Background
[0001] The present application relates to a method for forming an add-on component for an
aerofoil.
[0002] It is widely known that unwanted noise is essentially a form of pollution that affects
health and wellbeing, especially near airports and wind farm sites. Studies have shown
that both aviation and wind farm noise pollution have adverse health effects resulting
in annoyance, sleep disturbance and cognitive impairment. To protect the public, strict
noise regulations have been implemented to both the aviation and wind energy sectors.
The European Commission outlines aviation targets that in year 2050 aviation noise
emission will be reduced by 65% compared to the level produced in 2000. However, civil
aviation traffic is expected to expand worldwide between 4% and 5% annually with higher
growth in the Middle East and Asia. Similarly, Wind Europe issued a report in 2014
on the projected energy capacity scenarios in 2030, where their central scenario outlines
that 320 GW electricity will be generated by wind energy and that 78% of this would
be produced by onshore wind farms.
[0003] The significant growth within the aviation industry and the onshore wind farms in
the European Union (EU) member states will inevitably increase the aerodynamic noise
pollution. Aircraft noise is mainly caused by the jet engine and high lift devices
during take-off and landing. However, development in the technology of jet engines
has seen a reduction in jet noise, but an increase in noise generated by the high
bypass-ratio fan blades. Wind turbine mechanical noise is mainly caused by the moving
parts inside the gearbox and generator. However, the recent development of high precision
gear tooth profile designs and acoustic insulation of casings has reduced the source
of mechanical noise. In contrast, the aerodynamic noise generated from the wind turbine
blade is more difficult to reduce. To protect local settlements, maximum noise levels
are currently set at 35-45 dB(A) at 350 m from the wind turbines. As a result, wind
turbine companies often reduce the rotation speed of their turbines in high wind speed
scenarios in order to curb the aerodynamic noise level and not exceed the prescribed
limit. This practice essentially leads to a lower utilisation of the available wind
energy source. Reduction of noise without reducing the rotor-speed would therefore
make wind energy cheaper and, hence, a more attractive alternative for fossil energy.
In quantitative terms, a further 1 dB noise reduction from the current level could
lead to significant increase in wind energy production.
[0004] Aerodynamic noise can emanate from the aerofoils' leading and trailing edges. The
aerofoil noise is generated either at the leading edge of the blades, through interaction
with the atmospheric turbulence, or at the trailing edges, where turbulence in the
boundary layer develops on the blade's surface and scatters into sound. Leading edge
noise and trailing edge noise are different noise sources and not related to each
other. Trailing edge noise (also commonly referred to self-noise), remains one of
the most relevant noise sources related to the aviation and wind turbine industries.
[0005] It is known from the prior art that trailing edge noise reduction can be achieved
by use of a simple sawtooth trailing edge. First, noise reduction by a serrated trailing
edge is partly related to destructive interference caused by a phase lag mechanism
of turbulence noise scattering on the slanted/oblique edge. Second, the root of the
serrated trailing edge is effective in turbulence noise radiation. Third, two noise
sources that are displaced by 180° phase angle in the longitudinal direction, such
as the leading edge slit case, have been shown to be able to maximise the destructive
interference for the aerodynamic noise reduction.
[0006] CN 109292076 A1 (Harbin Inst. Technology) discloses a low self-noise aerofoil structure having a multi-wavelength serrated
trailing edge. The aerofoil body is detachably connected to the noise reduction trailing
edge plate through a connector.
[0008] US 2012/027590 A1 (Bonnet) discloses a rotor blade assembly and a method for reducing the noise of a rotor
blade for a wind turbine.
[0010] US 2017/0174320 (Amazon Tech Inc.) discloses systems, methods, and apparatus for actively adjusting the position of
one or more propeller blade treatments of a propeller blade of an aerial vehicle during
operation of the aerial vehicle.
[0011] US 2017/0022820 A1 (Rolls-Royce plc) discloses an aerofoil for a gas turbine which has a series of first and second recesses
cut into the leading edge of the aerofoil itself. A formula is given for how to cut
the recesses in order to reduce noise at the leading edge of the aerofoil, the formula
being:

where
f0 is the frequency of noise that is reduced, U is the velocity of air passing over
the leading edge, and
htt is the distance in height of the adjacent troughs of the first and second recesses.
[0012] Gruber, Azarpeyvand and Joseph "Airfoil trailing edge noise reduction by the introduction
of sawtooth and slitted trailing edge geometries" (Proceedings of 20th International
Congress on Acoustics, ICA 2010) compares the measurements of the trailing edge self-noise
reduction obtained using sawtooth and slit serrations on a NACA651210 aerofoil.
Summary of the Invention
[0013] The inventive realisation of the present application is that the formula disclosed
in
US 2017/0022820 A1 is incorrect and that a more accurate formula is as defined in claim 1. Furthermore,
it has been discovered that improved results can be obtained by constructing a separate
component for an aerofoil according to the inventive formula and attaching it to the
aerofoil at the trailing edge of the aerofoil, rather than cutting recesses into the
aerofoil itself as in
US 2017/0022820 A1.
[0014] Furthermore, it has been realised that an equivalent inventive formula can be used
to tune the noise reduction obtainable from an aerofoil having slit serrations (as
disclosed in Gruber, Azarpeyvand and Joseph referred to above).
[0015] According to the invention, there is provided a method for forming an add-on component
for an aerofoil having a leading edge and a trailing edge, said component being formed
in order to reduce the amplitude of sound produced at frequency
fpeak when air flows in a flow direction from the leading edge of the aerofoil over the
trailing edge of the component at a freestream velocity U
∞, the method including the steps of:
- (a) selecting a frequency fpeak of sound that is to be reduced;
- (b) selecting a freestream velocity U∞ of air;
- (c) providing a component having a joining edge for joining to a trailing edge of
an aerofoil and a trailing edge opposite said joining edge;
- (d) forming the trailing edge of the component into a plurality of pairs of peaks,
each of said pairs having a first trough, a first peak, a second trough, a second
peak, which is a greater distance from the joining edge than the first peak, and a
third trough, wherein the first trough is on one side of the first peak, the second
trough is between the first and second peak, and the third trough is on the other
side of the second peak to the second trough;
- (e) wherein the first and third troughs of each pair of peaks lie substantially on
a first axis, the second troughs of each pair of peaks lie substantially on a second
axis, and the second peaks of each pair of peaks lie on a third axis;
- (f) and wherein the component is formed according to the formula:

where
ĉ is from 0.4 to 0.8 and

where
h' is the shortest distance between the first axis and the second axis,
h " is the shortest distance between the 2
nd and 3
rd axis,
fpeak is the frequency of sound to be reduced and U
∞ is the freestream velocity in the flow direction of air flowing over the trailing
edge of the component.
[0016] In one embodiment,
h'=
h".
[0017] The shortest distance from the first peak to the first axis may be identical for
each of said pair of peaks within the plurality of pairs.
[0018] The third trough of first pair of peaks may be the first trough of a second pair
of peaks which is adjacent to said first pair of peaks.
[0019] A method for reducing the amplitude of sound produced at frequency
fpeak when air flows in a flow direction from the leading edge of an aerofoil over the
trailing edge of an aerofoil at freestream velocity U
∞, includes the steps of:
- (a) forming an add-on component for an aerofoil according to a method as defined above
and
- (b) attaching said component to said aerofoil.
[0020] The method may additionally include the steps of forming a plurality of components
and attaching said plurality of components to said aerofoil. For example, three components
may be formed and attached to said aerofoil, the first component proximate the tip
of the aerofoil, the second component proximate the middle of the aerofoil and the
third component proximate the other end of the aerofoil to the tip.
[0021] In one embodiment the components may be identical. However, in an alternative embodiment
said components have different values of
h' and/or
h".
[0022] According to a realisation mode not in accordance with the present invention (which
relates to the slits component referred to above), there is provided a method for
forming an add-on component for an aerofoil having a leading edge and a trailing edge,
said component being formed in order to reduce the amplitude of sound produced at
frequency
fpeak when air flows in a flow direction from the leading edge of the aerofoil over the
trailing edge of the component at freestream velocity U
∞, the method including the steps of:
- (a) selecting a frequency fpeak of sound that is to be reduced;
- (b) selecting a freestream velocity U∞ of air;
- (c) providing a component having a joining edge for joining to a trailing edge of
an aerofoil and a trailing edge opposite said joining edge;
- (d) forming the trailing edge of the component into a plurality of peaks separated
by troughs, with each peak being connected to each trough on either side of the peak
by a wall which is substantially perpendicular to the trailing edge, wherein the peaks
each have a width (a) which is substantially parallel to the trailing edge and the
troughs each have a width (W) which is substantially parallel to the trailing edge,
said width also being the gap between adjacent peaks wherein the peaks lie substantially
on a first axis and the troughs lie substantially on a second axis and wherein the
shortest distance from the first axis to the second axis is defined as H,
- (e) and wherein the component is formed according to the formula:

where
ĉ is from 0.4 to 0.8.
[0023] In one embodiment, the ratio of the gap between adjacent peaks (W) and the spanwise
correlation length scale of the turbulent eddies (L
y) is governed by the expression 0.2 ≤ W/L
y ≤ 0.5.
[0024] A method for reducing the amplitude of sound produced at frequency
fpeak when air flows in a flow direction from the leading edge of an aerofoil over the
trailing edge of an aerofoil at freestream velocity U
∞ includes the steps of:
- (a) forming an add-on component for an aerofoil according to a method as defined above
and
- (b) attaching said component to said aerofoil.
[0025] The method may additionally include the steps of forming a plurality of components
and attaching said plurality of components to said aerofoil. For example, three components
may be formed and attached to said aerofoil, the first component proximate the tip
of the aerofoil, the second component proximate the middle of the aerofoil and the
third component proximate the other end of the aerofoil to the tip.
[0026] In one embodiment the components may be identical. However, in an alternative embodiment
said components have different values of H.
[0027] In another aspect not in accordance with the invention, there is provided a method
for forming an add-on component for an aerofoil having a leading edge and a trailing
edge, said component being formed in order to reduce the amplitude of sound produced
at frequency
fpeak when air flows in a flow direction from the leading edge of the aerofoil over the
trailing edge of the component at flow velocity U, the method including the steps
of:
- (a) selecting a frequency fpeak of sound that is to be reduced;
- (b) selecting a flow velocity U of air;
- (c) providing a component having a joining edge for joining to a trailing edge of
an aerofoil and a trailing edge opposite said joining edge;
- (d) forming the trailing edge of the component into a plurality of pairs of peaks,
each of said pairs having a first trough, a first peak, a second trough, a second
peak, which is a greater distance from the joining edge than the first peak, and a
third trough, wherein the first trough is on one side of the first peak, the second
trough is between the first and second peak, and the third trough is on the other
side of the second peak to the second trough;
- (e) wherein the first and third troughs of each pair of peaks lie substantially on
a first axis, the second troughs of each pair of peaks lie substantially on a second
axis, and the second peaks of each pair of peaks lie on a third axis;
- (f) and wherein the component is formed according to the formula:

where

where
h' is the shortest distance between the first axis and the second axis,
h" is the shortest distance between the 2
nd and 3
rd axis,
fpeak is the frequency of sound to be reduced and U is the flow velocity in the flow direction
of air flowing over the trailing edge of the component.
[0028] In yet a further aspect there is provided a method for reducing the amplitude of
sound produced at frequency
fpeak when air flows in a flow direction from the leading edge of an aerofoil over the
trailing edge of an aerofoil at flow velocity U, the method including the steps of
providing at least one component which has been formed according to a method as defined
above and attaching said component to said aerofoil.
[0029] In yet a further still aspect there is provided add-on component for an aerofoil
having a leading edge and a trailing edge, said component being formed in order to
reduce the amplitude of sound produced at frequency
fpeak when air flows in a flow direction from the leading edge of the aerofoil over the
trailing edge of the component at flow velocity U, the component including
a joining edge for joining to a trailing edge of an aerofoil,
a trailing edge opposite said joining edge,
and a surface between the joining edge and the trailing edge,
wherein the trailing edge of the component is formed into a plurality of pairs of
peaks, each of said pairs having a first trough, a first peak, a second trough, a
second peak, which is a greater distance from the joining edge than the first peak,
and a third trough, wherein the first trough is on one side of the first peak, the
second trough is between the first and second peak, and the third trough is on the
other side of the second peak to the second trough,
wherein the first and third troughs of each pair of peaks lie substantially on a first
axis, the second troughs of each pair of peaks lie substantially on a second axis,
and the second peaks of each pair of peaks lie on a third axis,
where h' is the shortest distance between the first axis and the second axis, h" is the shortest distance between the 2nd and 3rd axis, and
wherein the maximum thickness of the component in a direction perpendicular to said
surface is from 0.5mm to 10mm.
[0030] A number of preferred embodiments of the present invention will now be described
with reference to the drawings, in which:
Figure 1A is a schematic drawing showing the geometric parameters of the SRooTES,
DRooTES and Slit trailing edge add-ons;
Figure 1B is a schematic drawing of DRooTES and slit trailing edge add-ons for carrying
out the method according to the invention;
Figure 1C is a schematic drawing of the experimental set-up of the of the far-field
noise measurement described herein;
Figure 2 depicts graphs comparing the performance of slit trailing edges at various
slit amplitudes, H, where λ = 3 mm, for ΔPWL, dB, at 20 m/s ≤ U∞ ≤ 60 m/s;
Figure 3 depicts graphs comparing non-dimensional frequency at various slit amplitudes,
H; where λ is kept at 3 mm, W is kept at 0.3 mm and ĉ = 0.45; at 20 m/s ≤ U∞ ≤ 60 m/s;
Figure 4 depicts graphs comparing the performance of slit trailing edges at various
slit wavelength, λ (mm), and width of slit root, W kept at 0.3 mm. ĉ = 0.45, for ΔPWL, dB, at U. = 30 m/s and U∞ = 60 m/s;
Figure 5 depicts graphs comparing the performance of between the baseline and slit
(different W/A, but with the same λ) trailing edges for ΔPWL, dB; where H = 15 mm; λ = 3 mm; at 20 ≤ U∞ ≤ 60 m/s;
Figure 6 depicts graphs showing the comparison between the baseline and DRooTES (with
different h') trailing edges, ΔPWL (dB); where λ = 3 mm; at 20 ≤ U∞ ≤ 60 m/s;
Figure 7 depicts graphs showing the non-dimensional frequency of the DRooTES when
h' = h", i.e. κ= 1, at various root-to-root amplitude h',λ = 6 mm and ĉ = 0.45, at 20 ≤ U∞ ≤ 60 m/s;
Figure 8 depicts graphs showing the non-dimensional frequency of the DRooTES when
h' ≠ h", i.e. κ ≠ 1, at various amplitude H, λ = 6 mm and ĉ = 0.45, at 20 ≤ U∞ ≤ 60 m/s;
Figure 9 depicts graphs comparing SRooTES, DRooTES and Slit trailing edges where amplitude,
H, and wavelength, λ, were kept at 15 mm and 3 mm for ΔPWL, dB, at 20 m/s < U∞ < 60 m/s; and
Figure 10 depicts graphs comparing SRooTES, DRooTES and Slit trailing edges where
amplitude, H, and wavelength, λ, were kept at 30 mm and 3 mm for ΔPWL, dB, at 20 m/s
< U∞ < 60 m/s.
[0031] An aerofoil add-on component for carrying out the method in accordance with the invention
is referred to herein as Double-Rooted Trailing Edge Serration (abbreviated to "DRooTES"),
where for the first time, not only the level of trailing edge noise reduction can
be improved, but also fine-tuning of the frequency of interest for the self-noise
reduction becomes a possibility. This nomenclature has been adopted by analogy with
a standard sawtooth serration, which is referred to herein as "SRooTES" (Single Rooted
Trailing Edge Serration).
Nomenclature
[0032]
- /
- = frequency, Hz
- H
- = amplitude, m
- λ
- = wavelength, m
- h'
- = root-root longitudinal displacement, mm
- h"
- = root-tip longitudinal displacement, mm
- φ
- = angle of the secondary serration tip, degrees
- λ0
- = root-mid root lateral displacement, mm
- h
- = half of amplitude, m
- c0
- = chord length, m
- W
- = slit width at root, mm
- a
- = slit width at tip, mm
- AoA, θ
- = Angle of Attack
- Θ
- = Polar Angle, degrees
- U∞
- = Freestream Velocity, m/s
- x
- = Position on aerofoil
- n
- = convection velocity factor
- c
- = factor for the propagation of the pressure driven turbulent eddies
- PWL
- = Sound Power Level, dB
- ΔPWL
- = Difference in Sound Power Level, dB
- OAPWL
- = Overall Sound Power Level, dB
- Ly
- = spanwise correlation length scale of the turbulent eddies
Scientific theory
[0033] This application focuses on the characteristics and mechanisms of acoustic interferences
on turbulent boundary layer trailing edge noise by DRooTES and slit trailing edges.
The fundamental theory that underpins this work is based on interference in wave theory.
There are two forms of interference: constructive and destructive. In theory, a perfect
destructive interference occurs when acoustic radiation from two sources, S
1 and S
2 as shown in Figure 1B, are 180° (
π) out-of-phase. The relevant phase difference (or phase angle) can be expressed as
nπ, where
n = 1, 3, 5, and so on. This results in the cancellation of the acoustic radiation.
In contrast, a perfect constructive interference occurs when acoustic radiation is
in-phase between the two sources (i.e. when
n = 2, 4, 6, and so on), which results in amplification of the acoustic radiation to
the far field. As a generic term, the following equation is applied to determine the
phase angle,
ω̂, defined as:

where
ω is oscillation frequency,
f is the frequency,
l is the longitudinal displacement between the two sources and
U. is the freestream velocity. Therefore, applying an "out-of-phase" angle (destructive
interference) to Eqn. 1, based on the distance between S1 and S2 (scatter sources)
defined as
h' for the DRooTES, and
H for the Slit trailing edge in Fig. 1A, the following equations are derived:

where
St is known as the Strouhal number, which demonstrates the respective values of non-dimensional
frequency at which destructive interference occurs at odd numbers, and for the constructive
interference occurs at even numbers.
Details of the Trailing Edge Parameters
[0034] The acronyms used herein as follows: Slits, and Double-Rooted Serrations (DRooTES).
Experimental set-up
[0035] A NACA65-(12)10 cambered aerofoil has a chord-length of
c0 = 0.145 m to
c0 = 0.170 m for serrated trailing edge cases, except for the Baseline (B), (un-serrated)
chord length of
c0 = 0.1425 m to
c0 = 0.155 m, and a span-wise length of 0.45 m. To ensure similar wetted surface areas,
different chord lengths were used for the baseline and serrated cases. The chord-lengths
of the un-serrated trailing edge cases (Baseline) were half of the chord lengths for
the serrated trailing edges in Slits and Double-Rooted Serrations (DRooTES). Note
that, basically, the SRooTES represents a simple sawtooth trailing edge. The aerofoil
was constructed in two main parts: the main aerofoil body and the detachable flat
plate trailing edge. The main aerofoil was manufactured from aluminium alloy with
surface pressure taps across the upper and lower surfaces, and a 0.8 mm slot along
the trailing edge. A detachable, flat plate of 0.8 mm thickness was laser cut to form
various trailing edge shapes.
[0036] A illustrates the geometric parameters of the trailing edge flat plate cases. These
are defined as the serration amplitude (
H), serration wavelength (
λ), root1-root2 longitudinal displacement (
h'), root2-tip2 longitudinal displacement (
h"), angle of the serration tip (
φ) and lateral-displacement serration roots (
λ0). Unless otherwise stated, the root1-root2 longitudinal displacement (
h') and root1-root2 lateral displacement (
λ0) are half the amplitude (
H) and wavelength (
λ) respectively. For the Slit, the geometrical parameters are the slit amplitude (also
defined by
H), slit wavelength (also defined by
λ), width of slip tip (
a) and width of slit gap (
W). The present study investigated four cases: Baseline, SRooTES, DRooTES and Slit.
Figure 1B compares more closely the DRooTES and Slit geometries and will be referred
to below.
[0037] A 0.8 mm slot along the rear end of the main aerofoil body allows for insertion of
0.8 mm thickness flat plate trailing edges. The ranges of serration amplitude (
H) and wavelength (
λ) of the Slit, SRooTES and DRooTES were 5 mm ≤
H ≤ 30 mm intervals of 5 mm, and 3 mm ≤
λ ≤ 35 mm respectively. The root1-root2 lateral displacement and angle of the serration
tip of the DRooTES were 1.5 mm ≤
λ0 ≤ 4.5 mm interval of 1.5 mm and 0° ≤
φ ≤ 84.3°. The Baseline trailing edge was half the amplitude of the serrated case,
to ensure similar wetted surface area to both SRooTES and DRooTES. For the ease of
comparison between SRooTES and DRooTES to the slit trailing edge the Baseline trailing
edge would also be assumed to be half the amplitude. A coarse sandpaper was permanently
applied to the upper and lower surfaces at 30 mm from the aerofoil leading edge to
ensure the boundary layers were fully tripped to turbulent. The sandpaper strip had
a width of 10 mm and a thickness of 0.95 mm.
Wind Tunnel Facilities and Instrumentation
[0038] The wind tunnel facilities and instrumentation setup for the far-field noise measurement
were performed in the aero-acoustics facility at Brunel University London, which consisted
of an open jet wind tunnel within an anechoic chamber of 4 m x 5 m x 3.4 m. The open
jet nozzle dimension was 0.3 m × 0.1 m (width x height). The aerofoil was attached
to the side plates flush to the nozzle lips. The open jet wind tunnel had an operation
capacity of up to
U = 80 m/s, with typical low turbulence flow between 0.1% and 0.2%. The background
noise (without aerofoil, but with side plates) was largely contributed by the open
jet noise, which was very low in comparison to the aerofoil self-noise level produced
at the identical flow speed. All far-field noise measurements were performed at the
geometric angle of attack (AoA)
θ = 0°.
Far-Field Array Noise Measurements
[0039] The far-field array noise measurements were performed with eight G.R.A.S. half-inch
condenser microphones (46AE) mounted at polar angles from
Θ = 50° to
Θ = 120° intervals of
Θ = 10°. The
Θ = 90° microphone was positioned at the mid-span of the aerofoil and at 0.97 m above
the trailing edge. Figure 1C illustrates the experimental setup of the far-field array.
A gain of ± 20 dB was applied to each microphone signal through the G.R.A.S. 12AX
4-Channel CCP amplifier. The data were acquired using a 16-bit analogue-digital card
manufactured by National Instruments. The sampling frequency was 40 kHz with a sampling
time of 20 seconds. The data were windowed and the Power Spectral Density (PSD) of
1 Hz bandwidth was computed from a 1024 points FFT and a 50% overlap time. The noise
was calculated to obtain the Sound Power Level (PWL) assuming a spherical spreading
of the sound waves from the trailing edge. Noise measurements were taken at various
freestream velocities from
U = 20 m/s to
U = 60 m/s, at
U = 10 m/s intervals.
[0040] A illustrates the geometric parameters of the trailing edge flat plate cases. For
the DRooTES, these are defined as the serration amplitude (
H), serration wavelength (
λ), root1-root2 longitudinal displacement (
h'), root2-tip2 longitudinal displacement (
h"), angle of the serration tip (
φ) and lateral-displacement serration roots (
λ0). Unless otherwise stated, the root1-root2 longitudinal displacement (
h') and root1-root2 lateral displacement (
λ0) are normally half the amplitude (
H) and wavelength (
λ) respectively. For the Slit, the geometrical parameters are the slit amplitude (also
defined by
H), slit wavelength (also defined by
λ), width of slip tip (
a) and width of slit gap (
W).
Experimental set-up
[0041] A NACA65-(12)10 cambered aerofoil has a chord-length of
c0 = 0.145 m to
c0 = 0.170 m for serrated trailing edge cases, except for the Baseline (B), (un-serrated)
chord length of
c0 = 0.1425 m to
c0 = 0.155 m, and a span-wise length of 0.45 m. To ensure similar wetted surface areas,
different chord lengths were used for the baseline and serrated cases. The chord-lengths
of the un-serrated trailing edge cases (Baseline) were half of the chord lengths for
the serrated trailing edges in Slits and Double-Rooted Serrations (DRooTES). Note
that, basically, the SRooTES represents a simple sawtooth trailing edge. The aerofoil
was constructed in two main parts: the main aerofoil body and the detachable flat
plate trailing edge. The main aerofoil was manufactured from aluminium alloy with
surface pressure taps across the upper and lower surfaces, and a 0.8 mm slot along
the trailing edge. A detachable, flat plate of 0.8 mm thickness was laser cut to form
various trailing edge shapes.
[0042] A illustrates the geometric parameters of the trailing edge flat plate cases. These
are defined as the serration amplitude (
H), serration wavelength (
λ), root1-root2 longitudinal displacement (
h'), root2-tip2 longitudinal displacement (
h"), angle of the serration tip (
φ) and lateral-displacement serration roots (
λ0). Unless otherwise stated, the root1-root2 longitudinal displacement (
h') and root1-root2 lateral displacement (
λ0) are half the amplitude (
H) and wavelength (
λ) respectively. For the Slit, the geometrical parameters are the slit amplitude (also
defined by
H), slit wavelength (also defined by
λ), width of slip tip (
a) and width of slit gap (
W). The present study investigated four cases: Baseline, SRooTES, DRooTES and Slit.
Figure 1B compares more closely the DRooTES and Slit geometries and will be referred
to below.
[0043] A 0.8 mm slot along the rear end of the main aerofoil body allows for insertion of
0.8 mm thickness flat plate trailing edges. The ranges of serration amplitude (
H) and wavelength (
λ) of the Slit, SRooTES and DRooTES were 5 mm ≤
H ≤ 30 mm intervals of 5 mm, and 3 mm ≤
λ ≤ 35 mm respectively. The root1-root2 lateral displacement and angle of the serration
tip of the DRooTES were 1.5 mm ≤
λ0 ≤ 4.5 mm interval of 1.5 mm and 0° ≤
φ ≤ 84.3°. The Baseline trailing edge was half the amplitude of the serrated case,
to ensure similar wetted surface area to both SRooTES and DRooTES. For the ease of
comparison between SRooTES and DRooTES to the slit trailing edge the Baseline trailing
edge would also be assumed to be half the amplitude. A coarse sandpaper was permanently
applied to the upper and lower surfaces at 30 mm from the aerofoil leading edge to
ensure the boundary layers were fully tripped to turbulent. The sandpaper strip had
a width of 10 mm and a thickness of 0.95 mm.
Wind Tunnel Facilities and Instrumentation
[0044] The wind tunnel facilities and instrumentation setup for the far-field noise measurement
were performed in the aero-acoustics facility at Brunel University London, which consisted
of an open jet wind tunnel within an anechoic chamber of 4 m x 5 m x 3.4 m. The open
jet nozzle dimension was 0.3 m × 0.1 m (width x height). The aerofoil was attached
to the side plates flush to the nozzle lips. The open jet wind tunnel had an operation
capacity of up to
U = 80 m/s, with typical low turbulence flow between 0.1% and 0.2%. The background
noise (without aerofoil, but with side plates) was largely contributed by the open
jet noise, which was very low in comparison to the aerofoil self-noise level produced
at the identical flow speed. All far-field noise measurements were performed at the
geometric angle of attack (AoA)
θ = 0°.
Far-Field Array Noise Measurements
[0045] The far-field array noise measurements were performed with eight G.R.A.S. half-inch
condenser microphones (46AE) mounted at polar angles from
Θ = 50° to
Θ = 120° intervals of
Θ = 10°. The
Θ = 90° microphone was positioned at the mid-span of the aerofoil and at 0.97 m above
the trailing edge. Figure 1C illustrates the experimental setup of the far-field array.
A gain of ± 20 dB was applied to each microphone signal through the G.R.A.S. 12AX
4-Channel CCP amplifier. The data were acquired using a 16-bit analogue-digital card
manufactured by National Instruments. The sampling frequency was 40 kHz with a sampling
time of 20 seconds. The data were windowed and the Power Spectral Density (PSD) of
1 Hz bandwidth was computed from a 1024 points FFT and a 50% overlap time. The noise
was calculated to obtain the Sound Power Level (PWL) assuming a spherical spreading
of the sound waves from the trailing edge. Noise measurements were taken at various
freestream velocities from
U = 20 m/s to
U = 60 m/s, at
U = 10 m/s intervals.
Results and Discussion
[0046] The results are presented in this section. The section covers the noise measurements
obtained by the DRooTES and Slit trailing edges at
U∞, between 20 m/s and 60 m/s, with an interval of 10 m/s, at angle of attack
θ = 0°.
[0047] So far, when describing the flow velocity, we only refer to the freestream value
U
∞ in the generic equations (Eqn. 1 and Eqn. 2). However, when describing the acoustical
destructive mechanism for the DRooTES and Slits, the main parameter is the convection
speed of the turbulent eddies U
c, not the freestream velocity U
∞. It should be noted that the convection speed of the turbulent eddies would also
be affected by pressure-driven secondary flow structure along the edge. It has been
determined that the net convection speed of the turbulent eddies u
c is between 40% and 80% of the freestream velocity, i.e. between

and

. Therefore, for the present DRooTES and Slit trailing edge, the generic expression
in Eqn. 2 can be modified as:

where
ĉ is the convection velocity factor, whose values lie between 0.4 and 0.8. As per the
definition in Eqn. 3, the destructive interference mechanisms should occur at
St = 0.5, 1.5 and so on, between the roots of the DRooTES, and roots and tips of the
slit trailing edge.
SLIT TRAILING EDGE
Slit Amplitude (H)
[0048] Figure 2 illustrates a comparison of the sensitivity of slit trailing edges at various
H at different freestream velocities,
U∞. ΔPWL is defined as the difference between sound power levels, as a function of frequency,
between the Baseline and Slit trailing edges:
ΔPWL =
PWLB(
f) -
PWLSlit(
f). Note that the positive value of ΔPWL represents reduction in noise level, and the
opposite is true for a negative value of Δ
PWL to be treated as noise level increases. The results clearly show that slit trailing
edge are the most effective in producing noise reduction up to 7 dB across the low
to mid-frequency range. The slit trailing edge can also result in significant degradation
in performance, compared to the Baseline trailing edge, at high frequencies up to
5 dB. In addition, distinctive peaks of noise reduction ΔPWL achieved by individual
slit trailing edges appears not to follow a trend of slit amplitude
H across various
U∞. The individual slit trailing edges observed that the maximum ΔPWL exhibited a relationship
f to
U∞ and to
H as follows:
- 1.

- 2.

[0049] Thus, the acoustic frequency where the maximum noise reduction occurs has a relationship
to freestream velocity and the longitudinal displacement between either end of the
slit (root and tip),
H.
Non-Dimensional Frequency - Slit Amplitude, H
[0050] Figure 3 illustrates whether application of non-dimensional frequency against the
broadband noise reduction of the slit trailing edge, at various slit amplitude (
H), can be generalised. In theory, perfect destructive interference occurs when the
acoustic radiations are at 180° out-of-phase between two sources, resulting in cancellation
of the acoustic radiation. This is illustrated in Figure 1B, which shows the initial
hypothesis of the destructive interference between two sources at the root and tip
of the slit trailing edge. This means that the non-dimensional frequency (
f.
H/
uc, where
l =
H for the slit trailing edge), defined in Eqn. 3, should be equal to 0.5. Figure 4
shows that the peak ΔPWL indeed takes place at around the
St ≈ 0.5 for different slit amplitudes (except for the
U = 60 m/s, where a slight fluctuation of Strouhal number is evident). These results
obtained experimentally confirm that the destructive interference mechanism pertaining
to the 180° out of phase cancellation between the two sources (root and tip) is responsible
for the maximum noise reduction.
[0051] Furthermore, Figure 3 clearly demonstrates that all the peaks ΔPWL pertaining to
the slit configurations are followed by a significant dip of ΔPWL (noise increase)
at
St ≈ 1, which is twice the value for the Strouhal number for maximum noise reduction
discussed in the previous paragraph. This is another evidence of the acoustical interference
mechanisms being present between the sources of the slit trailing edges. In summary,
the destructive interference mechanisms (noise reduction) should occur at
St = 0.5, 1.5, and so on, between the roots and tips of the slit trailing edge. This
is consistent with the experimentally observed destructive interference at
St ≈ 0.5 and
St ≈ 1.5. On the other hand, a constructive interference (noise increase) occurs at
St ≈ 1.
Non-Dimensional Frequency - Wavelength (λ) with Constant Width of Slit Root (W)
[0052] Figure 4 shows a comparison of the sensitivity of non-dimensional frequency at various
λ of the slit trailing edges, where the slit width,
W, was kept constant at 0.3 mm. The results shown in Figure 4 are observed at all freestream
velocities. The results clearly demonstrate that
λ has no effect on the non-dimensional frequency with good comparison of the collapse
ΔPWL peaks. Furthermore, the ΔPWL peak corresponds to the destructive interference
at
St ≈ 0.5 and
St ≈ 1.5, and constructive interference at
St = 1 for all cases. The effects of acoustic interference mechanism were still observable
at the largest
λ slit trailing edge cases, however, the effects of the mechanism were greatly weakened
in comparison to the smallest
λ.
Width of Slit Root (W) with a Constant Wavelength (λ)
[0053] Figure 5 presents a comparison of the broadband noise radiation for slit trailing
edges at different aspect ratios of
W/
λ, where
λ was kept constant at 3 mm. The results clearly demonstrate that as
W increases, significant degradation of the noise performance (negative ΔPWL) occurs
at low-to-mid frequencies across all freestream velocities. When
W increases, the slit geometry becomes less compact, and eventually exceeds the spanwise
integral length scale of the turbulent eddies. In this case, the slit at the root
region slowly reverts to a straight trailing edge noise mechanism, which in turn diminishes
the noise reduction capability.
[0054] In these experiments, the best performer is
W/
λ = 0.15 with reduction up to 6 dB, whereas the worst performer is with the largest
Wlλ = 0.5. At mid-to-high frequencies, 600 Hz <
f< 20 kHz, it can be observed that the largest
W/
λ (= 0.5) is the only configuration that does not result in noise increase. It can
even achieve a slight broadband noise reduction up to 4 dB at low velocity. All the
smaller
W/
λ configurations, on the other hand, only produce noise increase. Whereas, the slit
trailing edges with smaller
W/
λ configuration result in a larger noise increase. Based on the results presented thus
far, the following statements can be summarised:
- 1) Small W/λ configuration is desirable for broadband noise reduction at low-to-mid frequency.
This is to avoid the slit width becoming comparable with the spanwise integral length
scale of the turbulent eddies, which will weaken the destructive interference mechanism.
- 2) Large W/λ configuration is desirable to avoid noise increase at high frequency. This is to
reduce the tendency of cross-flow across the slits and minimise flow leakage.
[0055] The noise reduction is subjected to the boundary condition of the ratio between the
slit gap (
W), and the incoming spanwise correlation length scale of the turbulent eddies (L
y) near the trailing edge. It is found from the experiments that the optimal condition
for noise reduction at
fpeak to occur is approximately when 0.2 ≤ W/L
y ≤ 0.5. The lower and upper limits of W/L
y may fluctuate depending on the flow condition (such as Reynolds numbers, Mach numbers,
etc).
DRooTES
Comparison of the Noise Results by DRooTES with Different Root-to-Root Amplitude (h')
[0056] The next investigation is to examine a new geometry feature, additional root, also
utilising acoustic interference. This new geometry is called the DRooTES. Figure 6
presents a comparison of the broadband noise reduction (as well as noise increase)
by the DRooTES against the baseline trailing edge at different root-to-root amplitude,
h' (see Figure 1B). The best performer amongst all the DRooTES cases is the largest
amplitude
h' = 15 mm with noise reduction up to 7 dB at
U∞ = 60 m/s. The smallest
h' = 2.5 mm exhibits noise reduction against the baseline trailing edge only at high
frequency. The overall trend witnessed a degradation of the level of noise reduction
with the decrease in amplitude of the DRooTES. At high frequencies, DRooTES exhibit
an increase in noise, up to 2 dB, with the increase in amplitude.
Non-dimensional frequency - when the Root1-to-Root2 (h') = Root2-to-tip (h") for DRooTES
[0057] Assuming that destructive interference between the two sources as per the Figure
1B exists for the DRooTES, the distance between them (
h') should be used for the Strouhal number
St. For destructive interference of a DRooTES, the following condition must be fulfilled:

where
ω =
2πf. uc is the same definition used for the slit trailing edge earlier, which is the convection
speed of the turbulent eddies after subjected to the interaction with the pressure-driven
secondary flow. The empirical factor

, accounts for the possible non-equal value between the
h' and
h" in the frequency scaling for the DRooTES.
[0058] Figure 7 shows the spectra of ΔPWL with non-dimensional frequencies
f.h'/
uc. Note that because
h'=
h"i,
κ= 1. It can be seen that the maximum noise reduction (maximum ΔPWL) occurs at St ≈
0.5, which is very close to the values observed for the slit trailing edge. This demonstrates
the same acoustical destructive mechanism is also valid for the DRooTES.
Non-dimensional Frequency - when the Root1-to-Root2 (h') ≠Root2-to-tip (h") for DRooTES, with constant H = 30 mm
[0059] When
h' ≠
h", then κ is no longer unity. Applying the factor of

into the frequency scaling, Figure 8 shows the sensitivities of broadband noise radiation
at non-dimensional frequency at various
h', where
h' is then adjusted accordingly to produce the overall
H constant at 30 mm. The results demonstrate that the different curves collapse well.
The increase of
h' affects the maximum noise reduction peak. The best performer was
h' = 20 mm with 8 dB reduction in comparison to the
h' = 5 mm which achieved only 5 dB at same freestream velocity. However, the acoustic
performance is depended on both the geometrical parameters and flow conditions.
SUMMARY
[0060] To determine the optimal geometrical dimension for the slits and DRooTES
(H for the slit, and
h' for the DRooTES), the following equations apply:
For slit,

For DRooTES,

[0061] Overall, the factors that potentially affect the exact values of
ĉ and
fpeak (sources of uncertainty) are:
- 1) Turbulent eddies scatter into pressure waves in close proximity to the roots, not
exactly at the root, which can affect the "true" longitudinal displacement between
roots and tips of the slit.
- 2) Variation of the convection velocity factor ranges for the turbulent eddies
- 3) An additional factor affecting the convection speed of the turbulent eddies due
to the presence of secondary flows (e.g. the cross-flow within the slit), defined
as c.
Comparison of the SRooTES, DRooTES and Slit trailing edges
[0062] Figure 9 illustrates a comparison of the trailing edges at various freestream velocities
at amplitude of
H = 15 mm. The best performer based on the maximum ΔPWL was the slit trailing edge
case with reduction up to 4.8 dB in comparison to the baseline trailing edge. Alternatively,
the DRooTES produced significant broadband noise reduction up to 4.5 dB across a significant
greater frequency range, 100 Hz <
f< 4 kHz, at all freestream velocities in comparison to the slit trailing edge. This
compares to the slit achieving reduction across a small frequency range of 100 <
f< 1.5 kHz based on the freestream velocity. The worst case is the SRooTES which produced
the least noise reduction at the low to mid frequency. However, at high frequency
the SRooTES produced the least noise increase in comparison to DRooTES and slit trailing
edge. At high frequency, the slit trailing edge produced the greatest noise increase,
followed by DRooTES.
[0063] Figure 10 presents a comparison of the trailing edges at various freestream velocities
at amplitude of
H = 30 mm. The best performer was the DRooTES with the largest noise reduction up to
7.2 dB. Furthermore, the DRooTES produced the smallest noise increase and noise reduction
across all frequency ranges in comparison to baseline. The SRooTES produced similar
noise reduction across the low to mid frequency range, however, it produced the greatest
noise increase. The slit trailing edge produced significant reduction at specific
frequencies at the low to mid frequency range and produced similar reductions to the
DRooTES at high frequency.
[0064] In conclusion, the results shown in Figure 9 and Figure 10 clearly demonstrates the
following:
- 1. DRooTES offers significant benefits at improving noise performance amongst all
trailing edge cases, where DRooTES achieve noise reduction up to 4.5 dB and 7.2 dB
for H = 15 mm and H = 30 mm respectively.
- 2. The optimization of geometry parameter, depending on the flow conditions, offer
significant benefits in improving noise performance for all the trailing edge cases.