procedure

A delayed flap approach procedure was flight tested using the NASA CV-990 airplane to measure and analyze the noise produced beneath the flight path. Three other types of landing approaches were also flight tested to provide a comparison of the noise reduction benefits to the delayed flap approach. The conventional type of approach was used as a baseline to compare the effectiveness of the other approaches. The decelerating approach is a variation of the delayed flap approach. A detailed comparison of the ground perceived noise generated during the approaches is presented. For this comparison, the measured noise data were normalized to compensate for variations in aircraft weight and winds that occurred during the flight tests. The data show that the reduced flap approach offers some noise reduction, while the delayed flap and decelerating approaches offer significant noise reductions over the conventional approach.

Foster, J. D.↗

NASA NTRS1976

Semi-empirical airframe noise prediction model

A semi-empirical maximum overall sound pressure level (OASPL) airframe noise model was derived. The noise radiated from aircraft wings and flaps was modeled by using the trailing-edge diffracted quadrupole sound theory derived by Ffowcs Williams and Hall. The noise radiated from the landing gear was modeled by using the acoustic dipole sound theory derived by Curle. The model was successfully correlated with maximum OASPL flyover noise measurements obtained at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center for three jet aircraft - the Lockheed JetStar, the Convair 990, and the Boeing 747 aircraft.

Hersh, A. S.↗

NASA NTRS1976

Preliminary measurements of aircraft airframe noise with the NASA CV-990 aircraft

Flight tests were conducted in a CV-990 jet transport with engines at idle power to investigate aircraft airframe noise. Test results showed that airframe noise was measured for the aircraft in the landing configuration. The results agreed well with the expected variation with the fifth power of velocity. For the aircraft in the clean configuraton, it was concluded that airframe noise was measured only at higher airspeeds with engine idle noise present at lower speeds. The data show that landing gear and flaps make a significant contribution to airframe noise.

White, K. C.↗

NASA NTRS1975

Measured noise reductions resulting from modified approach procedures for business jet aircraft

Five business jet airplanes were flown to determine the noise reductions that result from the use of modified approach procedures. The airplanes tested were a Gulfstream 2, JetStar, Hawker Siddeley 125-400, Sabreliner-60 and LearJet-24. Noise measurements were made 3, 5, and 7 nautical miles from the touchdown point. In addition to a standard 3 deg glide slope approach, a 4 deg glide slope approach, a 3 deg glide slope approach in a low-drag configuration, and a two-segment approach were flown. It was found that the 4 deg approach was about 4 EPNdB quieter than the standard 3 deg approach. Noise reductions for the low-drag 3 deg approach varied widely among the airplanes tested, with an average of 8.5 EPNdB on a fleet-weighted basis. The two-segment approach resulted in noise reductions of 7 to 8 EPNdB at 3 and 5 nautical miles from touchdown, but only 3 EPNdB at 7 nautical miles from touchdown when the airplanes were still in level flight prior to glide slope intercept. Pilot ratings showed progressively increasing workload for the 4 deg, low-drag 3 deg, and two-segment approaches.

Burcham, F. W., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS1975

Measurements and analysis of aircraft airframe noise

Flyover measurements of the airframe noise of AeroCommander, JetStar, CV-990, and B-747 aircraft are presented. Data are shown for both cruise and landing configurations. Correlations between airframe noise and aircraft parameters are developed and presented. The landing approach airframe noise for the test aircraft was approximately 10 EPNdB below present FAA certification requirements.

Putnam, T. W.↗

NASA NTRS1974

Preliminary measurements of aircraft aerodynamic noise

Flight measurements of aerodynamic noise were made on an AeroCommander airplane with engines off and a JetStar airplane with engines at both idle power and completely shut off. The overall sound level for these airplanes in the landing configuration varied as the sixth power of the aircraft velocity. For the JetStar airplane, the overall sound level decreased as the inverse square of the distance in the lateral direction. The aerodynamic noise was approximately 11 decibels below the FAR Part 36 noise level for the JetStar airplane. The landing gear were a significant contributor to aerodynamic noise for both aircraft.

Lasagna, P. L.↗

NASA NTRS1972

Externally blown flap impingement noise.

An investigation of externally blown flap impingement noise was conducted using a full-scale turbofan engine and aircraft wing. The noise produced with a daisy nozzle installed on the engine exhaust system was greater than that produced by a conical nozzle at the same thrust. The daisy nozzle caused the jet velocity to decay about 35 percent at the flap. The presence of the wing next to the conical nozzle increased the noise, as did increasing the flap deflection. Compared with the conical nozzle, the daisy nozzle produced slightly less noise at a flap deflection of 60 deg but produced more noise at the lower flap deflections tested.

Putnam, T. W.↗

NASA NTRS1972

Flap noise

Externally-blown-flap noise research can be summarized by the following remarks: With lower-surface blowing, the sources of the flap noise are begining to be understood and the noise scaling laws have been established. Further, progress has been made on suppressing the flap interaction noise at the large flap deflections used during landing. Recent small-scale noise tests of configurations using external upper-surface blowing indicate that engine-over-the-wing configurations may be promising.

Dorsch, R. G.↗

NASA NTRS1972

Externally blown flap impingement noise

Tests of the noise produced by the impingement of the jet exhaust on the wing and flap for an externally blown flap system were conducted with a CF700 turbofan engine and an F-111B wing panel. The noise produced with a daisy nozzle installed on the engine was greater than that produced by a conical nozzle at the same thrust. The presence of the wing next to the test nozzles increased the noise, as did increasing the flap deflection angle. Compared with the conical nozzle, the daisy nozzle produced slightly less noise at a flap deflection of 60 deg but produced more noise at the lower flap deflections tested. Tests showed that the single-slotted flap deflected 60 deg, produced less noise than the double-slotted flaps. Also, maintaining the maximum distance between the exit nozzle and flap system resulted in a minor reduction in noise.

Lasagna, P. L.↗