Optimization of Microphone Locations for Acoustic Liner Impedance Eduction

Michael G. Jones, Willie R. Watson, Jason June
2015 21st AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference   unpublished
Two impedance eduction methods are explored for use with data acquired in the NASA Langley Grazing Flow Impedance Tube. The first is an indirect method based on the convected Helmholtz equation, and the second is a direct method based on the Kumaresan and Tufts algorithm. Synthesized no-flow data, with random jitter to represent measurement error, are used to evaluate a number of possible microphone locations. Statistical approaches are used to evaluate the suitability of each set of microphone
more » ... locations. Given the computational resources required, small sample statistics are employed for the indirect method. Since the direct method is much less computationally intensive, a Monte Carlo approach is employed to gather its statistics. A comparison of results achieved with full and reduced sets of microphone locations is used to determine which sets of microphone locations are acceptable. For the indirect method, each array that includes microphones in all three regions (upstream and downstream hard wall sections, and liner test section) provides acceptable results, even when as few as eight microphones are employed. The best arrays employ microphones well away from the leading and trailing edges of the liner. The direct method is constrained to use microphones opposite the liner. Although a number of arrays are acceptable, the optimum set employs 14 microphones positioned well away from the leading and trailing edges of the liner. The selected sets of microphone locations are also evaluated with data measured for ceramic tubular and perforate-over-honeycomb liners at three flow conditions (Mach 0.0, 0.3, and 0.5). They compare favorably with results attained using all 53 microphone locations. Although different optimum microphone locations are selected for the two impedance eduction methods, there is significant overlap. Thus, the union of these two microphone arrays is preferred, as it supports usage of both methods. This array contains 3 microphones in the upstream hard wall section, 14 microphones opposite the liner, and 3 microphones in the downstream hard wall section.
doi:10.2514/6.2015-3271 fatcat:a4wfmiobizcshmmuooysv5uk2e