UDT Europe 2005 Amsterdam, 21-23 June 2005

Surface ship flow noise 1/6

Surface ship underwater radiated fIow noise

Christ de Jong
*
, TNO, Netherlands
Johan Bosschers, MARIN, Netherlands
Hans Hasenpflug, Royal Netherlands Navy
Ted Farabee, NSWC/CD, USA

*
Dr C.A.F. de Jong, TNO Science and Industry, IST Acoustics
P.O. Box 155, 2600 AD Delft, The Netherlands, E-mail: christ.dejong@tno.nl
ABSTRACT
An increasing focus on naval operations in littoral waters and the advances in weapon and sensor
capabilities are driving an increased interest in the control of the underwater signatures of naval
platforms. The technology for the control of machinery and propeller noise is well advanced, but
there is a short fall in knowledge of the mechanisms that govern the noise due to the flow along the
hull and appendages. The United States and Royal Netherlands Navies have started a joint R&D
program on Mechanisms and Prediction of Surface Ship Radiated Flow Noise, with the objective to
identify the mechanism and to develop tools for predicting flow noise levels of surface ships. This
paper gives an overview of the program and the results of initial studies. Several possible noise
source mechanisms have been identified on the basis of a literature survey and the results of a
series of underwater noise measurements on full-scale frigates.
INTRODUCTION
Underwater signature control is essential to limit the threat of sea mines and torpedoes and to
guarantee the operational availability of the platform. The expected stringent underwater noise
requirements for future Navy combatants demand a well-balanced set of measures for the various
noise sources on the platform. The technology for control of machinery and propeller noise is well
advanced, see e.g. [1]. However, there is a limited knowledge of the mechanisms that control the
underwater-radiated noise from the flow along the hull and appendages, especially for surface
ships. Figure 1 shows known surface ship flow noise sources. There is a need for experimentally
validated prediction tools to better understand the behavior of surface ship radiated flow noise. The
Royal Netherlands and United States Navies have expressed a common interest in this area that
has resulted in a joint research program, to be carried out between 2004 and 2007.
Bow wave
Splash/air
entrainment
Appendages
wake Two-phase flow at and beneath
free surface, surface waves
TBL excitation/
hull radiation
Bow wave
Splash/air
entrainment
Appendages
wake Two-phase flow at and beneath
free surface, surface waves
TBL excitation/
hull radiation
Bow wave
Splash/air
entrainment
Appendages
wake Two-phase flow at and beneath
free surface, surface waves
TBL excitation/
hull radiation
Bow wave
Splash/air
entrainment
Appendages
wake Two-phase flow at and beneath
free surface, surface waves
TBL excitation/
hull radiation

Figure 1 - Surface ship flow noise sources
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this project are to:
1. Determine and quantify by measurements on model-scale and full-scale vehicles the sources of
flow noise generated by surface ships in terms of ship speed and hull shape.
2. Develop and validate scaling laws and theoretical models for predicting flow noise levels of
surface ships with conventional and advanced hull forms.
UDT Europe 2005 Amsterdam, 21-23 June 2005

Surface ship flow noise 2/6
APPROACH
In order to meet the objectives, the following work approach has been developed:
a) Flow noise sources for surface ships will be determined and quantified for different conditions
through full-scale measurements of naval ships (both USN and RNLN ships).
b) Computational models will be developed for predicting the acoustic signature resulting from
flow-noise sources on current and future surface combatants. The models will be developed so
that they can be used to evaluate hull shapes, construction methods and hull treatments with
respect to acoustic requirements. Coordinated theoretical analysis and experimental small- and
large-scale testing will be conducted in parallel to support the development of theoretical and
analytical models of flow-noise mechanisms.
c) The computational prediction tools will be validated through a comparison of predicted values
with the measured values on model and full scale. Various model scales are planned to be
utilized in the program, which will help to determine, validate and refine scaling rules to be
applied.
Surface ship flow noise is an area of research in which little experience exists for conducting
detailed model and full-scale measurements. Specific challenges that must be addressed with basic
development work under this program include:
a) The flow noise levels being measured are low and under normal test conditions may be masked
by other noise sources.
b) Flow noise is caused by complicated physical phenomena in the flow related with the presence
of a free surface: Air entrainment will lead to the formation of bubbles which may radiate noise
and which will interact with the flow. Theoretical and experimental tools to understand these
details are not currently available and must be developed.
c) The scaling effects of flow and the influence of water quality on bubble behavior, such as the
difference between fresh and salt water, are considered to be substantial, but are not
quantified. The scaling laws that apply to the proposed experiments must be determined.
FULL-SCALE EXPERIMENTS
In an early stage of the program, exploratory measurements have been carried out on full-scale
naval vessels, in order to estimate the contribution of flow noise to the underwater-radiated noise.
By measuring with an acoustical antenna, the noise source distribution along the ship length has
been determined for various ship speeds. This enables to separate the underwater noise
contribution of the bow waves and the wake from propeller and machinery noise.

Figure 2 - RNLN and USN surface ships during full-scale trials: M-class frigate (left) and DDG51-
class destroyer

In the (classified) results of the full-scale antenna measurements, one can recognize a significant
contribution of the bow waves that is not much lower than the contributions of machinery and
propeller noise. In addition to this identifiable contribution of the bow waves, flow noise generated
by the turbulent boundary layer (TBL) will contribute to the radiated noise along the complete
length of the ship, either by direct radiation or via excitation of hull vibrations and radiation. In the
antenna output, this noise cannot be distinguished from other distributed noise sources, like
machinery noise transmitted via piping on board.





UDT Europe 2005 Amsterdam, 21-23 June 2005

Surface ship flow noise 3/6
The full-scale trial results confirmed the relevance of surface ship radiated flow noise. The trials
have led to a useful set of data of flow noise at various ship speeds. For use in prediction models,
these data have to be complemented by theoretical models of the relevant flow noise mechanisms.
In view of the results of the full-scale trials, the focus is on bow wave and TBL modeling.
FLOW NOISE SOURCE MECHANISMS
Studies of flow noise source mechanisms involve two disciplines:
Hydrodynamics determines the generation of turbulent pressure fluctuations and bubbles.
Acoustics determines how these source mechanisms radiate sound directly or via excitation of
ship hull vibrations
Turbulent Boundary Layer (TBL) noise
The direct sound radiation of a turbulent boundary layer is very inefficient, due to its quadrupole
characteristics. However, in theory, the efficiency may largely increase in the presence of air
bubbles [2], a situation typical for the flow around a surface ship. Moreover, TBL noise may become
important because the TBL pressure fluctuations excite hull plate vibrations radiate more efficiently.
The prediction of underwater-radiated TBL noise is complicated by various mechanisms. The
radiation efficiency of the hull plates is strongly influenced by fluid loading [3] and by the presence
of ribs and stiffeners [4,5]. Prediction models require input information of the spatial and temporal
characteristics of the TBL pressure fluctuations. The model for the TBL spectrum suggested by
Chase [6] is only valid for a fully developed, single-phase TBL flow along an infinitely large, flat,
rigid plate. The actual flow around a surface ship is much more complex. Attempts are being made
to estimate the characteristics of the TBL surface pressure spectra from a numerical solution of
Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes equations (RANS/SM), see [7], including free surface capture
techniques. Computational Fluid Dynamics calculations are compared against scale model
measurement results for the Model 5415 hull form (see Figure 3 and www50.dt.navy.mil/5415).

Figure 3 - US Navy Combatant, DTMB 5415
Bow wave noise
The bow wave noise is related with wave breaking and the resulting bubble generation. These
mechanisms have been studied extensively for wind-generated waves at the ocean surface, due to
the importance of the prediction of wave dissipation, the exchange of gasses between the ocean
and the atmosphere and the contribution of surface waves to the ambient noise in the oceans.
There are, however, some distinct differences between the characteristics of wind generated
breaking waves and ship generated waves. The wave structure around a ship hull, with the bow in
particular, is illustrated well by the Kelvin wave pattern in which the ship hull is represented by a
moving point source, see Figure 4. The wave pattern
can be divided into transverse and divergent waves,
where the divergent waves are contained in the well-
known Kelvin wedge. Typically, the wave pattern of
frigates is dominated by the (divergent) bow wave
system.
The bow waves and the wave breaking depend strongly
on the shape of the bow and on the speed of the ship.
The dynamics of the wave breaking is influenced by the
presence of wind generated surface waves and the
resulting ship motions. Breaking may occur at
subsequent wave crests of the bow wave, see e.g.
Figure 5.


Figure 4 - The Kelvin wave pattern [8]
UDT Europe 2005 Amsterdam, 21-23 June 2005

Surface ship flow noise 4/6

Figure 5 - A bow wave pattern with a spilling and a plunging breaker

Following terminology from deep water ocean breaking waves, one can distinguish between
different types of wave breaking:
Spilling breaker: the wave crest breaks and vorticity
and bubbles spill down the front face of the wave
resulting in an area of aerated water on the wave face.
Plunging breaker: the wave crest exhibits an
overturning jet that impinges on the water surface,
entrapping an air cavity that develops into bubble
plumes. Generally, these jets are already entrained
with air before impingement on the surface. After
impact, the splash-up may contain secondary jets,
which again entrap an air cavity.

Most of the noise due to breaking waves is caused by oscillating air bubbles and clouds of air
bubbles. This noise depends on the amount of air that is entrained and on the bubble size
distribution. The mechanism of air entrainment is different for the different types of wave breaking.
It is quite complicated and very difficult to scale: Froude number (the ratio of inertial forces to
gravity forces), Weber number (the ratio of inertial forces to surface tension forces), Reynolds
number (the ratio of inertial forces to viscous forces), turbulence intensity and water quality all
influence the entrainment process, see e.g. [9].
Individual bubbles will emit sound when they are formed, due to entrainment, splitting or
coalescence, or under influence of external pressure fluctuations [10]. The fundamental and
dominant oscillation of a micro bubble is radial expansion and contraction, which exhibits a sharply
defined resonance. For air bubbles in water at less than one atmosphere this resonance occurs at a
frequency [m] [m/s] 3 R f
R
, where R is the mean radius of the bubble (see e.g. [11]).
There is only limited information available on the bubble parameters in the bow wave region of a
ship. Reference to the bubble distribution in a ships wake is made in a paper on full-scale
experiments by Trevorrow et al. [12], in laboratory experiments of Waniewski et al. [13] and in a
numerical study by Carrica et al. [14]. The limited evidence presented here indicates that one may
expect bubbles in the wake near the ship hull with sizes of the order of magnitude of 10 m to
1 mm. The void fraction is unknown, but may certainly be as large as 10%. This range of sizes
corresponds with resonance frequencies between 3 and 300 kHz. That means that it is unlikely that
individual bubbles generate much noise at lower frequencies. It is believed that wind generated
surface waves produce noise at lower frequencies via oscillation of clouds of bubbles (see e.g. [15])
as is illustrated in Figure 7, that is taken from [16]. One of the aims of the present study is to
investigate whether a similar mechanism occurs in the bow wake of the ship. One obvious
difference with wind generated wave breaking is that the bubble plumes generated by the bow
waves will be much more stretched out, due to convection along the ship hull.
Presently, it is not possible to calculate the wave breaking and air entrainment in the bow waves of
ships. That means that the development of prediction models (scaling laws) for bow wave noise
relies heavily on experimental evidence. In addition to the full-scale experiments, scale model
experiments will be performed at various scales.


Figure 6: A plunging breaker
UDT Europe 2005 Amsterdam, 21-23 June 2005

Surface ship flow noise 5/6

Figure 7 - An estimate of the radiated acoustic power per cubic meter of bubble sheet in the surf
zone for a spilling/plunging breaker, from Deane [16]. Line B corresponds to bubble
noise, line A might be due to bubble cloud oscillations.
SCALE MODEL EXPERIMENTS
Within the scope of the US/NL Flow Noise program, a number of scale model experiments will be
performed in the towing basins of NSWC (Carderock) and MARIN (Ede) on both conventional and
advanced naval ship hull geometries, like those shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8 - conventional and advanced ('tumble home) hull form scale models
Scale model experiments for surface ship wave resistance are usually performed at a Froude
number that is identical to the full-scale. Hence, towing test for a geometrical scale factor are
carried out at a speed that is a factor
1/2
of the full-scale speed. Due to this scaling, the Weber
number is reduced with a factor
2
and the Reynolds number with a factor
3/2
. To investigate these
scaling effects, the flow noise scale model experiments are carried out at a number of different
scaling factors, ranging from 1:20 to 1:5. Moreover, the salinity and the surfactants of the (fresh)
water in the towing basins differ significantly from that of sea water and these have a significant
effect on the bubble size distribution and the resulting sound production. It has been clearly
demonstrated in experiments by Orris and Nicholas [17] that the bubble plume for a plunging jet in
salt water contains more small bubbles than that in fresh water. A partial explanation is that
bubbles in fresh water coalesce more easily, while in salt water the bubbles repel each other due to
their surface physical-chemical properties. The larger bubbles in fresh water rise more easily to the
surface.
Hence, the scale model experiments do not provide a direct scaled result for the underwater-
radiated flow noise, but provide a means to increase the understanding of the relevant mechanisms
and to obtain experimental evidence of scaling laws.
MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES
The scale model experiments require a combination of hydrodynamic and acoustic measurement
techniques. TBL hull pressure fluctuations are measured with flush mounted pressure transducers.
Underwater-radiated sound pressures are measured with hydrophones. In principle, the towing
basins are an inappropriate environment for acoustical measurements. The towing carriages and
other equipment generate a large background noise. To solve this problem, a `silent towing system
is being developed for the flow noise tests. The hard walls of the basin cause strong reflections,
UDT Europe 2005 Amsterdam, 21-23 June 2005

Surface ship flow noise 6/6
resulting in a highly reverberant environment. Therefore, the measurements will be carried out with
a specially designed near field acoustic antenna, which reduces the influence of reverberation and
allows for localization of acoustic sources along the length of the hull. The acoustical measurements
are combined with video observations of the flow around the hull, both under and above the water
surface. Currently, several techniques for measuring the underwater bubble size distribution are
being evaluated.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Surface ship radiated flow noise is a limiting factor in the reduction of the underwater acoustic
signature. It has to be taken into account in the design of a balanced set of signature reducing
measures for surface ships. The full-scale measurements undertaken under this program have
already confirmed that bow wave flow noise does contribute to the signature. The contribution of
TBL noise is still under investigation. It is the aim of this program to be able to quantify the effect
of ship speed, hull shape and measures like hull treatments on the radiated flow noise.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The US/NL Flow Noise program is funded by the US Office of Naval Research and the Dutch Ministry
of Defense. It is carried out by the Carderock Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center, the
Department of Naval Architecture of the Royal Netherlands Navy, the Maritime Research Institute
Netherlands and TNO Science and Industry.
REFERENCES
1. C.A.F. De Jong 2002 Proc. UDT 2002. La Spezia 'On the prediction of machinery noise
transmission to underwater'
2. D.G. Crighton & J.E. Ffowcs Williams 1969 Journal of Fluid Mechanics 36(3), 585-603. 'Sound
generation by turbulent two-phase flow'
3. M.L. Rumerman 2002 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 111(1), 75-79. 'The effect
of fluid loading on radiation efficiency'
4. M.L. Rumerman 2002 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 111(3), 1274-1279.
'Estimation of broadband acoustic power radiated from a turbulent boundary layer-driven
reinforced finite plate section due to rib and boundary forces'
5. M.L. Rumerman 2003 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 114(2), 737-744.
'Estimation of broadband power levels radiated from turbulent boundary layer-driven ribbed
plates having dissimilar sections'
6. D.M. Chase 1987 Journal of Sound and Vibration 112(1), 125-147. 'The character of the
turbulent wall pressure spectrum at sub-convective wave numbers and a suggested
comprehensive model'
7. Y.T. Lee, W.K. Blake and T.M. Farabee 2005 ASME Journal of Fluids Engineering 'Modelling of
wall pressure fluctuations based on time mean flow field'
8. E. V. Lewis (ed.) 1988 Principles of Naval Architecture, Volume II. SNAME
9. H. Chanson 1997 International Journal for Multiphase Flow 23(1), 193-203. 'Air bubble
entrainment in open channels: flow structure and bubble size distributions'
10. M.S. Longuet-Higgins 1990 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 87(2), 652-661.
'Bubble noise spectra'
11. T.G. Leighton, 1994 The acoustic bubble, London: Academic Press Ltd
12. M.V. Trevorrow, S. Vagle and D.M. Farmer 1994 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
95(4), 1922-1930. 'Acoustical measurements of microbubbles within ship wakes'
13. T.A. Waniewski, C.E. Brennen and F. Raichlen 2001 Journal of Fluids Engineering 123, 57-63.
'Measurement of air entrainment by bow waves'
14. P.M. Carrica, D. Drew, F. Bonetto and R.T. Lahey Jr 1999 International Journal of Multiphase
Flow 25, 257-305. 'A polydisperse model for bubbly two-phase flow around a surface ship'
15. A. Prosperetti 1988 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 84(3), 1042-1054. 'Bubble-
related ambient noise in the ocean'
16. G.B. Deane 1997 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 105(2, Pt.1), 2671-2689.
'Sound generation and air entrainment by breaking waves in the surf zone'
17. G.J. Orris & M. Nicholas 2000 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 107(2), 771-787.
'Collective oscillations of fresh and salt water bubble plumes'