As electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) concepts and urban air mobility gain prominence, the mitigation of propeller noise has become essential. This study presents a comprehensive assessment of acoustic prediction methodologies, focusing on the application of both Formulation-1A and the more recent Formulation-1C of the Ffowcs Williams-Hawkings (FWH) equation. The work demonstrates the use of steady-state Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) simulations with a single rotating frame (SRF) approach for efficient acoustic analysis, enabling the transformation of steady flow solutions into time-varying acoustic surface data. The methodology is implemented as a new class within the open-source libAcoustics library for OpenFOAM, leveraging its parallelization capabilities. Validation with experimental data and comparison against numerical results were performed for a range of propeller configurations. Comparative analysis with direct noise computation (DNC) highlights the improved accuracy of Formulation-1C, especially in scenarios with ambient flow, and demonstrates the limitations of Formulation-1A in such conditions. The results confirm the robustness of the proposed framework for propeller noise prediction across a range of operating regimes.
HambreyJ. Computational aeroacoustic prediction of propeller noise using grid-based and grid-free CFD methods. PhD Thesis, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, 2016.
2.
LieverPAWestJSHarrisRE. Validation of high-fidelity CFD/CAA framework for launch vehicle acoustic environment simulation against scale model test data. 2016. JANNAF Conference.
3.
BrionnaudRTrapaniGChávez ModenaM, et al.Direct noise computation with a Lattice-Boltzmann method and application to industrial test cases. In: 22nd AIAA/CEAS aeroacoustics conference, 2016, pp. 1–20.
4.
BogeyCBarréSBaillyC. Direct computation of the noise generated by a hot coaxial jet. In: 13th AIAA/CEAS aeroacoustics conference (28th AIAA aeroacoustics conference), 2007, pp. 1–17.
5.
BogeyCBarréSBaillyC. Direct computation of the noise generated by subsonic jets originating from a straight pipe nozzle. Int J Aeroacoustics2008; 7: 1–21.
6.
LighthillMJ. On sound generated aerodynamically I. General theory. Proc R Soc Lond A Math Phys Sci1952; 211: 564–587.
7.
LighthillMJ. On sound generated aerodynamically II. Turbulence as a source of sound. Proc R Soc Lond A Math Phys Sci1954; 222: 1–32.
8.
Curle. The influence of solid boundaries upon aerodynamic sound. Proc R Soc Lond A Math Phys Sci1955; 231: 505–514.
9.
FfowcsW. Hawkings. Sound generation by turbulence and surfaces in arbitrary motion. Roy Soc London-Philosophical Trans Ser A1969; 264: 321–342.
10.
ParachaNAHaseebAQaisraniWN, et al.Determination of SPL from a jet exhaust using computational fluid dynamics. In: Proceedings of 2020 17th International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences and Technology, IBCAST 2020, 2020, pp. 513–519. https://doi.org/10.1109/IBCAST47879.2020.9044513.
11.
CasalinoDGrandeERomaniG, et al.Definition of a benchmark for low Reynolds number propeller aeroacoustics. Aero Sci Technol2021; 113: 106707.
BoxwellDAYuYHSchmitzFH. Hovering impulsive noise: some measured and calculated results. NASA Technical Reports, 1978.
17.
BrentnerKSFarrasatF. An analytical comparison of the acoustic analogy and Kirchhoff formulation for moving surfaces. American Helicopter Society, 1997.
18.
MorgansASKarabasovSADowlingAP, et al.Transonic helicopter noise. AIAA J2005; 43: 1512–1524.
19.
BlackDMMentheRWWainauskiHS. Aerodynamic design and performance testing of an advanced 30 degree swept eight bladed propeller at Mach numbers from 0.20 to 0.85. NASA Tech Pap. 1978. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19780024123
20.
JerackiRJMikkelsonDCBlahaBJ. Wind tunnel performance of four energy efficient propellers designed for Mach 0.8 cruise. NASA Tech Pap 1979. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19790011898
21.
RohrbachCMetzgerFBBlackDM, et al.Evaluation of wind tunnel performance testings of an advanced 45 deg swept 8-bladed propeller at Mach numbers from 0.45 to 0.85. NASA Tech Pap1982.
22.
SodermanPTHorneWC. Acoustic and aerodynamic study of a pusher-propeller aircraft model. NASA Tech Pap1990.
23.
DittmarJH. Cruise noise of the SR-2 propeller model in a wind tunnel. NASA Tech Pap1989.
24.
TanCHVooKSSiauwWL, et al.CFD analysis of the aerodynamics and aeroacoustics of the NASA SR-2 propeller. In: Proceedings of the ASME turbo expo 2014: power for land, sea and air, Dusseldorf, Germany, June 16th - 20th, 2014.
25.
De GennaroMCaridiDPourkashanianM. Ffowcs Williams-Hawkings acoustic analogy for simulation of NASA SR-2 propeller noise in transonic cruise condition. In: V European conference on computational fluid dynamics, 2010, pp. 14–17.
26.
MarinusBRogerMVan den BraembusscheR, et al.Truncated method for propeller noise prediction up to low supersonic helical tip Mach numbers. In: 15th AIAA/CEAS aeroacoustics conference, Miami, Florida, May 11th - 13th, 2009.
27.
Kotwicz HerniczekMTFesztyDMesliouiSA, et al.Evaluation of acoustic frequency methods for the prediction of propeller noise. AIAA J2019; 57: 2465–2478.
28.
BaskaranKJamaluddinNSCelikA, et al.Effects of number of blades on propeller noise. J Sound Vib2024; 572: 118176.
29.
Najafi-YazdiABrèsGAMongeauL. An acoustic analogy formulation for moving sources in uniformly moving media. Proc R Soc A2011; 467: 144–165.
30.
GarrickIEWatkinsCE. A theoretical study of the effect of forward speed on the free-space sound-pressure field around propellers. NASA Tech Pap. 1953. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930092212.
31.
BrèsGAPérotFFreedD. A Ffowcs Williams-Hawkings solver for Lattice-Boltzmann based computational aeroacoustics. In: 16th AIAA/CEAS aeroacoustics conference (31st AIAA aeroacoustics conference), 2010. 7th June - 19th June 2010, Stockholm, Sweden.
32.
ZhangKYuCLiuP, et al.An MPI-OpenMP mixing parallel open source FW-H code for aeroacoustics calculation. Preprints arXiv 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.16263
HoweMS. Installation effects on the production of blade-vortex interaction noise by a ducted rotor. J Sound Vib1992; 156: 61–78.
38.
TestaCIannielloSSalvatoreF. A Ffowcs Williams and Hawkings formulation for hydroacoustic analysis of propeller sheet cavitation. J Sound Vib2018; 413: 421–441.
39.
CrosERogerMSerreG. Low-frequency amplification of propeller tonal noise due to the scattering by a compact rigid cylinder. J Sound Vib2023; 546: 117450.
HansonLJawaharHKVemuriSS, et al.Experimental investigation of propeller noise in ground effect. J Sound Vib2023; 559: 117751.
43.
OlindeR. Des lois géométriques qui régissent les déplacements d'un système solide dans l’espace, et de la variation des coordonnées provenant de ces déplacements considérés indépendamment des causes qui peuvent les produire. J Math Pure Appl1840; 5: 380–440.
44.
AbuhaniehS. Development of a steady-state computational fluid dynamics solver for transonic rotorcraft flows. Proc Inst Mech Eng G J Aerosp Eng2024; 238: 582–595.
45.
MoussaK.Computational modeling of propeller noise: NASA SR-7A propeller. 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/10012/8446(Thesis, University of Waterloo).
