Improving Submarine Array Integration
Improving Submarine Array Integration
Improving submarine array integration for operational performance Sensors & Processing
1 Introduction
On modern submarines, the main SONAR arrays to 2.2 Type B submarine
detect surface or underwater threats are the bow array, the
The second submarine considered here will be
flank arrays and the towed array. If the towed array
referred as “Type B”. It has the following characteristics:
performance relies on its technology, the bow array and
flank array operational intrinsic performance strongly
depend upon the quality of their integration to the
submarine. Indeed, their integration can influence
detection performance with the main following impacts:
- Disturbing signal received by the array
- Increasing array self-noise
- Disturbing acoustic classification and Fig. 2. Type B submarine
identification of a threat
- Creating “ghost” detection
It is the submarine designer’s responsibility along Its bow array is also cylindrical and about the same
with the SONAR manufacturer, thanks to a strong size as the one of “Type A”. But on this submarine, the
teamwork, to optimize the integration of these arrays in array is positioned in the lower part of the bow (under
order to maximize their performance. torpedo tubes).
To illustrate key points of SONAR integration, two Its flank arrays are planar thin flank arrays, flush
SSK submarines with about the same displacement and mounted with hydrodynamics fairings in front and behind
same length but with different hydrodynamic shapes and the array’s acoustic part.
SONAR array integration have been compared.
1/8
UDT 2019
Improving submarine array integration for operational performance Presentation/Panel
Within bow array frequency bandwidth, we can notice Fig. 5. Flore submarine
that there is more noise coming from the surface than
from the seabed.
By positioning the array in the lower part of the bow a To obtain the widest bearing coverage, the array
significant gain up to 10 dB over the surface noise should be integrated as forward as possible into the bow
(considering an omnidirectional sensor) can be expected. cavity and the acoustic window should be extended
In this case, the optimization of the array installation backward.
could offer significant improvement in terms of surface
noise rejection, as illustrated in the figure hereunder (Fig.
4), thanks to the masking of the surface noise on the array
hydrophones.
2/8
UDT 2019
Improving submarine array integration for operational performance Presentation/Panel
Spp(ω)=2.ρ²Ut4.ω-1.h.(2.π/3.Cm.α-3.(1+µ².α²)+π.CT.α-1.
(1+α-2)) (1)
With
α=(1+Uc/(b.ω.δ)²)1/2
h.Cm=0.466
h.Cm=0.014
b=0.75
3/8
UDT 2019
Improving submarine array integration for operational performance Presentation/Panel
Fig. 9 and Fig. 10 show that submarine Type A has poor Fig. 11. Generic Bow SONAR cavity geometry
hydrodynamic shape and moreover its bow array is
located where the hydro-acoustic excitation is at a
maximum. On the other hand, Type B submarine has a
smooth hydrodynamic shape and the bow array is located
in a quieter area in term of flow noise level. Considering
the integrated noise level over the acoustic window, Type
A submarine has a noise level at least 3dB higher than
Type B, for every speed and in the whole frequency
bandwidth of the bow array.
More complex simulations can be performed to
optimize the array positioning and the design of the
SONAR cavity. Usually for submarine programs, Fig. 12. Example of Bow SONAR Pressure PSD
dedicated design cycles are performed between
submarine designer and SONAR manufacturer to
optimize the integration of the bow array:
- submarine designer defines submarine shape, array
position and cavity size
- submarine designer computes hydrodynamic
parameters around the submarine and the average self-
noise level in the cavity
- SONAR manufacturer computes self-noise after
SONAR processing (at beamforming level, array gain,…)
using hydrodynamic simulation provided by submarine Fig. 13. Example of one stochastic noise realization
designer. (left: module; right: phase)
- SONAR manufacturer and submarine designer team
analyze results and optimize bow array design and
integration.
4/8
UDT 2019
Improving submarine array integration for operational performance Presentation/Panel
Flank arrays have far less restrictions on their As shown on Fig. 17, despite masking material, array
dimensions than the bow array, thus the shape can be also sensors will still perceive a strong pressure field coming
adjusted to optimize its performance thanks to the from above and under the array, thus increasing self-
elevation directivity. noise.
Fig. 17. Maps of nearfield (1 m) pressure field (dB Fig. 19. Flank array k-Omega plots
ref µPa) on a stiffened cylindrical hull (55 (bearing vs frequency)
stiffeners), excited by a punctual force at 600 Hz.
6/8
UDT 2019
Improving submarine array integration for operational performance Presentation/Panel
7/8
UDT 2019
Improving submarine array integration for operational performance Presentation/Panel
4 Conclusions References
Submarine SONAR performance depends on the [1] M. Berton, Modélisation de la réponse vibro-
design of the acoustic arrays, their associated processing acoustique d’une structure excitée par une couche
and the quality of the array integration to the submarine. limite turbulente en présence d’un gradient de
Only strong collaborative work between SONAR pression statique, PhD thesis, INSA Lyon, 2014
manufacturer and submarine designer can lead to the best
underwater detection performance. This paper has studied
the influence of array integration on SONAR
performance for the two main arrays of a submarine the Author/Speaker Biographies
bow array and the flank arrays. Beyond the necessity to
implement the most advanced signal processing technics Edouard HONORE has held the position of underwater
such as adaptive processing, the main recommendations detection specialist at Naval Group for 8 years during
regarding physical integration to optimize detection have which he has specialized in SONAR array integration to
been given. submarine and surface ship.
These recommendations are summarized here for the
bow array: Olivier LACOUR received his PhD degree of Physic in
- The best array location is in the lower part of the bow 1989 from Joseph Fourier University (Grenoble, France).
to protect it from surface noise and optimize negative He joined Thales in 1988 as a Materials engineer for
elevation sound rays detection. acoustic systems including piezoelectric and cladding
- The shape of the bow and the exact position of the materials. In 1997, he joined the acoustic department and
array in this shape shall be optimized taken into has been involved in many transducer designs and
account hydrodynamic component of self-noise. developments from passive to active domains. Since then,
he has been involved in submarine array design, and
And for the flank arrays: integration, including sea trials on the Scorpene
- The array position shall be chosen in relation with submarines.
array shape in order to avoid the noisiest parts of the
submarine (usually the aft part of the pressure hull). Co-Authors:
- At equal surface area (and so array gain), higher flank
arrays get higher benefits from adaptive Raphaël LARDAT received a PhD in Fluid Mechanics
beamforming. in 1997 and has been involved in acoustics since 19
- The hydrodynamic of the flank arrays and their years, 12 of which within Thales. He is currently leading
fairings shall be studied by SONAR manufacturer and a R&D group for SONAR array development, specialized
submarine designer to limit the impact of the array on in signal and noise modelling, acoustic materials and
ship performance and to reduce array self-noise. transducers design.
Angular shapes shall be avoided because they Serge SITBON received a PhD degree in Automatic &
generate vortex which is an important source of noise. Signal Processing and has been involved in Thales sonar
- Thin flush mounted planar flank arrays present all the design and development. He is currently working with
benefits listed above. the sonar signal and data processing Research &
Development department.
8/8