Numerical Investigation on the Aerodynamic Noise Generated by a Simplified Double-Strip Pantograph

Abstract

In order to understand the mechanism by which a pantograph can generate aerodynamic noise and grasp its farfield characteristics, a simplified double-strip pantograph is analyzed numerically. Firstly, the unsteady flow field around the pantograph is simulated in the frame of a large eddy simulation (LES) technique. Then the location of the main noise source is determined using surface fluctuating pressure data and the vortex structures in the pantograph flow field are analyzed by means of the Q-criterion. Based on this, the relationship between the wake vortex and the intensity of the aerodynamic sound source on the pantograph surface is discussed. Finally, the far-field aerodynamic noise is calculated by means of the Ffowcs Williams-Hawkings (FW-H) equation, and the contribution of each component to total noise and the frequency spectrum characteristics are analyzed. The results show that on the pantograph surface where vortex shedding or interaction with the wake of upstream components occurs, the pressure fluctuation is more intense, resulting in strong dipole sources. The far-field aerodynamic noise energy of the pantograph is mainly concentrated in the frequency band below 1500 Hz. The peaks in the frequency spectrum are mainly generated by the base frame, balance arm and the rear strip, which are also the main contributors to the aerodynamic noise.

Numerical Simulation of 3D Flow Field and Flow-Induced Noise Characteristics in a T-Shaped Reducing Tee Junction

“…Since the TSPL of T-shaped reducing tee is mainly affected by the inlet flow velocity and pipe diameter ratio [27]. And to further predict the flow-induced noise characteristics of T-shaped reducing tee, the TSPL with different flow velocities and pipe diameter ratios are calculated, which is shown in Table 4.…”

Jet characteristics and optimal design of hydraulic perforating nozzles for natural gas hydrate reservoirs

“…23 By comparing the commonly used k-e and k-v models and performing multiple calculations, it is found that the SST k-v model has better accuracy and algorithm stability than the k-e model in the near-wall region and has high accuracy in simulating separated flows. 24,25 The SST k-v model has advantages in predicting near-wall and vortex flow and is suitable for boundary layer flow, separation, and transition in adverse pressure gradients. 26 Therefore, the SST k-v model can better handle wall-confined flows with high strain rates and large curvature of streamlines.…”