11th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference (26th AIAA Aeroacoustics Conference)

23 - 25 May 2005, Monterey, California

AIAA 2005-2913

Aeroacoustic of the VEGA Launcher Wind Tunnel Tests

and Full Scale Extrapolations
B. Imperatore *
CIRA Italian Aerospace Research Centre, 81043 Capua (CE), Italy
G. Guj
University 'Roma 3', 00146 Rome, Italy
A. Ragni
CIRA Italian Aerospace Research Centre, 81043 Capua (CE), Italy
Downloaded by Iqbal Gaziani on December 1, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-2913

A. Pizzicaroli
AVIO S.p.A, 00034 Colleferro (Rome), Italy
and
E. Giulietti**
University 'Roma 3', 00146 Rome, Italy

This work describes the main aspects of the extended experimental campaign aimed at
the characterization of the aeroacoustic environment created by the external aerodynamics
around the VEGA launcher, the expendable launch system developed by the European
Space Agency (ESA). In the frame of the VEGA program, a collaboration between AVIO,
CIRA and DIMI of University Roma 3 has been established for the evaluation of the
pressure fluctuations on the launcher external surface in order to determine the vibroacoustic loads on its structure. This issue is accomplished by extrapolating at full scales the
results obtained on the test model by utilizing proper analytical models reproducing the
main properties of the pressure fluctuations. The wall pressure fluctuation characterization
was addressed through wind tunnel tests at transonic and supersonic flow conditions on a
1:30 scaled model. In the present paper a specific attention is focussed on the technical
aspects and on the proposed analytical models for the full scale extrapolations and on the
acoustic behaviour of the full scale launcher, while in the companion paper the aspects
regarding the behaviour of the pressure wave at transonic flow conditions has been
addressed.

Nomenclature
Capital Roman
F
H
Ma

= generic function;
= generic function;
= Mach number;

Ing., Aeronautical Ground Testing Facilities Dept., Transonic Testing Group, Via Maiorise 1, Capua (CE)
Prof., Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Dept. (DIMI) University 'Roma 3', via della Vasca Navale 79, 00146,
Rome, Italy, guj@uniroma3.it

Ing., Aeronautical Ground Testing Facilities Dept., Icing Wind Tunnel, Via Maiorise 1, Capua (CE)

Ing., AVIO S.p.A Propulsione Aerospaziale, Corso Garibaldi 22, Colleferro (Roma)
**
Ing., Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Dept., Via della Vasca Navale 79, Roma

1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Copyright 2005 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved.

P
Re
S
St
U
UC

=
=
=
=
=
=

static pressure;
Reynolds number;
Power Spectral Density;
Strouhal Number;
velocity;
convection velocity;

Downloaded by Iqbal Gaziani on December 1, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-2913

Small Roman
a
c
f
h

=
=
=
=

constant exponent;
local velocity of sound;
frequency;
the launcher axis elevation with respect to the U direction;

j
p
q
s
u
v
x
r, , z

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

imaginary unit (j = 1 )
acoustic and dynamic pressure fluctuation;
dynamic pressure;
the azimuthal curvilinear coordinate (s= r);
velocity component in x direction;
velocity component in y direction;
x=z-1006.54 aeroacoustic abscissa;
cylindrical coordinates;

Capital Greek

= length scale of the launcher (=1006.54 mm);

= difference between two values;

Small Greek

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

incidence angle;
boundary layer thickness;
displacement thickness;
coherence function;
curvilinear distance between two transducers (=si-si);
kinematic viscosity;
density;
generic ;
2f;
axial distance between two transducers (=zi-zi);

Subscripts

= quantities in unperturbed flow;

Superscripts
*

= dimensionless quantities;

2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Downloaded by Iqbal Gaziani on December 1, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-2913

I.

Introduction

Acoustic environments, created by the rocket motors and the external aerodynamics of the launcher vehicles in
lift-off and flight conditions, are extremely important in view of the intensive acoustic pressure fields which can
excite the structures. The study of these excitations, of the resulting vibrations and noise transmission is of great
importance for the survival of the payloads and of the launcher equipments. Therefore a very good understanding of
the interaction between temporally & spatially random pressure fluctuations is needed. As matter of fact the full
scale experimental campaign is out of possibility and so a proper extrapolation mathematical model has to be
proposed to scale in a proper way the wind tunnel experiments, which allow the tuning of the coefficients, in the
extrapolation to full scale launcher.
Several models have been proposed in literature1,2,3,4,5,6 to reproduce the shape of the pressure auto-spectrum at
the wall in a turbulent boundary layer. The main problem encountered in the present applications is the significant
variation of the flow physics that may occur along the model due to the different flow conditions, e.g. attached
boundary layer, intermittent shock, separated flow. The shape of the pressure auto-spectrum in different flow
conditions may vary significantly7. Thus, it is not possible to determine a priori a model that is able to reproduce the
shape of the pressure spectrum independently of the pressure transducer position.
The knowledge of cross-correlation and cross-spectrum functions allows for the forcing functions to be correctly
computed in the evaluation of the structural dynamics and the flow induced vibrations of the launcher panel
surfaces8; as matter of fact the cross-correlation function globally characterizes the propagation of the pressure
perturbation close to the wall surface of the launcher9. The cross-spectra models proposed in literature10,11,12 assume
that the boundary layer is fully turbulent and the pressure field over the outer surface may be characterized as
temporally stationary with spatially homogeneous statistics. Therefore, the pressure field may be expressed by a
cross-correlation function that is decaying with spatial and time separation and is convected with the flow. The
common feature of the empirical models for the TBL developed so far is the separation of variables approach to
represent the correlation function dependence on the stream wise separation () and the cross flow separation (). It
should be stressed that the axisymmetry of the geometry and flow is not explicit in the formulations but it is
accounted for through the adjustable coefficients13.
The objectives of this paper are the development of an analytical dimensionless model for the external
aeroacoustics of the VEGA launcher and the simulation of the full scale behaviour.
A selected set of the most relevant results obtained from the post-processing of the experimental data is
presented and discussed along with the main properties of the boundary layer (BL) obtained on the launcher model
from the numerical simulations. The experimental data base for the transonic and supersonic conditions has been
developed in the framework of the collaboration among AVIO, CIRA and University Roma TRE.

II.

Experimental set up and test matrix

The scaled model, the same for both the experimental campaigns, has been equipped with 32 miniature KULITE
pressure transducers (Fig.1), flush mounted along the model surface in several positions in order to minimize the
intrusivity effects. The transducers location was organized into clusters in order for cross-correlations and crossspectra to be computed as well. In this way the validity of classical cross-spectra models was verified. Four
accelerometers have been located, grouped by two, in the vicinity of the model nose and trailing edge respectively;
they were respectively oriented along orthogonal directions.
In all the cases here considered, the adopted scaled model refers to the 4 stages clean configuration.
Transonic measurements have been carried out at the T1500 transonic wind tunnel of FOI (The Swedish Defence
Research Agency) in Stockholm. The selected Mach numbers spanned from Ma=0.83 up to Ma =0.98, while
different angles of incidence, up to 6, were considered.
Supersonic measurements were conducted in the DNW SST facility. The selected Mach numbers spanned from
Ma=2.0 up to Ma=3.0, while two angles of incidence have been considered (0 and 5). The sampling rates have
been fixed to 100kHz and 130kHz for transonic and supersonic flow conditions respectively, with an anti aliasing
filtering at half of the sampling rate.

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Figure 1. The sketch shows the number of transducers which are organised in cluster with different layout.

Downloaded by Iqbal Gaziani on December 1, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-2913

III.

Dimensionless fluctuating pressure model

Dimensional analysis permits the dimensionless representation of the original problem of the fluctuating pressure
spectrum in terms of independent, significant dimensionless parameters. A dimensional analysis has been performed
for the general representation of the original problem and for the definition of the analytical model of the type
proposed in literature7,14, which guarantees the extrapolation to the full scale; the considered reference quantities are
given in the sketches reported in Fig.2.

Figure 2. Sketch of the launcher model.

For the auto spectrum, based on the variable separation approach, the following form is proposed:

S ppU
= S *pp ( St , z * , Ma , * ) = H ( St , z * ) F1 ( Ma ) F2 ( * )
2
q 1
with five independent significant parameters:

S *pp =
St =

S ppU
q 1
2

: non dimensional spectrum

f 1
: Strouhal number based on the free stream velocity
U
4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(1)

z* =

Ma =

: longitudinal coordinate

U
: free stream Mach number
c

incidence angle
*

Under specific conditions, also the dimensionless function H ( St , z ) can be expressed through the separation
of variables approach leading to:

H ( St , z * ) = H 1 ( St ) H 2 ( z * )

(2)
According to Camussi et al.15, the general law proposed for H 1 ( St ) , that is a frequency function with unitary
integral area, has the form:

log10 [ H1 (st )] = A [log10 (St )] + B [log10 (St )] + C [log10 (St )] + D [log10 (St )] + E [log10 (St )] + F

Downloaded by Iqbal Gaziani on December 1, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-2913

(3)

An analytical approximation of H 2 ( z ) is very difficult to be driven, thus piece wise constant approximations are
proposed and adopted. The modulation of the spectra represented by H2(z*) is computed by integrating over St the
equation and enforcing that the integral of H1(St) has unity area.
The cross-spectrum assumes the form:

) (

S *pp ' = S *pp St , z * , Ma , * St ,U * , z * , s * e

2 z * St

U*

(4)

Thus three new independent dimensionless groups have been introduced for the cross-spectrum:

U* =

Uc
, velocity scale ratio,
U

z * =

, longitudinal separation,

s * =

, azimuthal separation.

We have to note that the dependence upon the Ma is recovered by the auto-spectrum, while the dependence on * is
negligible. Thus the coherence function, which appears in the cross-spectrum, assumes the following form:

(St ,U * , z * , s * ) = e

F3 ( z * ) F4 ( Ma ) St z *

F5 ( z * ) F6 ( Ma ) St s *

(5)

The possibility of using again simplified power laws has been explored on the basis of the experimental data base. In
the latter case the equations would simplify as follows:

F4 (Ma ) = Ma

a3

and

F6 (Ma ) = Ma

a5

(6)

The dimensionless equations are then obtained by various forms of best fitting on a large number of experiments.
In view of Eq.(1) the TBL displacement thickness 1 is a fundamental parameter but it is not measured in the
planned tests therefore it has to be determined numerically. The pressure fluctuation models require the BL integral
characteristics to be available, specifically the displacement thickness 1. A simplified CFD support is needed, as all
the necessary information are not available from direct measurements on the model. The proposed CFD model for
the BL characterization considers a number of simplified hypotheses, which are:
1.the geometry of the VEGA launcher is considered symmetric in cylindrical coordinates;
2.due to the small angle of attack the fluid dynamic conditions are considered symmetric in cylindrical
coordinates even in presence of the maximum incidence angle (6);
3.the fluid dynamics is in all cases 2D in cylindrical coordinates;
4.the compressible BL is solved along a stream line using the external boundary conditions given by
experimental measurements (pressure coefficients) of external flow;
5.the wall of the launcher is considered adiabatic and its temperature is equal to the total temperature;
6.the flow is considered steady.
The CFD code is based on the solution of the BL integral equations, and therefore provides only information on the
BL integral quantities.
An example of displacement thickness in transonic and supersonic conditions are shown in Fig.3.

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Downloaded by Iqbal Gaziani on December 1, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-2913

a)

b)

Figure 3. Displacement thickness in the turbulent case at Ma=0.83 (a) and

Ma=3.02 (b) for the launcher model.

IV.

Full scale extrapolation

The dimensional mathematical models of the auto and cross spectra, applied for the simulation of noise emission
at full scale, are determined by properly rescaling the non-dimensional models.
The dimensional auto-spectrum (in Pa2/Hz) is:

q
= S pp (, 1 , z , s, f , U , c, , , h ) = S ( St , z , Ma , ) 1
U
2

S pp

*
pp

(7)

where U, q, Ma are the full scale launcher free stream velocity, dynamic pressure, Mach number respectively
and 1 is calculated by the TBL simulation.
An analogous dimensional form is proposed for the cross-spectrum (in Pa2/Hz, complex quantity):

S pp ' = S pp ' (, 1 , z , s, f ,U , c, , , h,U C , , )

6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

(8)

V.

Results

Downloaded by Iqbal Gaziani on December 1, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-2913

An example of an Over All Sound Pressure Level (OASPL) for the model scale at Ma=0.98 is reported in Fig.4
as a function of x, it is evident the negligible effect of on the OASPL, while the position is extremely important,
and in contrast to Camussi et al. 15 because an universal analytical form can not be found.

Figure 4. OASPL evolution along the launcher model for Ma=0.98.

Figure 5. OASPL evolution along the launcher model for =0 in terms of microphones numbers, the
reference pressure is equal to the dynamic pressure downstream of the bow shock .
The effect of Ma, in supersonic regime, is focused in Fig.5, and, according to the Lowson law16, the OASPL
increases for decreasing Ma.
7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Downloaded by Iqbal Gaziani on December 1, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-2913

a)

b)

c)

Figure 6. Some representative auto-spectra along the launcher model computed at =0o:
Ma=0.83 (a), Ma=0.89 (b), Ma=0.98 (c).

In Fig.6 some representative auto-spectra along the launcher model in transonic conditions, computed at =0o
are reported. It is evident that the shape is quite similar for groups of microphones and so all the spectra belonging to
the same group can be made to collapse if a proper dimensionless form is adopted. Analogous considerations can be
performed in the supersonic cases (see for example Fig.7).

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Downloaded by Iqbal Gaziani on December 1, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-2913

Figure 7. Normalized auto-spectra evolution along the launcher model for Ma=3.02 and =0o.
In Figs.8 and 9 the experimental validation at the model scale, of one proposed analytical model is presented for
the auto and cross spectra respectively. The agreement between the analytical reconstruction and model sound
measurement is good; as a matter of fact the main features of the spectrum are well reproduced by the model.

Figure 8.

Dimensional auto-spectrum measured and reconstructed through the above reported analytical
models.
9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Downloaded by Iqbal Gaziani on December 1, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-2913

Figure 9.

Dimensional cross-spectrum measured and reconstructed through the above reported analytical
models.

VI.

Conclusion

Cross-spectra and overall sound pressure level represent fundamental quantities which are needed input for
estimating the structural response of the launcher and the acoustic transmission from the external field of fluctuating
pressure. They allowed us to determine the location of the most critical regions along the launcher at the different
Mach numbers analysed. The characterization of the aeroacoustic environment around the VEGA launcher at flight
conditions is obtained by analytical models which are tuned through the specific data base obtained in the
framework of the present experimental campaign.
In order for the experimental data from the scaled model to be reported on the full-scale launcher, the knowledge
of some relevant quantities at full-scale conditions is required. Specifically, once the dimensionless form of the autoor cross-spectra has been computed, the full-scale spectra are retrieved by rewriting the dimensional expression in
account of the full-scale magnitude of the reference parameters.
In addition to the position along the launcher model, auto-spectra are affected also by both the Mach number and
the angle of incidence, the Mach number being, however, the most relevant parameter influencing the auto-spectra
shape while the angle of incidence has a weak influence.
At the low transonic Mach numbers, specifically for Mach0.92, significant variations of the spectra shape are
observed depending on the nature of the boundary layer (e.g. close to the stagnation point, separations, shock
waves). At larger Mach (close to 1) the behaviour is much more regular and power law decays are observed.
In the supersonic condition the Flare zone is the region where the largest pressure peaks occur. This behaviour
happens independently from the Mach number. It is interesting to note that the largest peaks are obtained at the
lowest Mach which, therefore, represents the most critical situation.
Concluding, the use of the dimensionless representation for auto and cross spectra allows us to extrapolate the
model test results to full scale launcher, even in the cases in which the dimensions are slightly different from those
of VEGA.

Acknowledgments
The present research has been funded by AVIO in the framework of an ESA contract.

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

References

Downloaded by Iqbal Gaziani on December 1, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-2913

Efimtsov, B. M., Vibrations of a cylindrical panel in a field of turbulent pressure fluctuations, Soviet Physics-Acoustics,
Vol.32, No. 4, pp. 336-337, 1986.
2
Chase, D.M., The character of the turbulent wall pressure spectrum at sub convective wave numbers and a suggested
comprehensive model, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol.112, pp. 125-147, 1987.
3
Chase, D.M., The wave-vector-frequency spectrum of pressure on a smooth plane in turbulent boundary-layer flow at low
Mach number, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol.90, No.2, pp. 1032-1040, 1991.
4
Corcos, G.M., The structure of the turbulent pressure field in boundary-layer flows, Journal of Fluid Mech., Vol.18, pp.
353-378, 1963
5
Cousin, G., Sound from TBL induced vibrations, PhD Thesis KTH Marcus Wallenberg, Laboratory for Sound and
Vibration Research, Stockholm, 1999.
6
Robertson, J.E., Wind tunnel investigation of the effects of Reynolds number and model size on the steady and fluctuating
pressure experienced by a cone cylinder missile configuration at transonic speed, AEDC-TR-66-266, 1967.
7
Troclet, B., Schott, M. and Vanpeperstraete, S., Experimental analysis of noise at lift-off of the Ariane 5 launch-vehicle,
Aerospatiale Internal Report, 1998.
8
Blake, W.K., Mechanics of flow induced sound and vibrations, Appl. Math. and Mech., Acad. Press Inc., Orlando (Fl),
1986.
9
Bendat, J.S., Piersol, A.G., Random Data: Analysis & Measurement Procedures, Wiley-Interscience, 2nd edition, 1986.
10
Corcos, G. M., Resolution of pressure in turbulence, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 35(2), 1963, pp. 192-199;
11
Efimtsov, B. M., Characteristics of the field of turbulent wall pressure fluctuations at large Reynolds numbers, Soviet
Physics-Acoustics, Vol.28, No. 4, pp. 289-292, 1982.
12
Maestrello, L., Radiation from and panel response to a supersonic turbulent boundary, Journal of Sound and Vibration,
Vol.10, No.2, pp. 261-295, 1969.
13
Chase, D.M., Modeling the wave-vector frequency spectrum of turbulent boundary layer wall pressure, Journal of Sound
and Vibration, No.70, pp. 29-68, 1980.
14
Graham, W. R., A comparison of models for the wave-number-frequency spectrum of turbulent boundary layer pressures.
Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol.206, No.4, pp. 541-565, 1997.
15
Camussi, R., Guj, G., Ragni A., Wall pressure fluctuations induced by turbulent boundary layers over surface
discontinuities, Journal of Sound and Vibration, in press 2004.
16
Lowson, M.V., Prediction of Boundary Layer Pressure Fluctuations, Wyle Lab. Res. Staff rep., WR 67-15, 1967.

11
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics