A Comparison Study of Normal-Incidence Acoustic Impedance Measurements of a Perforate Liner

The eduction of the acoustic impedance for liner configurations is fundamental to the reduction of noise from modern jet engines. Ultimately, this property must be measured accurately for use in analytical and numerical propagation models of aircraft engine noise. Thus any standardized measurement techniques must be validated by providing reliable and consistent results for different facilities and sample sizes. This paper compares normalincidence acoustic impedance measurements using the two-microphone method of ten nominally identical individual liner samples from two facilities, namely 50.8 mm and 25.4 mm square waveguides at NASA Langley Research Center and the University of Florida, respectively. The liner chosen for this investigation is a simple single-degree-of-freedom perforate liner with resonance and anti-resonance frequencies near 1.1 kHz and 2.2 kHz, respectively. The results show that the ten measurements have the most variation around the anti-resonance frequency, where statistically significant differences exist between the averaged results from the two facilities. However, when the sample-to-sample variation and the uncertainty of the measurement of each individual sample estimate are taken into account for the data measured at the University of Florida, both data sets agree to within experimental uncertainty at all other frequencies. These results thus provide evidence that the size of the present samples do not significantly influence the results away from antiresonance.

[1]  Mats Åbom,et al.  Error analysis of two‐microphone measurements in ducts with flow , 1988 .

[2]  Walter G. Mayer,et al.  A course of lectures on the theory of sound , 1965 .

[3]  Todd Schultz,et al.  ACOUSTIC IMPEDANCE TESTING FOR AEROACOUSTIC APPLICATIONS , 2006 .

[4]  D. A. Blaser,et al.  Transfer function method of measuring in-duct acoustic properties. I - Theory. II - Experiment , 1980 .

[5]  T. H. Melling,et al.  The acoustic impendance of perforates at medium and high sound pressure levels , 1973 .

[6]  Tony L. Parrott,et al.  Cascaded Perforates as One-Dimensional, Bulk Absorbers , 2006 .

[7]  Mats Åbom,et al.  Influence of errors on the two‐microphone method for measuring acoustic properties in ducts , 1986 .

[8]  R. E. Kraft,et al.  Design and performance of duct acoustic treatment , 1991 .

[9]  G. L.,et al.  Theory of Vibrating Systems and Sound , 1927, Nature.

[10]  Patricia E. Stiede,et al.  Comparison of methods for determining specific acoustic impedance , 1997 .

[11]  D. A. Blaser,et al.  Transfer function method of measuring in‐duct acoustic properties. II. Experiment , 1980 .

[12]  Katz Method to resolve microphone and sample location errors in the two-microphone duct measurement method , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  Louis N. Cattafesta,et al.  Uncertainty analysis of the two-microphone method , 2007 .

[14]  Tony L. Parrott,et al.  Evaluation of a multi-point method for determining acoustic impedance , 1989 .

[15]  A. F. Seybert,et al.  Error analysis of spectral estimates with application to the measurement of acoustic parameters using random sound fields in ducts , 1981 .