Claus Lahiri

Establishment of a High Quality

Lars Enghardt
Friedrich Bake
Institute of Propulsion Technology,
German Aerospace Center (DLR),
10623 Berlin, Germany
Sermed Sadig
Miklós Gerendás
Combustor Aerothermal and Cooling,
Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd. & Co. KG,
15827 Dahlewitz, Germany
Database for the Acoustic
Modeling of Perforated Liners
Perforated liners, especially in combination with a bias flow, are very effective sound
absorbers. When appplied to gas turbine combustors, they can suppress thermo-acoustic
instabilities and thus allow the application of new combustion concepts concerning
higher efficiency and lower emissions. While the successful application of such a damp-
ing concept has been shown, it is still not possible to accurately predict the damping
performance of a given configuration. This paper provides a comprehensive database of
high quality experimental data. Variations of geometric, fluid mechanic, and acoustic
parameters have been studied, including realistic engine configurations. The results dem-
onstrate each parameter influence on the damping performance. A low order thermo-
acoustic model is used to simulate the test configurations numerically. The model shows
a good agreement with the measurements for a wide range of geometries and Strouhal
and bias flow Mach numbers. 关DOI: 10.1115/1.4002891兴

1 Introduction is illustrated in Fig. 1. It allows high precision acoustic measure-

ments of the damping performance of various liner configurations,
In order to achieve low emissions in a combustion system, the
including grazing and bias flow.
control of thermo-acoustic combustion instabilities is essential.
The test duct consists of two symmetric measurement sections
These instabilities arise from a feedback of acoustic pressure pul-
共section 1 and section 2 in Fig. 1兲 of 1200 mm length each. They
sations on heat release fluctuations. This phenomenon can be sup-
have a circular cross section with a diameter of 140 mm. In order
pressed by increasing the acoustic losses in the system. One pos-
to minimize the reflection of sound at the end of the duct back into
sibility is the use of Helmholtz resonators, which provide high
the measuring section, the test duct is equipped with anechoic
acoustic damping but only within a small bandwidth. Another
terminations at both ends 共not shown in Fig. 1兲. Their specifica-
approach is to use the broadband damping abilities of perforated
tions follow the ISO 5136 standard.
liners. While perforated liners are already installed in combustion
A total of 12 microphones are mounted flush with the wall of
chambers, they are optimized for cooling purposes and not neces-
the test duct. They are installed at different axial positions up-
sarily for acoustic damping. In recent years, the implementation of
stream and downstream of the damping module and are distrib-
modern combustion concepts, e.g., lean combustion, has increased
uted exponentially with a higher density toward the damping
the demand of further understanding and optimization of the
module. Two microphones are installed opposite each other at the
damping. Still, difficulties arise in the prediction of the damping
same axial position close to the signal source. As evanescent
performance of a given configuration.
modes become more prominent in the vicinity of the source, their
Theoretical analyses of the damping effect have been given in
influence is reduced significantly by using the average value of
Refs. 关1–3兴. In Ref. 关1兴, Howe developed an expression of the
these two microphones for the analysis. This technique helps re-
Rayleigh conductivity of a single orifice to give its acoustic be-
duce the errors for frequencies approaching the cut-on frequency
havior. Later, Eldredge and Dowling 关4兴 developed a method to
of the first higher order mode and thus extends the frequency
predict the damping characteristic of axial acoustic waves within a
range for accurate results.
cylindrical tube based on Howe’s definition of the Rayleigh con-
At the end of each section, a loudspeaker is mounted at the
ductivity. This approach was used by Macquisten et al. 关5兴 to
circumference of the duct 共A and B in Fig. 1兲. They deliver the test
define dampers and compare them with experimental results.
signal for the damping measurements. The signal used here is a
Based on these previous works, a one dimensional acoustic net-
multitone sine signal. All tonal components of the signal are in the
work tool was developed by Stow and Dowling 关6,7兴.
plane wave range. The signal has been calibrated in a way that the
Here, a comprehensive database of high quality experimental
amplitude of each tonal component inside the duct is about 102
data is established. The parameters include number, size, shape
dB.
and distribution of the orifices, wall thickness, cavity volume in a
The microphones used in these measurements are 1/4 in. 共6.35
double layer configuration, bias and grazing flow velocities, and
mm兲 GRAS type 40BP condenser microphones. Their signals are
signal frequency. The configurations are tested in an isothermal
recorded with a 16 track OROS OR36 data acquisition system
duct acoustic test rig providing a high accuracy of the results. The
with a sampling frequency of 8192 Hz. The source signals for the
database is used to test the prediction capability of the one dimen-
loudspeakers are recorded on the remaining tracks. The test signal
sional acoustic model proposed by Stow and Dowling.
is produced by an Agilent 33220A function generator. The signals
are fed through a Dynacord L300 amplifier before they power the
2 Experimental Setup Monacor KU-516 speakers.
The experimental study is performed in the duct acoustic test
rig at DLR Berlin at ambient conditions. The setup of the test rig
3 Experimental Analysis
For each configuration, two different sound fields are excited
Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute of ASME for publication in
the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received
consecutively in two separate measurements 共indices a and b兲.
August 5, 2010; Final manuscript received September 24, 2010; published online Speaker A is used in the first measurement and in the second
April 20, 2011. Editor: Dilip R. Ballal. measurement the same signal is fed into speaker B. Then, the data

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power SEPTEMBER 2011, Vol. 133 / 091503-1
Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/15/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Damping
Section 1 Module Section 2
bias
A 1 2 3 4 5 flow 7 8 9 10 11 B
⇓
grazing flow ⇒

6 - +
12
x=0 x=0

Fig. 1 Schematic setup of the duct acoustic testrig with speakers A and B and microphones
1–12. The anechoic terminations at both ends are not shown.

of section 1 and section 2 共indices 1 and 2兲 are analyzed sepa- and B. In order to calculate the reflection and transmission coef-
rately. This results in four equations for the complex sound pres- ficients r+, r−, t+, and t− from the sound pressure amplitudes, the
sure amplitudes for each section and measurement: following four relations can be derived:
+ −
p̂1a共x兲 = p̂+1ae−ik1 x + p̂−1aeik1 x 共1兲 p̂−1a = r+ p̂+1a + t− p̂−2a 共6兲
−ik+2 x ik−2 x
p̂2a共x兲 = p̂+2ae + p̂−2ae 共2兲 p̂−1b = r+ p̂+1b + t− p̂−2b 共7兲
+ −
p̂1b共x兲 = p̂+1be−ik1 x + p̂−1beik1 x 共3兲 p̂+2a = r− p̂−2a + t+ p̂+1a 共8兲
−ik+2 x ik−2 x
p̂2b共x兲 = p̂+2be + p̂−2be 共4兲 p̂+2b = r− p̂−2b + t+ p̂+1b 共9兲
+ −
p̂ and p̂ are the complex amplitudes of the downstream and The equations from both measurements are combined and solved
upstream traveling waves with their respective wave numbers k⫾. for the reflection
The recorded microphone signals are transformed into the fre-
quency domain using the method presented by Chung 关8兴. This p̂−1a p̂−2b − p̂−1b p̂−2a p̂+2b p̂+1a − p̂+2a p̂+1b
method rejects uncorrelated noise, e.g., turbulent flow noise, from r+ = r− = 共10兲
the coherent sound pressure signals. Therefore, the sound pressure p̂+1a p̂−2b − p̂+1b p̂−2a p̂+1a p̂−2b − p̂+1b p̂−2a
spectrum of one microphone is determined by calculating the and transmission coefficients
cross-spectral densities between three signals, where one signal
serves as a phase reference. In our case, the phase reference signal p̂+2a p̂−2b − p̂+2b p̂−2a p̂+1a p̂−1b − p̂+1b p̂−1a
is the source signal of the active loudspeaker. As a result, we t+ = t− = 共11兲
p̂+1a p̂−2b − p̂+1b p̂−2a p̂+1a p̂−2b − p̂+1b p̂−2a
obtain a phase-correlated complex sound pressure spectrum for
each microphone signal. In the downstream and upstream directions, respectively. The ad-
According to Eqs. 共1兲–共4兲, the measured acoustic signal is a vantage of combining the two measurements is that the resulting
superposition of two plane waves traveling in opposite directions. coefficients are independent from the reflection of sound at the
In order to determine the downstream and upstream propagating duct terminations. These end-reflections are contained in the
portions of the wave in each section, a mathematical model is sound pressure amplitudes but do not need to be calculated ex-
fitted to the acoustic microphone data. This model considers vis- plicitly.
cous and thermal conductivity losses at the duct wall. They are The dissipation of acoustic energy is expressed by the dissipa-
included in the wave number with the following attenuation factor tion coefficient. The dissipation coefficient can be calculated di-
␣ as proposed by Kirchhoff 关9兴: rectly from the reflection and transmission coefficients via an en-

冑 冉 冊
ergy balance:
1 ␩␻ ␥−1
␣= 1+ 共5兲 R⫾ + T⫾ + ⌬⫾ = 1
cr 2␳ 冑Pr 共12兲

with the duct radius r, the speed of sound c, the dynamic viscosity The energy of the incident wave is partly reflected, partly trans-
␩, the angular frequency ␻, the density of the fluid ␳, the heat mitted, and partly absorbed by the damping module. R and T are
capacity ratio ␥, and the Prandtl number Pr. As a result of this the power quantities of the reflection and transmission coeffi-
least-mean-square fit, the four complex sound pressure amplitudes cients, respectively, while r and t are the pressure quantities.
p̂+1 , p̂−1 , p̂+2 , and p̂−2 are identified at position x = 0 for both measure- Blokhintsev 关10兴 defined the acoustic energy flux I in a moving
ments. These sound pressure amplitudes are related to each other medium 共see as well in Ref. 关11兴兲
via the reflection and transmission coefficients of the test object. 1
This is illustrated in Fig. 2 for the two different measurements A I= 共1 + M兲2具p2典 共13兲
␳c
where 具p典 is the time-averaged acoustic pressure, ␳ is the density
A B
(a) (b) of the medium, c is the speed of sound, and M is the mean Mach
p̂+
1a t+ p̂+
2a p̂+
1b t+ p̂+
2b
number. Integrating over the duct cross section area A and using
re− r+ r− re+ re− r+ r− re+ the pressure amplitude yields a relation between the acoustic pres-
p̂−
1a t− p̂−
2a p̂−
1b
t− p̂−
2b
sure p and acoustic power P quantities:
Section 1 Section 2 Section 1 Section 2
A
P⫾ = 共1 ⫾ M兲2兩p̂⫾兩2 共14兲
Fig. 2 Illustration of the sound filed in the duct for measure- 2␳c
ments A and B by means of the sound pressure amplitudes p̂,
the reflection coefficient r, the transmission coefficient t, and Then, the energy coefficients can be given relative to the pressure
the end reflection re coefficients as

091503-2 / Vol. 133, SEPTEMBER 2011 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/15/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 6 These results prove the high accuracy and the reliability of the
M=0 experimental data.
5 M = 0.05
Dissipation Error [%] M = 0.1
5 Thermoacoustic Network Model
4
A low order one dimensional thermo-acoustic network model is
3 used to simulate the experimental setup of the DLR duct acoustic
test rig numerically. This model is based on the linear theory of
2 sound propagation and is able to predict combustion instabilities
with linear and nonlinear flame transfer functions in the frequency
1
and the time domain. A detailed description of the low order
thermo-acoustic network model was published in Refs. 关6,7兴. A
0
one dimensional thin annular geometry is assumed, i.e., axial and
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 circumferential modes will be regarded. Radial variations are not
kr represented. This simplification is valid either in an axially long
geometry, which is typically for industrial combustors, or in a
Fig. 3 Error of the dissipation coefficient in the experimental narrow annular cross section, which is typically for aero-engines.
results at three grazing flow Mach numbers The details of the geometry can be represented in acoustic mod-
ules. The acoustic network tool offers a wide range of modules,
e.g., straight ducts, area changes, combustion zones, Helmholtz
P−1 共1 − M 1兲2 + 2 resonators, and damping holes. The main modules to represent the
R+ = = · 兩r 兩 共15兲 test rig configuration are the straight duct and the damping holes.
P+1 共1 + M 1兲2
They will be described in more detail. A perfect gas is assumed
P+2 共1 + M 2兲2 − 2 and the flow variables will be split into a mean part denoted by a
R− = = · 兩r 兩 共16兲 bar and a perturbed part denoted by a prime: ␾ = ␾ ¯ 共x兲
P−2 共1 − M 2兲2
+ ␾⬘共x , ␪ , t兲.
P+2 A2 ␳1c1 共1 + M 2兲2 + 2 The straight duct module is described in detail in Ref. 关6兴. It is
T+ = = · 兩t 兩 共17兲 the main module in the acoustic network and characterizes the
P+1 A1 ␳2c2 共1 + M 1兲2 geometrical dimension. Flow features with a significant axial
length can be simulated with a straight duct. All other features are
P−1 A1 ␳2c2 共1 − M 1兲2 − 2 treated to be acoustically compact. Wave propagation is used to
T− = = · 兩t 兩 共18兲
P−2 A2 ␳1c1 共1 − M 2兲2 relate the perturbations at the start of the duct to the perturbations
where the indices 1 and 2 refer to section 1 and section 2 of the at the end of the duct.
duct as illustrated in Fig. 2, respectively. With A1 = A2, ␳1 = ␳2, The axial and circumferential perturbations can be written as a
sum of four waves: pressure and entropy waves as well as axial
c1 = c2, M 1 = M 2 = M, and Eq. 共12兲 follows the definition of the
and circumferential velocity perturbations. A thin annular geom-
energy dissipation coefficient:

冉 冊
共1 ⫿ M兲2 ⫾ 2
⌬⫾ = 1 − · 兩r 兩 + 兩t⫾兩2 共19兲
共1 ⫾ M兲2
This is an integral value of the acoustic energy that is absorbed
while a sound wave is passing the damping module. The dissipa-
tion coefficient is used to evaluate the damping performance of
the test object.
4 Accuracy of the Experimental Results
The test facility, the measurement techniques, and the data
analysis have been optimized to improve the accuracy of the re-
sults 关12兴. In order to provide a quantitative value for the accu-
racy, a reference measurement without a damping module has
been performed. The two sections of the test duct have been
joined together without the damping module in-between. For this
configuration, the dissipation coefficient is expected to be zero,
i.e., no acoustic energy is absorbed. The deviation from this ideal
value is the total error resulting from the experiments and the
analysis. The dissipation error is given as the deviation from the
ideal value in percent. The downstream and upstream directions
have been combined in an arithmetic averaged error of the dissi-
pation coefficient:
⌬err =
1
2
冑共⌬ref
+ 2
兲 + 共⌬ref
− 2
兲 共20兲
The results at three grazing flow Mach numbers are shown in Fig.
3. The dissipation error is plotted over the Helmholtz number
He= kr formed with the duct radius r. The dissipation error is
mostly below 1%, with a slight increase at the lower frequencies.
As kr approaches the cut-on frequency of the first higher order
mode 共kr = 1.84兲, the error increases rapidly. This is due to the
influence of evanescent modes that are becoming more prominent
close to the cut-on frequency.
etry is assumed with a constant cross section. A constant subsonic
mean flow is used.
The damping effect of perforated liners on acoustic waves has
been analyzed by several authors, e.g., Refs. 关4,12–14兴. In Ref.
关4兴, Eldredge and Dowling presented a model, which is able to
predict the absorption coefficient of a screen of orifices for axial
acoustic waves. The representation of the damping holes in the
thermo-acoustic network model is based on the description of a
single hole and will be discussed in more detail.
Howe 关1兴 developed an expression of the Rayleigh conductivity
of a single aperture to give its acoustic behavior. This is defined as
the ratio of the fluctuating volume flux through an aperture to the
fluctuating difference in pressure across the aperture
Q̂
K = − ik 共21兲
p̂u − p̂d
The model describes the viscous effects, which cause the shedding
of vortex structures from the rim of an aperture in an infinitely
thin wall. These vortices dissipate the acoustic energy into heat.
Other viscous effects are only considered by the adaptation of the
discharge coefficient. The Rayleigh conductivity in Howe’s ex-
pression is described by the local pressure ratio, which does not
take into account the propagation direction of the waves. Hence,
Howe’s model is independent of the shape of the mode. But due to
the assumptions, the network model is restricted to axial and cir-
cumferential wave propagations.
Hughes and Dowling 关13兴 extended Howe’s approach to give
an expression of a homogeneous screen of apertures. Their de-
scription is assuming a large distance s between neighboring ap-
ertures compared with their diameter 2R and an acoustic wave-
length ␭, which is much larger than the interaperture distance.
In the case of a single aperture and based on Ref. 关1兴, the
Rayleigh conductivity can be expressed by

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power SEPTEMBER 2011, Vol. 133 / 091503-3

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/15/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 l la
lp
θ θ
sθ
(a) sx x 2R (b) x norm area is highlighted in gray and the corresponding orifice area
Fig. 4 Definition of the perforation parameters
Ka = 2R共␥ + i␦兲 共22兲
where ␥ is the inertia of the aperture and ␦ denotes the resistance
of the flow, which determines the acoustic losses. Both coeffi-
cients depend on the Strouhal number associated with the convec-
tion velocity of the vortices shed from the aperture. Howe ap-
proximated this velocity with the half of the mean velocity
through the aperture
␻·R
St = 共23兲
v̄/2
In this case, it is assumed that the discharge coefficient of the hole
is CD = 0.5.
In this expression the effect of the thickness of the liner is not
represented. This can be done by extending Eq. 共22兲 with the liner
thickness t as proposed by Jing and Sun 关15兴 and applied by Stow
and Dowling 关6兴
Ka
K= 共24兲
t
1 + Ka
␲R2
The same approach but extended for a perforated liner was used in
Ref. 关4兴 to derive an integrated module of damping screens. A
comparison of both models has proven to give the same results.
The presented approach is only capable of describing the linear
sound absorption. Nonlinear effects as the saturation of energy
losses at high amplitudes as described by Rupp 关16兴 are not cap-
tured. The thermoacoustic network model implements Eq. 共24兲
without any further adjustments.
The mass flux, temperature, and pressure are specified at the
inlet and outlet. The mean quantities are derived from these val-
ues. The boundary conditions for the acoustic perturbations at the
inlet and outlet are set to be either an open end 共p̃ = AE = AV = 0兲, a
closed end 共ũ = AE = AV = 0兲, a semi-infinite pipe 共with no reflected
acoustic waves and AE = AV = 0兲, or a chocked inlet 共m̃ = 0兲. These
boundary conditions apply to all circumferential and axial waves.
Single and multiflow paths are possible. Flows may split from
the main path or may originate from secondary inlets. They can
terminate at dead ends or join into other paths. Holes can be
included between paths.
Equation 共24兲 does not contain a term to couple the heat release
in the combustor with the Rayleigh conductivity of the hole and
hence with the dissipation characteristic. To assess the impact of
the heat release on the dissipation in a real combustor is a com-
plex topic of its own and is not addressed in this paper.
6 Configurations
A total of 231 combinations of geometric and flow parameters
are studied to establish a diversified database. Eleven liner con-
figurations are studied at seven bias flow conditions and three
grazing flow conditions. The damping performance of each com-
bination is measured at 24 frequencies.
Figure 4 illustrates the perforation parameters for a regular 共Fig.
4共a兲兲 and an irregular 共Fig. 4共b兲兲 pattern with the axial coordinate
x and circumferential coordinate ␪. The length l is the length of
the liner defined by the length of the liner’s cavity. In most cases,
the perforation is not spanning over the total length of the liner, so
091503-4 / Vol. 133, SEPTEMBER 2011
Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/15/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
that the length of the perforation l p is given by the longest axial
distance between two orifices. For a regular perforation, the po-
rosity is defined as the ratio of the area of one orifice to a norm
area around it. The size of the norm area is given by the distance
in axial sx and circumferential s␪ directions between two adjacent
orifices. The dotted lines in Fig. 4共a兲 indicate the norm areas. One
is shown in black. The result is a normalized porosity independent
of the liner length: ␴ = ␲R2 / sxs␪. This definition is called open
area ratio. Here, normalized porosity used as open area ratio might
be confused with the ratio of the open areas of two liners in a
double skin configuration.
Two configurations 共10 and 13兲 have an irregular perforation
pattern 共see exemplary illustration in Fig. 4共a兲兲. As the norm areas
have different sizes, the definition above cannot be applied here.
Instead, an active length la is defined. The ratio of the total open
area to the active area defines an averaged normalized porosity for
the irregular perforation: ␴irr = n␲R2 / la2␲r, where n is the number
of orifices, R is the radius of the orifices, and r is the duct radius.
For a regular perforation pattern, the average normalized porosity
coincides with the normalized porosity. Table 1 lists the averaged
normalized porosity.
It should be noted that it is possible for a large sx to have the
active length la become longer than the actual length l. This can
happen for both regular and irregular perforation patterns.
The geometric parameters of the configurations are given in
Table 1. Configurations 3 and 4 are reference configurations. Their
porosity is kept constant while the orifice diameter and the num-
ber of orifices are modified. Basically, configuration 4 has fewer
but larger orifices compared with configuration 3. Both configu-
rations have a regular perforation pattern with cylindrical orifices
in a single skin arrangement.
Configuration 5 keeps the orifice diameter from configuration 4
and the number of orifices from configuration 3. These relations
are inverted in configuration 6, keeping the orifice diameter of
configuration 3 and the number of orifices of configuration 4.
Naturally, the porosity changes between these configurations.
Configuration 7 changes the wall thickness of configuration 3
from 1 mm to 3 mm, leaving all other parameters unchanged.
Configurations 8 and 9 apply a special geometry to the orifices
themselves. In configuration 8, the standard circular orifice is re-
placed by a cross-shaped orifice with a nearly identical open area.
A detail of configuration 8 is given in Fig. 5共a兲 with units in
millimeter. The open area yields 5 mm2 compared with the area
of 4.91 mm2 of a circular orifice of configuration 4. Configuration
9 has a circular shape, but both edges are chamfered with a radius
of 0.5 mm. A section of one orifice is shown in Fig. 5共b兲.
In configurations 10 and 13, the perforation is irregular, yield-
ing a nonuniform porosity. Configuration 10 varies the porosity in
the circumferential direction. The porosity changes symmetrically
from high porosity at ␪ = 0 to low porosity at ␪ = 180. The porosity
distribution in the axial direction is kept constant. The averaged
normalized porosity of this configuration matches with configura-
tion 4. In configuration 13, the porosity varies along the axial
length. This is illustrated exemplarily in Fig. 4共b兲. The variation is
symmetric to l / 2 with a high porosity in the middle of the liner
and a lower porosity toward the edges. To enable a more effective
axial variation, this configuration is nearly 6 times as long as the
other configurations. This explains the low porosity and large vol-
ume stated in Table 1.
Configurations 11-3 and 12-3 are double skin arrangements
with configuration 3 as the damping liner. Here, the cavity volume
of configuration 3 is divided by a second liner, the metering liner.
This creates two separate volumes, one between the damping liner
and the metering liner and the other one between the metering
liner and the back-wall of the cavity. The diameter of the metering
liner is modified between configurations 11-3 and 12-3 so that the
volume of the damping liner is small for configuration 11-3 and
large for configuration 12-3. As the diameter of the back-wall is
Transactions of the ASME
 Table 1 Overview of each configurations geometric parameters

Single skin Double skin

Orifice Number of
diameter orifices Porosity Porosity
number of orifice Wall Cross- Chamfered ␪- x- Small Large
Ref. 1 Ref. 2 orifices diameter thickness shape 共R = 0.5兲 variation variation volume volume
Configuration 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 13 11-3 12-3

Damping Liner

Orifice diameter 2R mm 1 2.5 2.5 1 1 Ⳏ2.5 2.5 2.5 1 1 1

Number of orifices n — 364 60 364 60 364 60 60 60 364 364 364
Porosity ␴ % 1.1 1.0 6.8 0.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.2 1.1 1.1
Wall thickness t mm 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1
Cavity volume V cm3 1757 1757 1757 1757 1703 1757 1757 1757 8201 280 780

Metering Liner

Orifice diameter 2R mm 1 1
Number of Orifices n — 108 108
Porosity ␴ % 0.4 0.3
Wall thickness t mm 1 1
Cavity volume V cm3 1447 941

kept constant, the second volume also changes with the diameter
of the metering liner. The open area of the two metering liners is
kept constant, but the porosity changes due to the modified liner
diameter.
The bias flow is defined by the pressure ratio across the liner in
%. The pressure ratio is varied over a wide range from high values
of 3% to 0%. The latter means that there is no additional air
supplied through the liner orifices. The air supply is controlled via
the mass flow rate, which means the pressure ratios can vary a bit
between configurations. The approximate pressure ratios are 0%,
0.01%, 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.2%, 0.3%, and 3%. However, the static
pressure on both sides of the liner was recorded during the mea-
surements so that the exact values are available. A realistic pres-
sure ratio across the combustor walls of an engine is around 3%.
It should be noted that in a double skin arrangement, the engine
parameter is the total pressure ratio across both liners dPT,
whereas the damping parameter is the pressure ratio across the
damping liner dP. In a single skin arrangement, there is only one
pressure ratio dP = dPT.
A typical value for the grazing flow Mach number within a
combustor is around M = 0.1. Here, three grazing flow velocities
have been applied: M = 0, 0.05, and 0.1.
7 Results
The limited space in this paper only allows a presentation of
some selected results. The damping performance of the selected
configurations is described by a dissipation curve. Here, the dis-
sipation coefficient is plotted over the Helmholtz number, formed
with the length of the perforation 共see Fig. 4兲 as the characteristic
length He= kl p. The dissipation coefficient is defined in Eq. 共19兲.
As all liner geometries are symmetrical in the axial direction, ⌬+
offset between them. The energy absorption is higher for waves
propagating against the flow direction 共see Eq. 共19兲兲. For clarity,
only the results for ⌬− are presented in this paper.
As the numerical model is limited to describe linear acoustic
behavior, care has to be taken in choosing the pressure amplitudes.
As mentioned by Rupp 关16兴, there is a transition point into non-
linear absorption, which corresponds to a velocity approaching
zero for parts of the unsteady cycle in the plane of the orifice.
Relating to the pressure level used in this investigation, nonlinear-
ity can be expected for pressure ratios smaller than 0.02%.
Figure 6 presents the influence of the bias flow on configuration
3 at a grazing flow M = 0.05. Dissipation curves are plotted for the
pressure ratios 0%, 0.1%, 0.3%, and 3%. As the model is only
valid for the linear range, i.e., with bias flow, no numerical results
are given for dP = 0%. While the good damping performance
without bias flow is limited to a small frequency range, a broad-
band damping is achieved by the bias flow configurations. The
damping performance is better for small pressure ratios, where the
Strouhal number of the flow decreases and the resistance of the
flow increases. The results of the numerical model are in good
agreement with the experiments. While the damping is predicted
quite accurately for the lower range of Helmholtz numbers, it is
slightly underestimated in the higher range, especially at the low
pressure ratio.
0.6
dP 0%
0.5 dP 0.1%
dP 0.3%
dP 3%
Dissipation ∆

0.4
and ⌬− are identical if no grazing flow is present in the duct.
However, even under the influence of the grazing flow, the dissi- 0.3
pation curves for ⌬+ and ⌬− show a similar behavior but with an
0.2

1
0.1
(a) radius = 0.5 (b)
0
1 t 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
kl
p
2R
Fig. 6 Influence of the bias flow on configuration 3, grazing
Fig. 5 Special orifice geometries flow M = 0.05. Measurements: symbols, model: lines.

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power SEPTEMBER 2011, Vol. 133 / 091503-5

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/15/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 0.6
0.6 dP 0%
dP 0.1% 0.5 conf. 3: σ = 1.1 %
0.5 dP 0.3%
conf. 4: σ = 1.0 %

Dissipation ∆
dP 3% 0.4
conf. 5: σ = 6.8 %
Dissipation ∆

0.4
0.3 conf. 6: σ = 0.2 %

0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1

0.1 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
0 kl
p
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
kl
p Fig. 8 Influence of the porosity, bias flow dP = 0.2%, and graz-
ing flow M = 0
Fig. 7 Influence of the bias flow on configuration 5, grazing
flow M = 0.05. Measurements: symbols, model: lines.

A previous conclusion from Fig. 7 was the existence of an

Figure 7 illustrates the results for configuration 5 at the same
flow conditions as above. The damping behavior of configuration
5 共high porosity兲 is very different to configuration 3. There is only
a poor absorption without bias flow. The bias flow increases the
damping performance significantly so that up to 60% of the inci-
dent sound energy is absorbed. It becomes obvious that an opti-
mum bias flow setting exists where the damping performance is at
a maximum for a wide range of Helmoltz numbers. Configuration
5 is able to reach maximum absorption for a range of pressure
ratios 共0.1–0.3%兲. The damping performance drops for higher
pressure ratios. Nevertheless, the absorption at 3% is still 3–4
times higher than for configuration 3. However, it needs to be
considered that the mass flow rate is also increased drastically.
The maximum absorption can be found at a different Helmholtz
number compared with configuration 3.
Two anomalies can be observed in Fig. 7. First, the scattering of
the dissipation coefficient at 3% and second, the dissipation coef-
ficient becomes negative for high Helmholtz numbers at 0%. Both
have the same origin. Sound is produced by the damper. In the
first case, it is broadband noise generated by the high mass flow
rate through the orifices that interferes with the measurements. In
the second case, a tone is produced at the liner by the grazing
flow. This tone can be found in the spectrum at kl p ⬇ 1.2. This is in
the frequency range, where the dissipation coefficient becomes
negative. The negative dissipation coefficient confirms that in-
stead of absorbing the incident sound, additional sound is gener-
ated.
The numerical results reproduce the damping characteristics
found by the experiments. They slightly overestimate the damping
at low Helmholtz numbers, whereas they tend to underestimate for
higher Helmholtz number. As before, the discrepancies are larger
for lower pressure ratios.
A direct comparison of configurations 3–6 is given in Fig. 8.
This comparison reveals the influence of the orifice diameter, the
number of orifices, and the porosity. Configurations 3 and 4 keep
a similar porosity, ␴ = 1.1% and ␴ = 1.0%, respectively, while the
optimum pressure ratio/bias flow velocity. Together with the find-
ings above, it follows that the combination of pressure ratio and
porosity is crucial to achieve maximum damping performance.
The limiting parameters in an engine are the available mass flow
rate and the given pressure ratio.
Figure 9 plots the influence of the bias flow on configuration 7
at a grazing flow M = 0.05. The liner in configuration 7 is 3 times
as thick as configuration 3. Comparing its results to configuration
3 in Fig. 6 reveals the influence of the wall thickness on the
damping. The general behavior is very similar to configuration 3.
While their characteristic is identical at dP = 3%, the discrepancy
grows for smaller dP. The damping optimum is at a slightly lower
Helmholtz number and extends over a smaller range. The ability
of broadband absorption is reduced by the thicker wall. This is
reflected by Eq. 共24兲, where the Rayleigh conductivity decreases
with a thicker wall. At higher frequencies, the resistance of the
flow decreases and the correction term becomes more pro-
nounced. This case is handled well by the model. The numerical
results are in good agreement for all pressure ratios and for the
range of Helmholtz numbers.
The influence of the orifice geometry is presented for a bias
flow of dP = 0% and a grazing flow of M = 0.1 in Fig. 10. The
reference configuration 4 with circular-shaped, sharp-edged ori-
fices is compared with configuration 8 with cross-shaped, sharp-
edged orifices and configuration 9 with circular-shaped, cham-
fered orifices. While there is no remarkable difference between the
cross-shaped orifices and the reference configuration, the cham-
fered orifices yield a slightly higher dissipation. Measurements at
other bias flow and grazing flow settings confirm this behavior. It
can be concluded that the shape of the orifices can be disregarded,
0.6
dP 0%
0.5 dP 0.1%
dP 0.3%
dP 3%
Dissipation ∆

0.4
orifice diameter and the number of orifices are varied. The varia-
tion has little impact on the absorption, so that they yield a similar
0.3
dissipation curve. Other measurements from this study 共not
shown兲 contradict these findings and show a clear distinction be- 0.2
tween configurations 3 and 4 at pressure ratios below dP
= 0.15%. However, the influence of the diameter and number of 0.1
orifices for measurements at higher pressure ratios dP ⬎ 0.15% is
negligible and the porosity seems to be the relevant parameter. 0
Configuration 5 has a higher porosity of ␴ = 6.8%, while con- 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
figuration 6 has a lower porosity of ␴ = 0.2%. A higher porosity kl
p
yields a better damping performance. It must be considered that a
higher porosity demands a higher mass flow rate in order to Fig. 9 Influence of the bias flow on configuration 7, grazing
achieve the same pressure ratio. flow M = 0.05. Measurements: symbols, model: lines.

091503-6 / Vol. 133, SEPTEMBER 2011 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/15/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 0.6 0.6
dP 0%
0.5 0.5 dP 0.01%
dP 0.1%
dPT 3%
Dissipation ∆
0.4

Dissipation ∆
0.4

0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2
conf. 4: circular, sharp−edged
0.1 conf. 8: cross, sharp−edged 0.1
conf. 9: circular, chamfered
0 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
kLp kl
p

Fig. 10 Influence of the orifice geometry, bias flow dP = 0%, Fig. 12 Influence of the bias flow on configuration 11-3, graz-
and grazing flow M = 0.1 ing flow M = 0. Measurements: symbols, model: lines.

while the design of the orifice edge affects the dissipation. How-
ever, the orifice edge has only a minor impact compared with the
porosity or the bias and the grazing flow.
Configurations 10 and 13 have a nonuniform porosity. In con-
figuration 10, the porosity varies around the circumference of the
liner. Figure 11 compares this configuration to the reference con-
figuration 4 with uniform porosity. Both configurations produce
similar results, except that there is a peak in the dissipation curve
at kl p = 0.55 for the nonuniform case. This peak corresponds to the
cut-on frequency of the first azimuthal mode inside the damping
volume. The azimuthal mode is excited by the azimuthal structure
of the perforation and leads to a resonance effect at its cut-on
frequency.
In configuration 13, the porosity varies along the axial length of
the liner with a high porosity in the middle and lower porosities
toward the edges 共see Fig. 4共b兲兲. Due to its extended length, a
comparison to the other configurations is difficult. Only one dis-
tinctive feature should be discussed without respective plot. The
dissipation curve shows two peaks similar to the resonance effect
in Fig. 11. Here, an axial resonance inside the damping volume is
responsible. The frequency of the first peak corresponds to a
␭ / 2-resonance and the second peak to a ␭-resonance. This effect
cannot be observed in the other configurations. They are much
shorter, so that axial resonances would occur at frequencies be-
yond the investigated range.
Figures 12 and 13 present results of the two double skin con-
figurations, configuration 11-3 and configuration 12-3, respec-
tively. Although both configurations share the same inner liner and
flow conditions, their damping characteristic is different. It is
mainly driven by the damping volume between both liners. Con-
figuration 11-3 has the smallest damping volume of VD
0.6
conf. 4: uniform
0.5 conf. 10: θ−variation
Dissipation ∆
= 280 cm3 and the maximum absorption is assumed to be beyond
the measured range of Helmholtz numbers kl P ⬎ 1.3. Configura-
tion 12-3 has a damping volume of VD = 780 cm3 and the maxi-
mum damping appears at kl P ⬇ 0.8. These configurations can be
compared with configuration 3 with a damping volume of VD
= 1757 cm3 and an absorption maximum at kl P ⬇ 0.5. The volume
seems directly related to the Helmholtz number at which maxi-
mum damping occurs. A larger volume shifts the maximum to
lower Helmholtz numbers. However, the different bias flow rates
do not affect the Helmholtz number of the maximum.
The results of the double skin arrangements without bias flow
共dP = 0%兲 reveal a specific feature: A second damping maximum
appears. This second maximum is related to the second volume
behind the metering liner. The low porosity and therefore high
pressure ratio of the metering liner suppresses acoustic communi-
cation through its orifices already at a small pressure ratio of the
damping liner. The maxima corresponding to the metering volume
are at kl P ⬇ 0.25 and kl P ⬇ 0.3 for configuration 11-3 with V M
= 1447 cm3 and configuration 12-3 with V M = 941 cm3, respec-
tively. This demonstrates the same trend that a larger volume gen-
erates damping at lower Helmholtz numbers. However, it does not
follow the sequence found for the damping volume. The damping
volume of configuration 3 is larger than the metering volumes in
configurations 11-3 and 12-3 and yet its influence can be observed
at a higher Helmholtz number. This means that the effects of the
damping volume and any other adjacent volume have to be stud-
ied separately.
The model can successfully predict the effects of different
damping volumes and finds the maximum damping at the appro-
priate Helmholtz numbers.
Figure 14 presents configuration 12-3 under the influence of a
grazing flow of M = 0.1. Comparing these results to Fig. 13 reveal
0.6 dP 0%
dP 0.01%
0.5
dP 0.1%

0.4
dPT 3%
Dissipation ∆

0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2

0.1 0.1

0 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
kLp klp

Fig. 11 Influence of the circumferential porosity distribution, Fig. 13 Influence of the bias flow on configuration 12-3, graz-
bias flow dP = 0.01%, and grazing flow M = 0.05 ing flow M = 0. Measurements: symbols, model: lines.

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power SEPTEMBER 2011, Vol. 133 / 091503-7

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/15/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 0.6
dP 0%
0.5 dP 0.01%
dP 0.1%
dP 3%
Dissipation ∆
0.4 T duced by the model that the frequency bandwidth of the damping
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 the damping at a large given total pressure ratio, which usually
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
kl
p
Fig. 14 Influence of the bias flow on configuration 12-3, graz-
ing flow M = 0.1. Measurements: symbols, model: lines.
the effect of the grazing flow on the absorption. While the maxi-
mum damping occurs at the same Helmholtz number kl P ⬇ 0.8 if a
bias flow is present, the maximum is shifted to kl P ⬇ 1 without
bias flow. The maximum damping value is reduced for the no
共dP = 0%兲 and low 共dP = 0.01%兲 bias flow cases, where it is in-
creased at higher bias flow rates. The model predicts a rise of
absorption for all cases. Thus, it predicts a larger dissipation at
dP = 0.01%.
Figure 15 illustrates the improvements of the double skin con-
figurations at realistic engine conditions. A typical pressure ratio
across a combustor wall is dP = 3% with a grazing flow of about
M = 0.1. With an additional liner of low porosity, the pressure ratio
across the damping liner is reduced, keeping a total pressure ratio
of 3%. The damping performance of the double skin arrangements
is doubled compared with configuration 3. The results could be
further improved by adjusting the open area ratio between the two
liners, targeting the optimum pressure ratio for the damping liner.
8 Conclusions
The comprehensive experimental study has revealed the influ-
ence of many parameters on the damping performance of perfo-
rated liners.
While the number of orifices and their diameter only have a
minor effect on the absorption, the porosity and the pressure ratio
共or bias flow velocity兲 are the dominant parameters. First, there
exists an optimum pressure ratio where maximum damping per-
formance is reached, and second, higher porosity yields a better
damping performance. For the design of a liner, it is crucial to
regard the combination of these two conclusions. Just increasing
0.6
conf. 3: single skin
0.5 conf. 11−3: double skin, small volume
conf. 12−3: double skin, large volume
Dissipation ∆
the porosity at a given mass flow rate will lower the pressure ratio
and thus not necessarily improve the damping performance.
Increasing the wall thickness shows mainly negative effects on
the damping. It is demonstrated by the experiments and repro-
is reduced for the thicker wall.
The Helmholtz number at which the damping has a maximum
is mainly determined by the damping volume. The volume and the
Helmholtz number of maximum absorption have a reciprocal re-
lationship. Enlarging or reducing the volume increases or de-
creases the Helmholtz number accordingly.
Double skin configurations can be successfully used to improve
exists in gas turbine applications. The metering liner is used to
create a large pressure loss, so that the pressure ratio of the damp-
ing liner can be optimized to yield a high absorption. If a bias flow
is present 共dP ⫽ 0%兲, the Helmholtz number of the maximum
absorption is dependent on the inner damping volume alone, while
the outer metering volume adds an additional maximum for dP
= 0%.
The extensive database of experimental results was compared
with results from a thermo-acoustic network model. In general,
the thermo-acoustic model has proven to be a powerful tool in the
prediction of the absorption characteristic of a single and double
wall damper for a wide range of operating conditions and geo-
metrical variations. It has successfully demonstrated to provide
reliable results within the range of its limitations, i.e., 1D geo-
metrical changes, no circumferential variations, and linear absorp-
tion.
The experiments reveal the influence of various geometric,
aerodynamic, and acoustic parameters on the liner performance in
detail and with high accuracy. The impact of the combustion on
the results cannot be reproduced by these isothermal and atmo-
spheric tests. However, the behavior of the liner under high tem-
perature and high pressure conditions is of great interest. In order
to extend our database to include these additional parameters, a
new test facility has been established. The hot-acoustic-testrig
共HAT兲 will be able to provide high accuracy results at almost
realistic engine conditions.
Acknowledgment
This work is part of the GerMaTec project 共Contract No.
20T0602兲 within the LuFo 4 framework. It is funded in part by the
Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology 共BMWi兲 and ad-
ministered by the German Aerospace Center 共DLR PT-LF兲. Their
support is gratefully acknowledged.
Nomenclature
M ⫽ mean grazing flow Mach number
K ⫽ Rayleigh conductivity
R ⫽ energy reflection coefficient, orifice radius
T ⫽ energy transmission coefficient
V ⫽ cavity volume
c ⫽ speed of sound
⫽

0.4 dP damping liner pressure ratio

dPT ⫽ total pressure ratio for a double skin
0.3 configuration
k ⫽ wave number
0.2 l ⫽ length of the liner
la ⫽ active length of the perforation
0.1
lp ⫽ length of the perforation
p̂ ⫽ complex sound pressure
0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 r ⫽ reflection coefficient, duct radius
kl
p
s ⫽ orifice spacing
t ⫽ transmission coefficient, liner thickness
Fig. 15 Influence of the double skin arrangement at realistic x ⫽ axial coordinate
engine condition, bias flow dPT = 3%, grazing flow M = 0.1. Mea- ⌬ ⫽ energy dissipation coefficient
surements: symbols, model: lines. ␭ ⫽ wavelength

091503-8 / Vol. 133, SEPTEMBER 2011 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/15/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 ␳ ⫽ density Coupling due to Helmholtz Resonators,” ASME Paper No. GT2003-38168.
关7兴 Stow, S. R., and Dowling, A. P., 2004, “Low-Order Modelling of Thermoa-
␴ ⫽ normalized porosity coustic Limit Cycles,” ASME Paper No. GT2004-54245.
␪ ⫽ circumferential coordinate 关8兴 Chung, J., 1977, “Rejection of Flow Noise Using a Coherence Function
␻ ⫽ angular frequency Method,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 62共2兲, pp. 388–395.
a,b ⫽ subscripts referring to measurements A and B 关9兴 Kirchhoff, G., 1868, “Über den Einfluss der Wärmeleitung in Einem Gase auf
1,2 ⫽ subscripts referring to sections 1 and 2 die Schallbewegung,” Ann. Phys. Chem., 210共6兲, pp. 177–193.
关10兴 Blokhintsev, D. I., 1956, “Acoustics of a Nonhomogeneous Moving Medium,”
+,− ⫽ superscripts referring to the downstream and NACA Technical Memorandum 1399, originally published in 1946 in Russian
upstream directions language.
关11兴 Morfey, C. L., 1971, “Acoustic Energy in Non-Uniform Flows,” J. Sound Vib.,
References 14共2兲, pp. 159–170.
关12兴 Heuwinkel, C., Enghardt, L., and Röhle, I., 2007, “Experimental Investigation
关1兴 Howe, M. S., 1979, “On the Theory of Unsteady High Reynolds Number Flow of the Acoustic Damping of Perforated Liners With Bias Flow,” The 13th
Through a Circular Aperture,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 366, pp. 205– AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustic Conference, Paper No. AIAA-2007-3525, Rome,
223.
Italy, May 21–23.
关2兴 Bechert, D. W., 1980, “Sound Absorption Caused by Vorticity Shedding, Dem-
关13兴 Hughes, I. J., and Dowling, A. P., 1990, “The Absorption of Sound by Perfo-
onstrated With a Jet Flow,” J. Sound Vib., 70共3兲, pp. 389–405.
关3兴 Rienstra, S. W., 1981, “On the Acoustic Implications of Vortex Shedding From rated Linings,” J. Fluid Mech., 218, pp. 299–335.
an Exhaust Pipe,” ASME J. Eng. Ind., 103共4兲, pp. 378–384. 关14兴 Bellucci, V., Paschereit, C. O., and Flohr, P., 2002. “Impedance of Perforated
关4兴 Eldredge, J. D., and Dowling, A. P., 2003, “The Absorption of Axial Acoustic Screens With Bias Flow,” The Eighth AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustic Conference,
Waves by a Perforated Liner With Bias Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 485, pp. 307– Paper No. AIAA-2002-2437, Breckenridge, CO, June 17–19.
335. 关15兴 Jing, X., and Sun, X., 1999, “Experimental Investigation of Perforated Liners
关5兴 Macquisten, M. A., Holt, A., Whiteman, M., Moran, A. J., and Rupp, J., 2006, With Bias Flow,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 106共5兲, pp. 2436–2441.
“Passive Damper LP tests for Controlling Combustion Instability,” ASME Pa- 关16兴 Rupp, J., Carrotte, J., and Spencer, A., 2009. “Interaction Between the Acous-
per No. GT2006-90874. tic Pressure Fluctuations and the Unsteady Flow Field Through Circular
关6兴 Stow, S. R., and Dowling, A. P., 2003, “Modelling of Circumferential Modal Holes,” ASME Paper No. GT2009–59263.

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power SEPTEMBER 2011, Vol. 133 / 091503-9

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/15/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use