Open Access
Scientific Article
Issue
Acta Acust.
Volume 6, 2022
Article Number 24
Number of page(s) 14
Section Aeroacoustics
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/aacus/2022019
Published online 22 June 2022

© The Author(s), Published by EDP Sciences, 2022

Licence Creative CommonsThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

1 Introduction

The most important characteristic signal of helicopters is acknowledged to be acoustic noise, which can be a severe problem of the acoustic stealth of helicopters. Therefore it is essential that a proper stealth design is adopted for a new helicopter, aiming at suppressing its acoustic noise and strengthening its acoustic stealth ability [13].

Predicting the acoustic noise [46] is one of the important parts of aircraft acoustic stealth technology, helping to ascertain the sound pressure level of acoustic noise and find out the main affection factors. It is commonly acknowledged that the rotor blades are regarded as the main acoustic noise source of a helicopter, whose acoustic noise prediction problem can be regarded as the calculation of the sound field of rotating sound sources. The Ffowcs Williams and Hawkings (FW–H) equation [7] is a standard approach to the solutions of this sort of problems. Taking account of the influence of medium movement (inflow), Ghorbaniasl and Lacor [8] have developed a direct calculation method of the sound field of rotating sound sources with inflow, based on convective FW–H equation, and also developed several time domain formulations for the solution of the convective FW–H equation. Ghorbaniasl et al. [9] and Huang et al. [10] have deduced convective Kirchhoff equation for the calculation of sound field.

However, not all of the sound waves travel directly in straight lines to infinity, for the existence of helicopter fuselage that brings acoustic scattering effects for its reflection of sound waves. Therefore a method is required for the calculation of the acoustic scattering effects of the helicopter fuselage. Common methods include equivalent source method (ESM) and boundary element method (BEM) [1113]. Compared with ESM that should disperse the whole domain, BEM just requires the dispersal of the boundary, transferring three dimensional problems into two-dimensional problems so that the complexity and workload can be reduced. The helicopter fuselage can be regarded as a solid boundary and thus BEM method can be a proper method adapted to the calculation of its acoustic scattering effects.

Some basic researches based on boundary element method (BEM) have been brought out for calculations of acoustic scattering effects. Roger Michel and Kucukcoskun Korcan [14] studied the scattering effects of the solid strut member of a rotor and put forward some relevant theories. Seongkyu Lee, Kenneth Brentner and Philip Morris [15, 16] studied the scattering effects in the time domain using an equivalent source method, with a sphere solid scattering boundary and a point sound source. Curle [17] studied the influence of solid boundaries upon aerodynamic sound and the acoustic scattering effects of the solid boundaries.

Previous researches mainly focus on the theories of BEM method [1820], and some basic verification cases of acoustic scattering effects with simple solid boundaries such as spheres and plains [21, 22]. The research presented in this paper aims at the acoustic scattering effects of the acoustic noise produced by the helicopter rotor blades with the solid boundary of helicopter fuselage, and tries to discover the influence of the variety of the fuselage types and sizes.

This research is presented in three sections. In the first section, a method based on BEM method and convective FW–H equation is presented. In the second section, helicopter models with different types of fuselages are established for the research on the influence on acoustic scattering effects of different fuselage types. In the third section, we make a research on the influence of the length, width and height of the fuselage and summarize the rules of the elements’ influence.

2. Theoretical background

2.1 Convective FW–H equation

Fundamental equations of fluid flow in an unbounded region outside the control surface without external force can be described as [7]

(1)

(2)

where ρ is the density of the fluid, ui is the velocity of the fluid, and Pij is the tensor of the force loading on the fluid. Equation (1) is known as the continuity equation and equation (2) is known as the momentum equation.

With the utilization of Heaviside Function, the continuity equation can be adapted as

(3)

where

(4)

H(f) is known as Heaviside Function.

Similarly, the momentum equation can be rewritten as

(5)

Let , we can obtain that

(6)

which is acknowledged as FW–H equation.

The acoustic solution of FW–H equation can be obtained as [1113]

(7)

where pT (x, t) is thickness noise and pL (x, t) is loading noise.

Taking inflow into account, convective FW–H equation should be [18]

(8)

where

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

With equations (9)(12), the analytical solutions of convective FW–H equation can be obtained as

(13)

(14)

where

(15)

and

(16)

Equation (16) indicates the vector from the sound source point on the surface of the blade to the observe point.

When M = 0, convective FW–H equation is the same as FW–H equation. By comparing FW–H equation and convective FW–H equation, the difference caused by inflow Mach number M can be obtained as

(17)

(18)

Therefore, equations (19) and (20) can be regarded as the influence index of inflow Mach, a quantificational expression of the affections of inflow Mach on thickness noise and loading noise.

2.2 BEM method

The common form of Helmholtz differential equation is:

(19)

where p is the acoustic pressure, ∇2 is the Laplace operator, k = ω/c0.

The relationship of the pressure derivative and local normal velocity can be described as:

(20)

At infinity, p must satisfy Sommerfeld radiation condition:

(21)

The Green Function at free acoustic field can be introduced as:

(22)

where P is the observe point and Q is one of the field points r = |Q − P|.

Therefore the common form of Helmholtz boundary integral equation can be obtained as:

(23)

where

(24)

(25)

(26)

The total acoustic pressure equals to the summation of incoming acoustic pressure and scatter acoustic pressure:

(27)

For plain wave, incoming acoustic pressure appears as:

(28)

For spherical wave, incoming acoustic pressure appears as:

(29)

When ps is used in Helmholtz boundary integral equation, we can obtain that

(30)

When pi is used in Helmholtz boundary integral equation, we can obtain that

(31)

Subtracting equation (31) from equation (30) and combining with equation (27), we can obtain

(32)

where

(33)

Thus equation (32) can be simplified as

(34)

In equation (34), pi(P) is the incidence pressure calculated by convective FW–H equation. C(P) can be obtained by equation (24). For the integral items. G is the Green function and n is the unit normal vector of a surface element.

2.3 Calculation of the sound pressure gradient

In equation (34), iρωvn is the sound pressure gradient that is obtained from equation (25). The sound pressure gradient can be calculated by equation (35) [23]

(35)

where

(36)

(37)

A further simplification can obtain the analytical expression of the sound pressure gradient of convective FW–H equation

(38)

(39)

where

(40)

(41)

(42)

(43)

(44)

(45)

(46)

(47)

(48)

(49)

(50)

(51)

The elements mentioned above are all known qualities and the only unknown quality is the total sound pressure p, which is the solution target.

2.4 Matrix form of the sound pressure calculation

The discretization of the integral can transfer equations (34)(52):

(52)

Based on the same surface element dSj, every integral/summation element marked j on the left of the equal sign in equation (52) equals to the one marked j on the right side. Therefore equation(52) can be written as:

(53)

Equation (36) can be written as the matrix form:

(54)

where

(55)

Let , , .

Equation (37) can be written as the form of:

(56)

Then the total sound pressure vector p can be obtained by equation (56), which is known as the matrix form of the sound pressure calculation.

3. Models and simulation environments

3.1 Geometry models of the helicopters

The geometry models of the fuselages are established by adopting the parametric modeling method (PMM), combined with the real fuselage shape. Main geometry parameters of the fuselages are confirmed as the decisive factors of the helicopter fuselage and the rotor.

Figure 1 shows the three-view drawing of the simplified helicopter geometry model and the main decisive parameters are outlined. Lh is the length of the whole helicopter. Lf is the length of the main body of fuselage. Wf is the width of the fuselage. Hf is the height of the fuselage. Hr is the height of the rotor that refers to the distance from the coordinate origin to the center of rotor. Rr is the radius of the rotor. Lb is the length of the blades.

thumbnail Figure 1

Establishment of the simplified helicopter geometry model (including rotor and fuselage).

The parameters listed in Figure 1 and Table 1 can be the main geometry parameters of the approximate design of a helicopter. The size and shape of the helicopter can be preliminary determined with the main geometry parameters and the primary geometry model of the helicopter can be given. Then the primary geometry model can be corrected to the final geometry model according to other detailed information.

Table 1

Nomenclature of the physical quantities.

Three typical helicopter fuselage, OH-6, HUEY and RAH-66, are selected for the research on the scattering effect of different fuselage types.

The OH-6 fuselage model established in this paper is shown in Figure 2, according to the design of the OH-6 helicopter [24]. The model mainly includes the main part of the OH-6 fuselage while the tail of the fuselage is simplified.

thumbnail Figure 2

Helicopter model with OH-6 fuselage.

The HUEY fuselage model established in this paper is shown in Figure 3, according to the design of the HUEY helicopter [25]. The fuselage model mainly includes the main part of the OH-6 fuselage while the tail of the fuselage is simplified.

thumbnail Figure 3

Helicopter model with HUEY fuselage.

The RAH-66 fuselage model established in this paper is shown in Figure 4, according to the design of the RAH-66 stealth helicopter [26]. The fuselage model mainly includes the main part of the OH-6 fuselage while the tail of the fuselage is simplified.

thumbnail Figure 4

Helicopter model with RAH-66 fuselage.

In the simulation case shown in Figure 5, the acoustic noise detector receives the acoustic noise waves produced by helicopter at the pitching angle θ = 45°, and the azimuth angle from 0° to 360°. The distance from the helicopter to the detector is 10 m. The inflow Mach number is M = 0.2.

thumbnail Figure 5

Schematic of simulation case.

4. Results and discussions

4.1 Approach to the results

In this paper, the theories and the methodologies enumerated in Section 2 are used for the calculation of the acoustic noise generated by the helicopter rotor and the scattering effects of the helicopter fuselage. Figure 6 is created to intuitively illustrate the whole progress from the model establishment to the result calculation, and also the combination of the methodologies and the results.

thumbnail Figure 6

Schematic diagram and flow chat of the methodology approach.

According to Figure 6, the methodology approach to the final results (sound pressure and SPL) can be described as 4 steps.

  • Step 1: Establishment of simulation environment.

Environment parameters, as is shown in Figure 4, is fixed in this step. The environment parameters mainly includes the relative location and the distance from the helicopter to the observer, the height and attitude angles of the helicopter, and the flight speed (inflow Mach number, M) of the helicopter, reflecting the whole simulation environment.

  • Step 2: Establishment of geometry model and mesh generation.

Main geometry parameters mentioned in Section 3 is assigned in this step for the design of the helicopter geometry models. The size and the primary shape can be figured out by the main geometry parameters, and then the shape is finally decided by the detailed information such as the airfoil of the blades, the specific shape of the fuselage, etc. Mesh generation is operated after the establishment of the geometry models, for the discretization of the surfaces of the models.

  • Step 3: Application of method based on FW–H and BEM.

The combined methodology mainly consisting of FW–H equation and BEM helps transfer the geometry models under the specific environment into the matrixes for calculations. Firstly, the acoustic noise generated by the rotor and the sound pressure gradient is obtained by using convective FW–H equation. Then BEM is applied for the acquisition of the Green Function, the surface normal vector, etc. Finally, the acquired physical quantities are recombined into the matrixes for calculations.

Step 4: Calculation of sound pressure and SPL.

After the acquisition of the matrixes for calculations, the calculations of the final results can be easily carried out by program languages. The sound pressure of the rotor noise can be firstly obtained and the sound pressure levels (SPL) can be obtained by Fourier transformation.

4.2 Influence of fuselage types

The scattering effects of different fuselage types can be observed from Figures 7 and 8.

thumbnail Figure 7

Scattering effects of different types of fuselage (polar graph).

thumbnail Figure 8

Scattering effects of different types of fuselage (XY graph).

It can be illustrated from Figures 7, 8 and Table 2 that fuselage RAH-66 has more obvious scattering effects than the other two traditional fuselages, OH-6 and HUEY, with the superiority of 2.79 dB in total sound pressure level and 7.47 dB in maximum sound pressure level, indicating that the acoustic noise scattering effects vary from different fuselage types.

Table 2

Total and maximum SPL of helicopters with different fuselages.

As a type of radar-stealth fuselage, RAH-66 fuselage consists of pieces of plains, causing sharp edges on the fuselage surface. OH-6 fuselage and HUEY fuselage, however, are made up of smooth surfaces with few sharp edges. Thus an inference can be presented that the sharp edges of a helicopter fuselage can cause obvious acoustic scattering effects.

For the verification of the inference above, another two helicopter models are established, one equipped with cuboid fuselage with sharp edges and the other equipped with capsule fuselage without sharp edges, as is shown in Figures 9 and 10.

thumbnail Figure 9

Helicopter model with cuboid fuselage.

thumbnail Figure 10

Helicopter model with capsule fuselage.

The acoustic scattering effects of cuboid and capsule fuselage are shown in Figures 11 and 12.

thumbnail Figure 11

Acoustic noise scattering effects of cuboid fuselage and capsule fuselage.

thumbnail Figure 12

Acoustic noise scattering effects of cuboid fuselage and capsule fuselage.

It can be obtained from Figures 11, 12 and Table 3 that the sound pressure level of acoustic noise scattered by cuboid fuselage apparently differs from that of the rotor blades while the acoustic noise scattered by capsule fuselage is almost the same as that of the rotor blades, verifying that helicopter fuselages with substantial sharp edges causes more obvious scattering effects.

Table 3

Total and maximum SPL of helicopters with cuboid and capsule fuselages.

4.3 Influence of radius of curvature of fuselage sharp edges

For quantitative studies on the influences of fuselage sharp edges, the radius of curvature (RC) of fuselage sharp edges is introduced. The variation progress from the cuboid fuselage to the capsule fuselage can be regarded to be the increase of RC of fuselage sharp edges, as is shown in Figure 13.

thumbnail Figure 13

Effects of the increase of RC of fuselage sharp edges.

For the cuboid fuselage mentioned above, the RC of the sharp edges is fixed at 100 mm, 200 mm, 300 mm, 400 mm and 500 mm, and the scattering effects of these fuselages with different RC is calculated by the method based on FW–H equation and BEM.

The acoustic scattering effects of cuboid fuselages with different RC are shown in Figure 14.

thumbnail Figure 14

Acoustic scattering effects of cuboid fuselages with different RC.

From Table 4, it can be seen that with the increase of RC, the maximum SPL shows monotone decreasing while the total SPL changes irregularly. It can be indicated from the variation of the maximum SPL that the increase of RC of the fuselage sharp edges makes contributions to the suppression of the fuselage scattering effects. As for the total SPL, it can reflects the approximate level of the SPL. However, its variation tendencies cannot reflect the influence on the scattering effects. The reason can be described that the existence of the outlier points such as some obviously low minimum points can pull down the average value, causing that the data group with higher maximum SPL and more significant scattering effects might have lower total SPL.

Table 4

Maximum and total SPLs of helicopters with cuboid fuselages of different RC.

In order to preliminarily find the function relationship between the RC of the fuselage sharp edge and the maximum SPL, several assumptions are made according to the shapes of SPL–RC graph, (1/SPL) –RC graph, etc. It is finally discovered that Y = Y(SPL) is linear with X = X(RC), which can be described as:

(57)

In equation (57), SPL represents the maximum sound pressure level and RC represents the radius of curvature. Coefficients waiting for determination are a, b and k.

Figure 15 shows the scatter diagram of Y and X, indicating the linear relationship between them. According to least square method, the linear fitting equation can be obtained as

(58)

with

(59)

thumbnail Figure 15

The scatter diagram and the linear fitting of Y and X.

Besides, we can obtain the linearity relevance modulus equals to 0.9936, verifying the linear relationship between Y and X.

Therefore the estimated function relationship can be described as

(60)

where the unit of SPL is dB and the unit of RC is mm.

The estimated function relationship shows the approximate variation law of the maximum SPL related to the radius of curvature of fuselage sharp edges, and can be used for the estimation for the scattering effects of fuselages with similar shapes but different radius of curvature of fuselage sharp edges.

4.4 Influence of length, width and height of the fuselage

As is shown in Figures 1618, 12 other models are established based on RAH-66 model for the research on the variation effects of helicopter fuselage’s length, width and height. In Figure 16, the length of the fuselage is multiplied by 0.8, 0.9, 1.1, 1.2. In Figure 17, the width of the fuselage is multiplied by 0.8, 0.9, 1.1, 1.2. In Figure 18, the height of the fuselage is multiplied by 0.8, 0.9, 1.1, 1.2.

thumbnail Figure 16

Fuselages with different length ratios.

thumbnail Figure 17

Fuselages with different width ratios.

thumbnail Figure 18

Fuselages with different height ratios.

The scattering effect of fuselages of different length ratios is shown in Figure 19 and Table 4.

thumbnail Figure 19

Scattering effect of fuselages of different length ratios.

Figure 19 indicates that the scattering effects of fuselages with different length obviously differ from each other. Besides, the scattering effects appear to be more significant with a longer fuselage. It can also be seen from Table 5 that the total sound pressure level and the maximum sound pressure level raises as the length of the fuselage increases. The main reason for the result can be illustrated that a longer fuselage has a larger scattering surface, letting more sound waves reflect at the fuselage surface rather than propagate directly, and therefore make more chances for sound waves to get to the position of the detector.

Table 5

Total and maximum SPL of helicopters with fuselages of different length ratios.

The scattering effect of fuselages of different width ratios is shown in Figure 20 and Table 5.

thumbnail Figure 20

Scattering effect of fuselages with different width ratios.

The considerable difference of acoustic noise scattering effects can be seen from Figure 20 that the scattering effects of fuselages with different width. But the scattering effects seem not to be more significant with a wider fuselage. It can also be seen from Table 6 that the total sound pressure level and the maximum sound pressure level sometimes rise as the fuselage expands in width, but sometimes fall.

Table 6

Total and maximum SPL of helicopters with fuselages of different width ratios.

The scattering effect of fuselages of different height ratios is shown in Figure 21 and Table 7.

thumbnail Figure 21

Scattering effect of fuselages with different height ratios.

Table 7

Total and maximum SPL of helicopters with fuselages of different height ratios.

Similarly, the considerable difference of acoustic noise scattering effects can be seen from Figure 21 that the scattering effects of fuselages with different height. But the scattering effects seem not to be more significant with a higher fuselage. It can also be seen from Table 6 that the total sound pressure level and the maximum sound pressure level sometimes rise as the fuselage expands in height, but sometimes fall.

The main reason for this can be explained that the affection on the scattering effects of the normal directions of surface elements, which affect the travel directions of scattered sound waves, must be taken into consideration. Multiplied by the same ratio numbers, the change of width and height bring much more variations to surface element normal directions than the change of length. Thus the affection of the surface element normal directions cannot be ignored.

To sum up, the acoustic scattering effects of helicopter fuselage can be an essential element of acoustic stealth that cannot be ignored. Considering the acoustic stealth ability of the designed helicopter, fuselages with massive sharp edges should be avoided. In addition, the length of helicopter fuselage should be limited and proper width and height of helicopter fuselage should be selected in order to take account of both acoustic stealth ability and capacity of helicopter fuselage.

Conclusions

Based on the presented FWH-BEM Method (FBM), the SPL of the noise generated by the rotor and scattered by the fuselage is predicted and the factors affecting the scattering effects are studied and discussed in detail. According to the results listed above, the following conclusions can be obtained:

  1. The acoustic scattering effect of helicopter fuselage sometimes cannot be ignored for the reason that it varies with different types of fuselages, especially some radar-stealth fuselages. The total SPL of the acoustic noise of RAH-66 fuselage reaches 83.14 dB, with the superiority of 2.79 dB to that of OH-6 fuselage and HUEY fuselage.

  2. Helicopter fuselages with sharp edges bring obvious scattering effects to the acoustic noise of helicopters while fuselages with few sharp edges have little scattering influence on the acoustic noise. The maximum SPL decreases when the RC of fuselage sharp edges increases. It can be obtained from the studies in this paper that for cuboid helicopter fuselages, the reciprocal of the maximum SPL is linear to the natural log of RC + a (a is a constant number). The estimated function relationship can be used for the estimation for the scattering effects of fuselages with similar shapes but different radius of curvature of fuselage sharp edges.

  3. The length, width and height of helicopter fuselage can also be factors that affect the acoustic noise scattering effects. The scattering effect of a helicopter’s acoustic noise appears to be more significant with a longer, wider or higher fuselage. Therefore the size of the helicopter should be limited, taking both the acoustic scattering and the volume of the fuselage into account.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 12004027).

References

  1. D.Y. Dube, H.G. Patel: Suppressing the noise in measured signals for the control of helicopters. Fluctuation and Noise Letters 18, 1 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  2. F. Liu, J. Lin, Y.Z. Wang: Design of cable parallel air-core coil sensor to reduce motion-induced noise in helicopter transient electromagnetic system. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement 68, 2 (2019) 525–532. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. S. Hartjes, H.G. Visser: Optimal control approach to helicopter noise abatement trajectories in nonstandard atmospheric conditions. Journal of Aircraft 56, 1 (2019) 43–52. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. S. Vouror, I. Goulos, C. Scullion: Impact of tip-vortex modeling uncertainty on helicopter rotor blade-vortex interaction noise prediction. Journal of the American Helicopter Society 66, 1 (2021) 1053–1065. [Google Scholar]
  5. S. Vouros, I. Goulos, V. Pachidis: Integrated methodology for the prediction of helicopter rotor noise at mission level. Aerospace Science and Technology 89 (2019) 136–149. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. L.Q. Wang, G.H. Xu, Y.J. Shi: Development and validation of a hybrid method for predicting helicopter rotor impulsive noise. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part G-Journal of Aerospace Engineering 233 (2019) 1323–1339. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. J.E. Ffowcs Williams, D.L. Hawkings: Sound generation by turbulence and surface in arbitrary motion. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A264, 1151 (1969) 321–342. [Google Scholar]
  8. G. Ghorbaniasl, C. Lacor: A moving medium formulation for prediction of propeller noise at incidence. Journal of Sound and Vibration 331 (2012) 117–137. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. G. Ghorbaniasl, L. Siozos-Rousoulis, C. Lacor: A time-domain Kirchhoff formula for the convective acoustic wave equation. Proceedings of the Royal Society A-Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences 472, 2187 (2016) 20150689. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Z.J. Huang, L. Siozos-Rousoulis, T.D. Troyer, G. Ghorbaniasl: A time-domain method for prediction of noise radiated from supersonic rotating sources in a moving medium. Proceedings of the Royal Society A-Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences 474, 2210 (2018) 20170089. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. M.J. Bluck, S.P. Walker: Analysis of three-dimensional transient acoustic wave propagation using the boundary integral equation method. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 39 (1996) 1419–1431. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. A.A. Ergin, B. Shanker, E. Michielssen: Analysis of transient wave scattering from rigid bodies using a Burton-Miller approach. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106, 5 (1996) 2396–2404. [Google Scholar]
  13. D.J. Chappell, P.J. Harris, D. Henwood, R. Chakrabarti: A stable boundary element method for modeling transient acoustic radiation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 120, 1 (2006) 74–80. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. R. Michel, K. Korcan: Near-and-far field modeling of advanced tail-rotor noise using source-mode expansions. Journal of Sound and Vibration 453 (2019) 328–354. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. S. Lee, K. Brentner, P. Morris: Acoustic scattering in the time domain using an equivalent source method. AIAA Journal 48, 12 (2010) 2772–2780. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. S. Lee, K.S. Brentner, P.J. Morris: Time-domain approach for acoustic scattering of rotorcraft noise. Journal of the American Helicopter Society 57, 4 (2012) 1–12. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. N. Curle: The influence of solid boundaries upon aerodynamic sound. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 231, 1187 (1955) 505–514. [Google Scholar]
  18. O. Amoiridis, L. Siozos-Rousoulis, Z. Huang, N. Ricks, A. Kalfas, G. Ghorbaniasl: Aeroacoustic scattering of rotating sources using a frequency-domain acoustic pressure gradient formulation. Applied Acoustics 130 (2018) 99–106. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. L. Siozos-Rousoulis, O. Amoiridis, Z. Huang, T. De Troyer, A.I. Kalfas, G. Ghorbaniasl: A convected frequency-domain equivalent source approach for aeroacoustic scattering prediction of sources in a moving medium. Journal of Sound and Vibration 431 (2018) 88–104. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. S.A. Glegg: Airfoil self-noise generated in a cascade. AIAA Journal 36, 9 (1998) 1125–1182. [Google Scholar]
  21. D. Casalino, M. Genito, A. Visingardi: Numerical analysis of airframe noise scattering effects in tilt rotor systems. AIAA Journal 45, 4 (2007) 751–759. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. R.R. Mankbadi: Review of computational aeroacoustics in propulsion systems. Journal of Propulsion and Power 15, 4 (1999) 504–512. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Z.H. Wang, C.X. Bi, X.Z. Zhang, Y.B. Zhang: Sound field prediction and separation in a moving medium using the time domain equivalent source method. Acta Acustica United with Acustica 103, 3 (2017) 401–410. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. D.Z. Suarez: Helicopters. Model World 3 (2020) 6–15. [Google Scholar]
  25. A. Sehgal, E. Boyle: Design and development of a four-bladed tail rotor system for the USMC H-1 upgrade program. Journal of the American Helicopter Society 49, 2 (2004) 99–108. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. A. Dobyns, B. Barr, J. Adelmann: RAH-66 Comanche building block structural qualification program. American Society for Testing and Materials Special Technical Publication 1383 (2001) 140–157. [Google Scholar]

Cite this article as: Wang Z. Huang J. & Yi M. 2022. Acoustic scattering effect prediction of helicopter fuselage based on BEM and convective FW–H equation. Acta Acustica, 6, 24.

All Tables

Table 1

Nomenclature of the physical quantities.

Table 2

Total and maximum SPL of helicopters with different fuselages.

Table 3

Total and maximum SPL of helicopters with cuboid and capsule fuselages.

Table 4

Maximum and total SPLs of helicopters with cuboid fuselages of different RC.

Table 5

Total and maximum SPL of helicopters with fuselages of different length ratios.

Table 6

Total and maximum SPL of helicopters with fuselages of different width ratios.

Table 7

Total and maximum SPL of helicopters with fuselages of different height ratios.

All Figures

thumbnail Figure 1

Establishment of the simplified helicopter geometry model (including rotor and fuselage).

In the text
thumbnail Figure 2

Helicopter model with OH-6 fuselage.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 3

Helicopter model with HUEY fuselage.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 4

Helicopter model with RAH-66 fuselage.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 5

Schematic of simulation case.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 6

Schematic diagram and flow chat of the methodology approach.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 7

Scattering effects of different types of fuselage (polar graph).

In the text
thumbnail Figure 8

Scattering effects of different types of fuselage (XY graph).

In the text
thumbnail Figure 9

Helicopter model with cuboid fuselage.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 10

Helicopter model with capsule fuselage.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 11

Acoustic noise scattering effects of cuboid fuselage and capsule fuselage.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 12

Acoustic noise scattering effects of cuboid fuselage and capsule fuselage.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 13

Effects of the increase of RC of fuselage sharp edges.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 14

Acoustic scattering effects of cuboid fuselages with different RC.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 15

The scatter diagram and the linear fitting of Y and X.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 16

Fuselages with different length ratios.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 17

Fuselages with different width ratios.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 18

Fuselages with different height ratios.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 19

Scattering effect of fuselages of different length ratios.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 20

Scattering effect of fuselages with different width ratios.

In the text
thumbnail Figure 21

Scattering effect of fuselages with different height ratios.

In the text

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.