Transfer function method of measuringacoustic intensity

in a duct system with flow

J. Y. Chungand D. A. Blaser

Engineering Department, Motors Mechanics General Research Laboratories, Michigan I, Varren, 48090
{Received 1980; 5May acceptedpublication for 21August 1980)

A new methodmeasuring of the acoustic intensity ofplane ina duct flow described. waves with is In this method,acoustic function two the transfer between locations duct used determine inthe is to the acoustic

intensity. caseno the Inthe of flow, transfer-function reduces formulation toacross-spectral relation similar
totherelation tomeasure used acoustic intensitythree in dimensions. In contrasttherelation three to in

dimensions, the however,cross-spectral for duct not formulation a is limitedaccuracy microphone in bythe

spacing.new The method been has verified experimentally oflaboratoryTest with series a tests. results
obtained transfer bythe function reveal the acoustic transmitted the method that net power along pipe
increasestheMach as number increases. acoustic The power radiated thepipe from opening, however,

remains unchanged with increasing number. difference the Mach This between transmitted radiated and the power appears due sound tobe to absorption by caused vorticity shedding pipe atthe opening.
PACSnumbers: 43.85.Dj, 47.60.+ i, 43.20.Mv, 43.28.Py
INTRODUCTION

The use of the cross-spectral

method of measuring

quires a small microphone spacing relative to the wavelength due to the finite difference approximation, while in the case of plane-wave propagation, no restriction is

acoustic intensity '' has been shown to be effective in

imposed on the microphone spacing.

evaluating soundradiation (or absorption)from a structural surface. The method is applicable to general three-dimensional wave propagation. It is restricted, however, to a condition of no-mean flow. Munro and

I. ACOUSTIC INTENSITYIN A DUCTWITHOUTFLOW

A. Formulation of acoustic intensity

Ingard 3 suggested that the use of the cross-spectral

technique can be extended to a case of plane-wave pro-

pagation in a uniform flow field, provided additional terms are added to the expression for the intensity. The validity of this expression, however, has not been demonstrated experimentally. A previous experimental
work on the acoustic measurement in a duct system with

Consider a stationary random acoustic propagationin a duct system as depictedin Fig. 1. The acousticpressure p at a given location, shownas a dottedline, can be expressedin terms of its incidentand reflected componentsPi and p,, respectively,or,

flow was conductedby Alfredson4 who used the standingwave-ratio

mission

P=Pi+Pr.

(1)

method to evaluate the sound power trans-

in a duct.

For plane-wave propagation, the magnitude of the acoustic intensity associated with the incident wave can
be defined as,

This paper describes a different method of measuring acoustic intensity in a duct system with flow. The
method uses a transfer-function measurement to de-

(2)

termine the acoustic intensity in a duct and is applicable to the condition of plane-wave propagation in a uniform flow. In conjunction with the transfer function

whereSpp the autospectraldensity p andpc is is of

the characteristic acoustic impedance. Likewise, the magnitude of the acoustic intensity associated with the reflected wave is,

method, Morfey's definition and formulation for s, 7

sound powder a flow field was adopted. Verification in
of this new technique was made by a series of laboratory tests with flow, which include a comparison of sound power measurements made both inside and outside of a duet system. The inside measurement was made with
the new method which is valid in the flow field while the

[Ilr=sp,/pc ,

(3)

where S,.is theauto spectral density Pt. In order of

to establish relationbetween andSr onecould, the Sii
first of all, establish the relation between p andp by introducing a convolution integral with an impulsive response
7/' or ,

outside measurement was made with the cross-spectral method. Strictly, the cross-spectral method cannot be used in a flow field. However, all the outside measurements were made far away from the duet opening, hence the effect of flow is negligible. Excellent agreement between the two sound power measurements was obtained within the frequency range where the conservation of acoustical energy is known to exist.

pr(t)for(r)p,(t - r)dr.
,

(4)

One has, from Eq. (4),

A new expression of acoustic intensity for a planewave propagation with no flow is also presented. This

E{p,(t)p(t r)}= +
or

r(rl)E{p,(t)p,(t r- r/)}dr/, (5) +

expression significantly is different fromthatof the

general cross-spectral method. The general ease re-

1570

J.Acoust. Am. Soc. 68(6), Dec. 1980

0001-4966/80/121570-08500.80 1980 Acoustical ofAmerica Society

1570

Downloaded 03 Aug 2012 to 217.64.162.238. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/journals/doc/ASALIB-home/info/terms.jsp

or

s,,,,
SOUND SOURCE

+ I.
it can be shown that

Similarly,

S,W,,.=S,,/[ l/R['. 1+

(14)

Substituting aboveexpressions SisiandSpp the of into

Eqs. (2) and (3), one obtainsthe magnitudeof the acouFIG. 1. Incident and reflected pressure waves at a duct section.

stic intensity components in the direction of the incident and reflected waves, respectively, as
(15)

(R,i(r) =

r(v)(Rii(r-v)dv,

(6)

and

where denotes expected E the value (Rroi the and is cross-correlation function Pi and while(Riiis the of Pr
autocorrelation function of Pi.
transform of Eq. (6), or

IIl=s,/[oc[1

(16)

Taking the Fourier

The magnitude of the net acoustic intensity in the direction of the incident wave can then be defined as,

;i (r)e dr (R,i 'j2'

= r(n) ( r - n) 2''dr, e' (7)
and defining a complex reflection coefficient R as the Fourier transform of the impulsive response r, one has

[Io]=[I[i- [IIr,
where the subscript 0 indicates the no-flow condition.

(17)

From Eqs. (15), (16),and (17), we obtain

[iol:(s,,/oc)[(1- Inl-)/11

(18)

from Eq. (7)

R(f) r()e '2'"

=S/S
Silarly,

B. Theoretical basisof the measurement technique

(8)

To evaluate acoustic the intensityin a ductbasedon

Eq. (18) requires measurements of the autospectral
density and the complex reflection coefficient of the acoustic pressure. Measurement of the autospectral density is a routine matter requiring a single microphone. Determination of the complex reflection coefficient, however, cannot be achieved easily with a single pressure measurement.

it can be shown from Eq. (4) that

Using the relations in Eqs. (8) and (9), the relation be-

tween S andtheautospectral density of thetotal S

acoustic pressure p can now be derived.

The autocorrelation of p can be expressed in terms of the incident and reflected-wave components as,

,,(r)-E{[p,(t) +p(t)][p,(t+ r)+p(t + r)]}

=(r)+i(r)+(r)+(r).
The Fourier transform of Eq. (10) yields,

(10)
(11)

S-S

+ S+ S+

According to the theory developed in Refs. 5 and 6, the complex pressure reflection coefficient R can be. expressed in terms of the transfer functions between acoustic pressures at two fixed locations in the duct. As depicted in Fig. 2, let microphones be placed at locations I and 2 along the duct wall, and let s be the spacing between these microphones. Then according

where * denotesa complex conjugate. It is clear from Eqs. (8), (), ana (11) tat

to Refs. 5 and 6, the complex pressure reflection coefficient at microphone location I is

S- (1+ R)(1

Rx= (Hx2 H i )/(H r - Hx2) ,

where

(19)

Hx2=Sm/Sxx

(20)

is the acoustic transfer function, Sm is the cross-spectral density between the two microphone signals, and S is the autospectral density of the pressure at microI
SOUND FLOW SOURCE

phone location1, also Hi =e 'jksandHr=e + (k=wave-

i i
I

li

i
i

P2i

number). It can be shown from Eq. (19) that

1-JR, [2 4 sin(ks)Im(H2)/[HH2[' =,.2

and

(21)

FIG. 2. Two-microphone

measurement system.

1571

J. Acoust.Soc. Am., Vol. 68, No. 6, December1980

J.Y. Chungand D. A. Blaser' Measuring acousticintensity

1571

Downloaded 03 Aug 2012 to 217.64.162.238. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/journals/doc/ASALIB-home/info/terms.jsp

tic velocity, respectively, M is the mean flow Mach number, pc is the characteristic acoustic impedance, and the brackets denote a time-averaged quantity. For

a stationary random acoustic propagation, Eq. (26) can

be rewritten as

lIf I= (1+ M)
x

Re[S,]dco + (M/pc)
S,,dco, (*7)

Sdco (MOC) +

where cois the angular frequency and S is e crossspectral density betweenp and u, also S and S are
the autospectral densities of p and u, respectively. A c-

cordg to Eq. (27), an expression of e frequency

FIG. 3. Experimental apparatus for verifying the theory of

spectrum of acoustic intensity can also be given as

acoustic intensity in a flow field.

[If()]- (1+M)Re[Su]+(M/pc)S+MpcSuu. (28)

(22)
Introducing the complex reflection coefficient R given

]l +R]2=4sin2(ks)/]H,-Hm] 2.

by Eqs. (8) and (9), the expression in Eq. (28) can be

rewritten as (see the Appendix for derivations)

Substituting Eqs. (21) and (22) into Eq. (18), one has

[Io[-- -(Sfpc)[Im(H2)/sin(ks)]
or

(23)
as

+hi .

(29)

Usg Eqs. (13) and (14), Eq. (29) can be rewritten

[Io[-- - (1/pc)[Im m)/sin(ks)], (S

where Im indicates the imaginary part.

(24)
In contrast to
where

Eq. (18), Eq. (24) reveals that the net acoustic intensity
in a duct for plane-wave propagation without flow can be determined from the cross-spectral density between acoustic pressures at two locations along the duct wall.

[Ifl , - II,[r,

(30)

Furthermore, it showsthat the intensity is directly

proportional to the imaginary part of the cross-spectral density. This is not surprising, however, since it was shown previously that this proportionaiRy exists even in a general case of three-dimensional wave propagation for which the acoustic intensity was shown to be

and

are e maitude of the acoustic intensity components in e direction of the cident and reflected waves, respectively, with mean flow Mach number M. It is ob-

Iio1=- [Im(S2)/pcks].

(25)

vious that Eqs. (29), (31), and (32) reduce to Eqs. (18), (2), and (3), respectively, when M=0.

This general expression was derived using finite difference approximations to evaluate the acoustic velocity from the acoustic pressure gradient; hence its application is restricted to small values of ks. It is interest-

I. Theoreticalbasis the measurement of technique

Just as in the case without flow using Eq. (18), to determine the acoustic intensity in a duct with flow using

ing to note, however,

that no such restriction

is im-

posed on Eq. (24) for plane-wave propagation.

II. ACOUSTIC INTENSITY IN A DUCT WITH FLOW

Eq. (29) requires measurementsof the quantitiesS and

R. The transfer function relation given by Eq. (19) is
applicable to the case where a uniform flow exists provided H i and H r are redefined as

A. Formulation of acoustic intensity

The definition of acoustic intensity in a flow field is considerably different from that in a soundfield without flow.
and

Hi =exp{-j[ks/(1 + M)]},

(33)

In this paper Morley's expression for acoustic intensity

is applied to a uniform duct flow with plane-wave propagation. The wave propagation is assumed to be stationary random and all results are applicable to the special
case of a deterministic process.

Hr= exp{+j [ks/(1-M)]}.

(29), one has

(34)

Hence, substituting Eqs. (19), (33), and (34) into Eq.

According to Morley 7 the magnitude of the net acoustic intensity in a uniform duct flow in the axial direction
can be expressed as

{I'l- 4pc sina[ks/(1 - M2)]

(35)

(26)
where p and u are the acoustic pressure and the acous1572 J. Acoust.Soc.Am., Vol. 68, No. 6, December 1980

Equation (35) shows that, due to flow, the crossspectral density alone cannot completely describe the
J.Y. Chungand D. A. Blaser:Measuring acoustic intensity 1572

Downloaded 03 Aug 2012 to 217.64.162.238. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/journals/doc/ASALIB-home/info/terms.jsp

lCALCULATOR I
LAP, ;I
/!1

DIGITAL SIGNAL

MEASURING AMPLIFIERS

MICROPHONE POWER

SUPPLIES

I'--

MICROPHONE '-J r
SUPPLIES !

POWER

L_J
FIG.
MICROPHONES

4.

Instrumentation

(CROSS-SPECTRAL
system.
METHOD)
FLOW

SOURCE

j12 MICROPHONES (TRANSFER-FUNCTI

METHOD)

l
RANDOM NOISE SOURCE

--''' ACOUSTIC PROPAGATION FLOW '-' ' --'"-Z

130

soundpower transmitted in a duct system (as is the

case with no flow). It should be noted, however, that
110

flow not only affects the incident and the reflected sound

Powercomponents the factors of (1 +M) 2 and(1-M) 2, by

respectively, as shownin Eqs. (31) and (32), but also

changes value of the autospectraldensitiesSii and the

90 80 70

SprPr to changes theacoustic due in impedance throughout the duct system.

III. EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION

OF THEORIES

60 50 40

To verify the transfer function method it is desirable

to have a flow field with known acoustic intensity to be
used as a reference to the test result. Such an acoustic

field, however,is diffiucltto find sinceno existing

method is available for calibrating the intensity field in flow. An indirect approach was then adopted to calibrate the intensity field. In this approach, it assumed that the acoustic energy is conserved within the frequency range of interest such that the sound power
transmitted in the duct with flow is the same as that

30

I
FREQUENCY (kHz)

a) M-O
130

110

radiated from the duct opening. The latter quantity was determined experimentally using the general cross spectral method which is applicable in the region out-

90

side the duct where the effect of flow is negligible.

During the same test, the new transfer-function
was used inside the duct to determine
transmission in the flow. The inside

80
70 60

method

the sound power

and the outside

measurement results were then compared to determine the validity of the new method.

50
40

A. Apparatus and instrumentation

The experimental apparatus, as shown in Fig. 3, consists of a pipe system, a two-microphone station for measuring the acoustic intensity within the pipe, and a two-microphone probe for measuring the acoustic in1573 J. Acoust.Soc.Am., Vol. 68, No. 6, December 1980

30 0

1
FREQUENCY (kHz)

b) M-O.

FIG. 5. Typical soundpressut-c pcctra in the duct with and

without the signal from the random noise source.

J.Y. Chungand D. A. Blaser: Measuring acoustic intensity

1573

Downloaded 03 Aug 2012 to 217.64.162.238. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/journals/doc/ASALIB-home/info/terms.jsp

11o

10
M=O

100

., o n i

Im (G121
s-i-ksl

70

-30

GO

1
FREQUENCY (kHz)

FREQUENCY

(kHz)

FIG. 6. Comparison of general and plane-wave theories for determining the acoustic intensity without flow.

FIG. 8. Soundpower loss at the end of pipe without flow.

tensity outsidethe pipe. A 100-W, 381-mm(15-in. )diam. speaker was used in conjunctionwith a 100-W
acoustic driver to generate a broadband noise within the 51-.mm(2-in. )-diam. pipe system. A compressed air system was utilized as the source of flow for the
tests.
mean

The acoustic intensity in the duct is determined by

measurements of the transfer function and the auto-

spectral density at the two-microphone station near the end of the pipe. These measurements were made using the instrumentation system shown in Fig. 4. In measuring the transfer function, errors due to both the amplitude and the phase mismatch between microphone systems were eliminated by the sensor-switching

Measurements
flow Mach

were made without

of 0.05 and 0.10

flow and with

within the

numbers

pipe.

Four condenser microphones with a diameter of 6.35mm (k-in.) were used. Two of the microphones were mounted flush to the inside wall of the pipe. They were separated by 27 mm and located 76 and 103 mm from the end of the pipe. This nearness to the end of the pipe minimized viscous losses along the pipe wall. The other two microphones spaced 16 mm apart were used for the probe system outside the pipe.
11o
INSIDE OUTSIDE
M=O

technique. ,6
Figure 5 shows typical comparisons of the measured pressure spectra inside the duct with the noise source
on and with the noise source off. The noise-source-off

spectra represent the noise floor for these measurements. For M--0.1, this noise floor is seen to increase by nearly 40 dB over that of the case with M-0 due to pressure fluctuations generated locally by flow
11o 0.05 INSIDE OUTSIDE

lOO

100

$0

70

70

GO

1
FREQUENCY (kHz)

1 FREQUENCY (kHz)

FIG. 7. In-pipe versus out-of-pipe

sound power without flow.

FIG. 9. In-pipe versus out-of-pipe

sound power with M= 0.05.

1574

J. Acoust. Am.,Vol.68, No.6, December Soc. 1980

J.Y. Chung D. A. Blaser: and Measuring acoustic intensity

1574

Downloaded 03 Aug 2012 to 217.64.162.238. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/journals/doc/ASALIB-home/info/terms.jsp

0.05

lO
M -0.10

., o

n
I

-10

- -20
w

-3o

-30

n, -o

1
FREQUENCY (kHz)

1
FREQUENCY (kHz)

FIG. 10. Soundpower loss at the end of pipe with M = 0.05.

FIG. 12. Soundpower loss at the end of pipe with M = 0.10.

over the microphone. For frequencies above 100 Hz, the noise-source-on signal is sufficiently above the noise floor to provide accurate measurements.
The sound power radiated from the end of the pipe was determined from intensity measurements using the

All measurements of autospectral densities, crossspectral densities, and transfer functions were made with a digitial signal analyzer. The acoustic intensities and the net acoustic powers were then calculated by a desktop calculator system.
B. Tests without flow

general cross-spectral method made over the surface

of a ficticious rectangular box with dimensions of 2 x 1 x 1 m as illustrated in Fig. 3. The box was actually
subdivided into 10 square surfaces, each with dimensions of 1 x 1 m. Using the acoustic intensity probe,

Prior to testing with flow, a few tests were conducted

each surface was manually surveyed and the space-time averaged cross-spectral density was measured using the instrumentation shown in Fig. 4. Errors in the cross-spectral density due to phase mismatch between microphone systems were again eliminated using the sensor switching technique. The total radiated sound

without flow to verify the measurement theory in the limiting case of zero Mach number. First, the net acoustic power transmitted along the pipe was determined from the cross-spectral density utilizing both the general three-dimensional formula of Eq. (25) and the
special plane-wave formula of Eq. (24). As shown in Fig. 6, the results using the two formulae are in close agreement. At low frequencies, there is no observable difference in the results. The general three-dimensional formula, however, slightly underestimates the
11o

power was then determined by the averaged intensity

and the total surface area of the rectangular
11o
M -0.10

box.

....

INSIDE OUTSI DE

M-0

....

M- 0.10

100

100

90

BO

70

70

60

60
o 1
FREQUENCY

2
(kHz)

I
FREQUENCY (kHz)

FIG. 13. Comparison of out-of-pipe

sound power with M = 0

FIG. 11. In-pipe versus out-of-pipe sound power with M = 0.10.

aud 0.10.

1575

J. Acoust. Am.,Vol.68, No.6, December Soc. 1980

J.Y. Chung D. A. Blaser: and Measuring acoustic intensity

1575

Downloaded 03 Aug 2012 to 217.64.162.238. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/journals/doc/ASALIB-home/info/terms.jsp

11o

with a microphone spacing of 16 ram.

....

As shown in

EQ. (35) EQ. (24)

M: 0.05

Fig. 7, these two measurements agree quite closely,

hence confirming the accuracy of the two different measurement procedures. It should be noted that the maximum
which

100

error
could

in the outside
account for

measurement
some

at 3 kHz

corre-

sponding to the microphone spacing of 16 mm is 0.6 dB,

of the deviation between

80

the two results at high frequencies. Viscous losses along the wall and at the end of the pipe would also contribute to the deviation that increases with frequency. This difference in the two measurements is plotted in Fig. 8 as the ratio of radiated-to-transmitted acoustic power. The sharp decrease in the power ratio is indicative of a high loss of acoustic power between the two

GO

1
FREQUENCY (kHz)

measurement surfaces. The power loss is directly related to the vorticity shed at the pipe exit. The acoustic disturbance creates the vorticity which, due to fluid viscosity, dissipates into heat and shows up as an energy deficit in the acoustic radiation process. This phenomenon will be discussed further in the following section.
C. Tests with flow

FIG. 14. Sound power spectra for M-- 0.05 determined from
measurement theories with and without flow effects.

sound power as the frequency increases. This error is caused by the finite difference approximation used in the general formulation and is related to the product of the microphone spacing and the acoustic wavenumber. For these measurements, the microphone spacing of 27 mm gives avalue of ks=1.48 at3kHz. Hence at3kHz, the
error is

With mean flow Mach numbers of 0.05 and 0.1, the acoustic intensity inside the duct was evaluated based

on Eq. (35). The soundpower radiation from the duct

opening under the same flow conditions was also evalu-

ated based on Eq. (25). Comparisons of the net acoustic power transmitted

10 log[ks/sin(ks)I= 1.72 dB.

It should be noted that lthough this error cn only be calculated for the case of plane-wave propagationalong a knowndirection, it represents the maximum possible error due to the finite difference approximation for
any acoustic field.

along the pipe and radiated from the end of the pipe are shown in Figs. 9 and 10 for M=0.05, and in Figs. 11 and 12 for M =0.10. Above I kHz, there is good agreement between measurements inside and outside of the

pipe.
method.

This confirms the theory of the transfer-function

Next, the net acoustic power was determined from cross-spectral density measurements made inside the

pipe usingEq. (24) andfrom cross-spectral density

measurements made outside the pipe using Eq. (25)
11o M :0.10

Close examination of Figs. 9 and 11 reveals that, as the Mach number increases, the net acoustic power transmitted along the pipe increases while the net radiated acoustic power appears to remain nearly fixed. In fact, the net radiated acoustic ,power at these flow Mach numbers is essentially the same in both amplitude
and spectral distribution as the measured data without
the net flow

....

EQ. (3.5) EQ. (24)

flow (Fig. 13). Thus, although accordingto Morley's

definition 7 the uniform mean flow increases

lOO

of acoustic energy propagating along the pipe, this increased flow of energy is not radiated acoustically from
so

the end of the pipe, but instead it is absorbed due to interactions with the flow field. Morfey also indicated that when vorticity is present, acoustic energy need not

be conserved. More recently, Bechert et al., s'9have studied specific examples where vorticity is present in let flows through nozzles and orifices. They found that if the flow at a nozzle exit is slightly unsteady, i.e., if
70

sound is present, fluctuating vorticity is shed due to

the existence of a Kutta conditionat the edge of a rigid

GO

surface. At low frequencies, this process extracts energy from the soundfield. This conclusionis in agreement with the current experimental finding of the difference in transmitted versus radiated acoustic power
shown in Figs. 9-12.
theories with and without flow effects.

FIG. 15. Sound power spectra for M = 0.10 determinedfrom

measurement

Bechert also presented an approximate model for the

J.Y. Chungand D. A. Blaser: Measuring acoustic intensity 1576

1576

J. Acoust.Soc.Am., Vol. 68, No. 6, December 1980

Downloaded 03 Aug 2012 to 217.64.162.238. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/journals/doc/ASALIB-home/info/terms.jsp

absorption of sound due to vorticity shedding at a noz-

or

zle exit. 9 The following expression was given based on

his analysis'

Ws/Wr=[(1 + {M")/4M](ka)" , (36) where W/Wr is the ratio of radiated-to-transmitted

acoustic power, M is the Mach number, and ka is the
dimensionless wavenumber based on the radius of the

(AT)

Taking Fourier transform of Eq. (A?) one obtains a

spectral relation of

pipe a. It must be noted that Eq. (36) is only applicable to very low values of the dimensionless wavenumber The ratio of radiated-to-transmitted acoustic power from Figs. 9 and 11 were plotted in Figs. 10 and 12, respectively, and compared to the absorption model of
or

$,.=[S,,S,,,+ - S,,,]/pc S*** ,

S.=[S - S r- 2Im(S,)]/pc.
A similar derivation yields

(A8)

(A9)

Eq. (36). Although the magnitude of the soundabsorption does not fit the model well, the increase in absorption with decreasing frequency is essentially correct. Also, the increase in absorption with increased Mach number is well predicted by the model. All of these findings tend to support the verification of the transferfunction method of measuring acoustic intensity in a duct system with flow.
As a matter of interest, the experimental data within the pipe system with flow were reprocessed using the no-flow cross-spectral formula. Shown in Figs. 14 and 15 are comparisons of the net acoustic power determined from the formula without flow, i.e., Eq. (24), and the formula with flow, i.e., Eq. (35), for the two flow conditions. At most frequencies the no-flow theory underestimates the actual acoustic power; however, in a low-frequency region where the pressure-reflection coefficient exceeds unity, the no-flow theory overestimates the actual acoustic power. It is seen that even for mean-flow Mach numbers below 0.1, considerable error in the net acoustic power flow would be induced by neglecting the effect of flow.
APPENDIX

S..=[S,, + S,,,- 2Re(S,)]/(pc) 2.

1 +M 2
pc

(A10)

Substituting these expressions into Eq. (28) we have

M

or

1 +M 2
pc

+ pS,,,,[1 2- 2Re(R)], +IRI

spectively.

(A12)

where andiRi are defined Eqs. (8) and(9), reR in

Using Eq. (13) in Eq. (A12) one obtains

+n]*. (A13)

Ij. y. Chung,"Cross-Spectral Method Measuring of Acoustic

Intensity Without Error Caused by Instrument Phase Mismatch," J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 64, 1613-1616 (1978).

In a duct system with uniform mean flow the acoustic pressure p and the acoustic velocity u can be expressed in terms of the incident and reflected acoustic pressures

2j. y. Chung, Pope,andD. A. Feldmaier,"Application J. of

Acoustic Intensity Measurement to Engine Noise Evaluation," SAE Paper No. 790502 (1979).

Pi and Pt, respectively, as

P=P +Pt,

(A1)

3D. H. MunroandK. U. Ir/gard,"On Acoustic Intensity Measurements in the Presence of Mean Flow," J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 65, 1402-1406 (1979).

u= (p - pr)/pc .
Introducing correlation functions of p and u as

(A2)

4R.J. Alfredson,"The Design Optimization Exhaust and of

Silencers," Ph.D. thesis, U. Southampton, England, July

' (R"(r)=lim p(t)u(tr)dt, 7 +

(R(r) lim7 =
T--. o

(A3)
(A4)

1970.

5D.A. Blaser andJ. Y. Chung, Transfer-Function "A Technique for Measuring the Acoustic Characteristics of Duct

p(t)p(tr)dt, +

Systems with Flow," Proc. INTER NOISE '78 (1978).

6j. y. Chung D. A. Blaser, "Transfer function and method of

measuring in-duct acoustic properties, I. Theory and II. Experiment," J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 68, 907-921 (1980).

(R"(r)=lim u(t)u(t+ 7 r)dt,

(AS)

and using the relations in Eqs. (A1) and (A2), one has

?C.L. Morfey, "Acoustic Energy Nonuniform in Flows,"J.

Sound Vib. 14, 159-170 (1971).

v_oo [fo 1 r +r)dt 6t,(r)-limp(t)p(t

p(t)p(t+ r)dt

SD. Bechert,U. Michel, andE. Pfizenmaier, W. "Experiments

on the Transmission of SoundThrough Jets," paper presented at AIAA 4th Aeroacoustics Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, October 1977, AIAA paper 77-1278.

SD. Bechert, W. "Sound Absorption Caused VorticityShedby

p(t)p,(t r)dt+

p(t)p(t r)d , +

(A6)

ding, Demonstrated with a Jet Flow," paper presented at AIAA 5th Aeroacoustics Conference, Seattle, Washington,
March 1979, AIAA paper 79-0575.

1577

J. Acoust.Soc.Am., Vol. 68, No. 6, December1980

J.Y. Chungand D. A. Blaser: Measuring acousticintensity

1577

Downloaded 03 Aug 2012 to 217.64.162.238. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/journals/doc/ASALIB-home/info/terms.jsp