Results for “sonic” — Page 15

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

USM3D Simulations for Third Sonic Boom Workshop

The NASA USM3D flow solver was used to compute test cases for the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop (SBPW3). The test cases include a nearfield biconvex shock-plume interaction wind tunnel model, and the C608 Low Boom Flight Demonstrator. Numerical simulations were conducted on the mixed-element and tetrahedral grids provided by the workshop committee, as well as a family of grids generated by an in-house approach for sonic boom analyses known as BoomGrid. The near-field pressure signatures were extracted, propagated to the ground and the perceived loudness levels on the ground were computed. The USM3D near-field pressure signatures, corresponding ground signatures, and loudness levels on the ground are compared with that of mean values from other workshop participants. The effect of three flux-limiters on the accuracy of near-field pressure signatures prediction was investigated and results are compared with that of mean values from other workshop participants. The effect of using wall function grids in accurately predicting near-field pressure signatures was also evaluated.

Supersonics↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

USM3D Simulations for the Third Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop (SBPW-3)

The NASA USM3D flow solver was used to compute test cases for the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop (SBPW3). The test cases include a nearfield biconvex shock-plume interaction wind tunnel model, and the C608 Low Boom Flight Demonstrator. Numerical simulations were conducted on the mixed-element and tetrahedral grids provided by the workshop committee, as well as a family of grids generated by an in-house approach for sonic boom analyses known as BoomGrid. The near-field pressure signatures were extracted, propagated to the ground and the perceived loudness levels on the ground were computed. The USM3D near-field pressure signatures, corresponding ground signatures, and loudness levels on the ground are compared with that of mean values from other workshop participants. The effect of three flux-limiters on the accuracy of near-field pressure signatures prediction was investigated and results are compared with that of mean values from other workshop participants. The effect of using wall function grids in accurately predicting near-field pressure signatures was also evaluated.

Supersonics↗

NASA NTRS2023

Multiple Scattering Theory for Modeling Sonic Booms in Atmospheric Turbulence

Sonic booms are often modeled using Burgers equations accounting for dominant propagation effects. Scattering effects of turbulence, however, have not been incorporated into such equations, although these effects are ubiquitous in measured sonic booms. This paper formulates the mean scattering effects, including backscattering, using multiple scattering theory and ensemble averaging. It obtains an acousto-turbulence interaction energy representing the interaction of an acoustic wave field with a turbulence field. The interaction energy gives rise to a scattering wavenumber, a complex-valued correction to the free-space wavenumber. The scattering wavenumber leads to a dispersion and attenuation of the mean waveform due to backscattering, and can be obtained from a derived exact solution. An existing Burgers equation is extended to include the scattering effects of turbulence as an additional linear term. Numerical simulations of an N-wave and a low boom show that the mean scattering effects lead to shock thickening in the mean waveforms as well as reduce the peak amplitudes and total energy contents. The energy reduction is less severe in the low boom than in the N-wave and is dependent on the variance, correlation length, and thickness of the turbulence field.

sonic booms↗

NASA NTRS2022

X-59 Sonic Boom Test Results from the NASA Glenn 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel

A wind tunnel test was conducted to investigate near-field sonic boom pressure signatures from a model of the X-59 Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator aircraft. A 1.62%-scale model of the aircraft in the C612A configuration was fabricated for the wind tunnel test, which took place in the NASA Glenn 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel in September and October 2021. The model had provisions for two different mounting options: a swept blade strut that attached at the top of model ahead of the inlet, and rear-entry sting that was made as one piece with a dummy nacelle, and which had a 2”-long cylindrical segment aft of the nozzle exit before tapering up in size. The blade strut allowed for a clean aft end of the model for evaluation of the shocks from that region, while the sting avoided the significant distortions of the flow and shocks from the blade strut along the top of the model. Both the sting and the strut had adapters that attached to a force balance. The model had alternate parts for ±0.5° deflections of the flaps, ailerons, and stabilator, and ±1° deflections of the T-tail horizontal surface. Off-body static pressure measurements of the flow field below the model were made by use of a pressure rail which had 420 orifices along its tip. The model was positioned at various heights from the rail by vertical movement of the wind tunnel strut, and at various longitudinal stations relative to the rail by means of a linear actuator mounted between the tunnel strut and the balance. The longitudinal positioning allowed multiple pressure signatures to be obtained along different portions of the rail. These signatures were aligned by accounting for the model longitudinal movement and then averaged to take out the effects of tunnel flow distortions and the interference of the rail flow field and shocks on the model pressure signatures. The test was run at approximate Mach numbers of 1.36, 1.4, and 1.47, and the model was set at various angles of attack and roll relative to the rail. Plots of the model signatures for all the variations of Mach number, model angles, control deflections, and height relative to the rail are provided throughout the report. Repeatability was generally very good and gave confidence in the quality of the measurements. The signatures measured at various heights from the rail provided insight into the aging of the model shocks as they propagated from 1.2 to 3 body lengths from the model. Off-track signatures up to 45° from centerline obtained by rolling the model gave indications of the shock flow fields across the width of the sonic boom carpet. The deflections of the various control surfaces allowed assessment of the boom sensitivity to the control surface movements.

Sonic boom↗

NASA NTRS2023

X-59 Sonic Boom Test Results from the NASA Glenn 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel

A wind tunnel test was conducted to investigate near-field sonic boom pressure signatures of the X-59 Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator aircraft. A 1.62%-scale model of the aircraft was fabricated for the wind tunnel test, which took place in the NASA Glenn 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel in September and October 2021. The model had provisions for being mounted by a swept blade strut that attached at top of model ahead of the inlet, or by a rear-entry sting that held the model at the location of the nacelle. The model had alternate parts for ±0.5° deflections of the flaps, ailerons, and stabilator, and ±1° deflections of the T-tail. Off-body static pressure measurements of the flow field below the model were made on a pressure rail which had 420 orifices along its tip. The model was positioned at various heights from the rail by vertical movement of the tunnel strut, and at various longitudinal stations relative to the rail by means of a linear actuator mounted between the wind tunnel strut and the balance. Spatial averaging of model pressure signatures acquired over a range of longitudinal positions reduced the effects of tunnel flow distortions and the interference of the rail flow field and shocks on the model pressure signatures. The test was run at approximate Mach numbers of 1.36, 1.4, and 1.47, and the model was set at various angles of attack and roll relative to the rail. Plots of the model signatures for representative variations of Mach number, model angles, control deflections, and height relative to the rail are provided throughout the report. Repeatability was generally very good and gave confidence in the quality of the measurements. The signatures measured at various heights from the rail provided insight into the aging of the model shocks as they propagated from 1.2 to 3 body lengths from the model. Off-track signatures up to 45° from centerline obtained by rolling the model gave indications of the shock flow fields across the width of the sonic boom carpet. The deflections of the various control surfaces allowed assessment of the boom sensitivity to the control surface movements.

Sonic boom↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Toward High-Quality X-59 Sonic Thump Measurements

Brigham Young University has been investigating best practices for recommendation to NASA in upcoming X-59 sonic thump measurements. This preparatory work has focused both on obtaining high-fidelity data and standardizing signal analysis techniques for sonic thumps. Included in the research are topics such as whether to use a ground-based or elevated microphone, how to use low-noise microphones and still recover high-fidelity data at low frequencies, and estimating the uncertainty in a given measurement due to local atmospheric turbulence effects. Also included is a study of windowing techniques, zero padding, and the removal of high-frequency ambient noise contamination.

sonic boom↗

NASA NTRS2023

X-59 Sonic Boom Test Results from the NASA Glenn 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel

A wind tunnel test was conducted to investigate near-field sonic boom pressure signatures of the X-59 Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator aircraft. A 1.62%-scale model of the aircraft was fabricated for the wind tunnel test, which took place in the NASA Glenn 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel in September and October 2021. The model had provisions for being mounted by a swept blade strut that attached at top of model ahead of the inlet, or by a rear-entry sting that held the model at the location of the nacelle. The model had alternate parts for ±0.5° deflections of the flaps, ailerons, and stabilator, and ±1° deflections of the T-tail. Off-body static pressure measurements of the flow field below the model were made on a pressure rail which had 420 orifices along its tip. The model was positioned at various heights from the rail by vertical movement of the tunnel strut, and at various longitudinal stations relative to the rail by means of a linear actuator mounted between the wind tunnel strut and the balance. Spatial averaging of model pressure signatures acquired over a range of longitudinal positions reduced the effects of tunnel flow distortions and the interference of the rail flow field and shocks on the model pressure signatures. The test was run at approximate Mach numbers of 1.36, 1.4, and 1.47, and the model was set at various angles of attack and roll relative to the rail. Plots of the model signatures for representative variations of Mach number, model angles, control deflections, and height relative to the rail are provided throughout the report. Repeatability was generally very good and gave confidence in the quality of the measurements. The signatures measured at various heights from the rail provided insight into the aging of the model shocks as they propagated from 1.2 to 3 body lengths from the model. Off-track signatures up to 45° from centerline obtained by rolling the model gave indications of the shock flow fields across the width of the sonic boom carpet. The deflections of the various control surfaces allowed assessment of the boom sensitivity to the control surface movements.

Sonic boom↗

NASA NTRS2024

Sonic Boom Analyses in Support of Improved X-59 Community Noise Testing

informing measurement planning and analysis of quiet supersonic aircraft community testing. The report is divided into three main sections: (1) investigations on the impacts of contaminating noise on sonic boom community noise metrics; (2) investigations into sonic boom variability, including turbulence effects on metrics of interest and development of a data-driven boom variability analysis framework; (3) other studies that support developing improved methodologies for community testing and analysis.

community noise↗

NASA NTRS2025

Uncertainty Quantification for Empirical X-59 Sonic Boom Loudness Levels

Estimates of the total uncertainty for empirically determined loudness levels are documented when GRS (Ground Recording System) noise monitors are used to record X 59 sonic boom waveforms. The total uncertainty is characterized by combining nine different sources of uncertainty that may affect the apparent gain of the measurement chain. These uncertainty estimates are presented as expected measurement error relative to the true loudness level, and separate error estimates are provided for eight different noise metrics in which NASA has interest. The behavior of the Perceived Level (PL) metric is studied within the report body, while the total uncertainties for the seven other noise metrics are summarized in appendices for brevity. The effects of four sources of uncertainty are estimated simply from information found on hardware specification sheets provided by the manufacturer. However, mock acoustic recordings are created to estimate the effects of other sources because those effects are expected to induce spectral coloration, so they may vary with noise metric type and sound level. These sources are not well modeled by simple gain adjustments. Importantly, measurement error is computable when processing mock recordings since the true levels are knowable, which is not the case when processing data recorded in the field. Specifically, the true levels are knowable because the components of the mock recordings are separable – e.g., loudness levels of booms can be computed with or without superimposed background noise. Mock acoustic recordings also have the benefit of allowing analysis of sonic booms from vehicles that are not yet flying, like the X-59, since the mock recordings are created by combining vehicle-specific predicted waveforms with other audio sources. The estimates of total measurement error are documented as a function of the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the loudness level, where the corrected SNR is computed while accounting for the effects of the method that is used to correct for background noise contamination when computing the noise metric values. The corrected SNR calculations used here can be applied to both mock recordings and in-field measurements, so the uncertainty of in-field recordings can be found using pre-computed lookup tables that identify the relationship between metric type, corrected SNR, and the expected measurement error.

Sonic Boom↗

NASA NTRS1967

The university's role in sonic boom research

Universities research projects on sonic booms and outline of research on generation and propagation of sonic booms

Seebass, A. R.↗

NASA NTRS1969

Sonic boom propagation in stratified atmosphere

Comprehensive analysis and algorithm, realized in a computer program, provides realistic calculations for sonic boom signatures in the atmosphere. Algorithm includes maneuvering aircraft in a sonic boom pressure calculation, a ray-tube area calculation, and results in the form of complete signatures.

Haefeli, R. C.↗

NASA NTRS1969

Sonic boom theory.

Sonic boom theory for steady flight in atmosphere without winds, discussing sonic boom reduction by aerodynamic means

Seebass, R.↗

NASA NTRS1972

Development and evaluation of a device to simulate a sonic boom

A device to simulate the vibrational and acoustical properties of a sonic boom was developed and evaluated. The design employed a moving circular diaphragm which produced pressure variations by altering the volume of an air-tight enclosure that was located adjacent to an acoustical test chamber. A review of construction oriented problems, along with their solutions, is presented. The simulator is shown to produce the effects of sonic booms having pressure signatures with rise times as low as 5 milliseconds, durations as short as 80 milliseconds, and overpressures as high as 2.5 pounds per square foot. Variations in the signatures are possible by independent adjustments of the simulator. The energy spectral density is also shown to be in agreement with theory and with actual measurements for aircraft.

Rash, L. C.↗

NASA NTRS1972

Simulated indoor sonic booms judged relative to noise from subsonic aircraft

Judgment tests were conducted in which subjects equated the subjective unwantedness or noisiness of simulated indoor sonic booms with the flyover noise of a subsonic jet aircraft as heard indoors. It was found that the spectral content of the booms, as affected by changes in the rise time of the booms, influenced the relative subjective noisiness of the booms in a way predictable from certain physical measures of Max and EPNL. However, a correction factor is required for predicting from physical measures the subjective noisiness of sonic booms when compared to nonimpulsive subsonic aircraft flyover noise measured in the same physical units. It appears that a somewhat different correction value is required for booms heard outdoors than when heard indoors.

Kryter, K. D.↗

NASA NTRS1972

Sonic-boom ground-pressure measurements from Apollo 15

Sonic boom pressure signatures recorded during the launch and reentry phases of the Apollo 15 mission are presented. The measurements were obtained along the vehicle ground track at 87 km and 970 km downrange from the launch site during ascent; and at 500 km, 55.6 km, and 12.9 km from the splashdown point during reentry. Tracings of the measured signatures are included along with values of the overpressure, impulse, time duration, and rise times. Also included are brief descriptions of the launch and recovery test areas in which the measurements were obtained, the sonic boom instrumentation deployment, flight profiles and operating conditions for the launch vehicle and spacecraft, surface weather information at the measuring sites, and high altitude weather information for the general measurement areas.

Hilton, D. A.↗

NASA NTRS1972

A solid state converter for measurement of aircraft noise and sonic boom

The problems inherent in present systems of instrumentation for measuring aircraft noise and sonic boom include limited frequency response, expensive connecting cables, sensitivity to cable length and type, high sensitivity to environmental conditions, and additional limitations of individual system components. Furthermore, differing requirements have resulted in the use of two different systems for aircraft noise and sonic boom measurements respectively. To alleviate these difficulties a unified system of instrumentation suitable for both types of measurements was developed. The system features a new solid state converter connected to a zero drive amplifier. The system was found insensitive to cable length and type up to at least 1000 ft and requires no impedance matching networks. The converter itself has flat frequency response from dc to 28 kHz (- 3 db), dynamic range of 72 db, and noise floor of 50 db in the band 22.4 Hz to 22.4 kHz.

Zuckerwar, A. J.↗

NASA NTRS1973

Preliminary study of supersonic-transport configurations with low values of sonic boom

A parametric study of low-boom supersonic transport airplanes with conventional configurations was made to identify the features of specific configurations that promise relatively low sonic boom overpressures (less than 47.9 N/sq m). The range of values considered was gross weight from 28,300 to 170,000 kg; cruise Mach numbers of 2 to 3.2; and wing loadings of 1436, 2870, and 4309 N/sq m. Fuselage length was varied from 49.1 to 102.4 m and fuselage diameter from 2.75 to 3.98 m. A nominal Mach 2 configuration weighing 56,700 kg and having a wing loading of 2870 N/sq m was selected; and its gross geometric, aerodynamic, and structural features were estimated. At a cruise altitude of 18,300 m, lift-drag ratio was estimated to be 7.35, while sonic boom overpressure was 41.7 N/sq m. Takeoff thrust loading using four afterburning turbojet engines at maximum dry thrust was 0.32. Payload for a 4440-km range was 16.7 percent of gross weight, giving a direct operating cost of 0.82 cent per seat statute mile.

Dugan, J. F., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS1973

Investigation of noise suppression by sonic inlets for turbofan engines. Volume 1: Program summary

Results of a program for sonic inlet technology development are presented. This program includes configuration and mechanical design selection of concepts, aerodynamic design description of the models, and results of test evaluation. Several sonic inlet concepts were tested and compared for aerodynamic and acoustic performance. Results of these comparative evaluations are presented. Near-field measurements were taken inside several of the inlet models. Results of these tests are discussed with respect to the effect of Mach number gradients on noise attenuation and rotor shock wave attenuation, and boundary layer effects on noise propagation. The test facilities and experimental techniques employed are described briefly.

Klujber, F.↗