Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T22:45:39.140Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interactional aerodynamics and acoustics of a hingeless coaxial helicopter with an auxiliary propeller in forward flight

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

H. W. Kim ,
A. R. Kenyon ,
R. E. Brown  and
K. Duraisamy
H. W. Kim
Affiliation:
[email protected], Department of Aeronautics, Imperial College London, London, UK
A. R. Kenyon
Affiliation:
[email protected]
R. E. Brown
Affiliation:
[email protected], Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
K. Duraisamy
Affiliation:
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aerodynamics and acoustics of a generic coaxial helicopter with a stiff main rotor system and a tail-mounted propulsor are investigated using Brown’s Vorticity Transport Model. In particular, the model is used to capture the aerodynamic interactions that arise between the various components of the configuration. By comparing the aerodynamics of the full configuration of the helicopter to the aerodynamics of various combinations of its sub-components, the influence of these aerodynamic interactions on the behaviour of the system can be isolated. Many of the interactions follow a simple relationship between cause and effect. For instance, ingestion of the main rotor wake produces a direct effect on the unsteadiness in the thrust produced by the propulsor. The causal relationship for other interdependencies within the system is found to be more obscure. For instance, a dependence of the acoustic signature of the aircraft on the tailplane design originates in the changes in loading on the main rotor that arise from the requirement to trim the load on the tailplane that is induced by its interaction with the main rotor wake. The traditional approach to the analysis of interactional effects on the performance of the helicopter relies on characterising the system in terms of a network of possible interactions between the separate components of its configuration. This approach, although conceptually appealing, may obscure the closed-loop nature of some of the aerodynamic interactions within the helicopter system. It is suggested that modern numerical simulation techniques may be ready to supplant any overt reliance on this reductionist type approach and hence may help to forestall future repetition of the long history of unforeseen, interaction-induced dynamic problems that have arisen in various new helicopter designs.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 113 , Issue 1140: The International Powered Lift Conference 2008: A Special issue , February 2009 , pp. 65 - 78
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2009 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Bagai, A., Aerodynamic Design of the Sikorsky X2 Technology Demonstrator™ Main Rotor Blade, American Helicopter Society 64th Annual Forum, 29 April-1 May 2008, Montréal, Canada.Google Scholar
2. Burgess, R.K., The ABC™ Rotor – A Historical Perspective, American Helicopter Society 60th Annual Forum, 7-10 June 2004, Baltimore, MD, USA.Google Scholar
3. Linden, A.W. and Ruddell, A.J., An ABC Status Report, American Helicopter Society 37th Annual Forum, 17-20 May 1981, New Orleans, LA, USA.Google Scholar
4. Orchard, M. and Newman, S., The fundamental configuration and design of the compound helicopter, Proceedings of Institution of Mechanical Engineers, 217 Part G: J Aerospace Engineering, G01702, October 2003, pp 297–315.Google Scholar
5. Kim, H.W., Kenyon, A.R., Duraisamy, K. and Brown, R.E., Interactional aerodynamics and acoustics of a propeller-augmented compound coaxial helicopter, American Helicopter Society Aeromechanics Specialists’ Meeting, 23-25 January 2008, San Francisco, CA, USA.Google Scholar
6. Brown, R.E., Rotor wake modeling for flight dynamic simulation of helicopters, AIAA J, January 2000, 38, (1), pp 57–63.Google Scholar
7. Brown, R.E. and Line, A.J., Efficient high-resolution wake modeling using the vorticity transport equation, AIAA J, April 2005, 43, (7), pp 1434–1443.Google Scholar
8. Kenyon, A.R. and Brown, R.E., Wake dynamics and rotor-fuselage aerodynamic interactions, American Helicopter Society 63rd Annual Forum, 1-3 May 2007, Virginia Beach, VA, USA.Google Scholar
9. Kim, H.W. and Brown, R.E., Coaxial rotor performance and wake dynamics in steady and manoeuvring flight, American Helicopter Society 62nd Annual Forum, 9-11 May 2006, Phoenix, AZ, USA.Google Scholar
10. Felker III, F.F., Performance and loads data from a wind tunnel test of a full-scale, coaxial, hingeless rotor helicopter, NASA TM 81329/USAARADCOM TR 81-A-27, October 1981.Google Scholar
11. Kim, H.W. and Brown, R.E., Impact of trim strategy and rotor stiffness on coaxial rotor performance, 1st AHS/KSASS International Forum on Rotorcraft Multidisciplinary Technology, 15-17 October 2007, Seoul, Korea.Google Scholar
12. Ruddell, A.J., Advancing Blade Concept (ABC™) Development, American Helicopter Society 32nd Annual Forum, 10-12 May 1976, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
13. Burgess, R.K., Development of the ABC Rotor, American Helicopter Society 27th Annual Forum, May 1971, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
14. Cooper, D.E., YUH-60A Stability and control, J American Helicopter Society, 1978, 23, (3), pp 2–9.Google Scholar
15. Prouty, R.W. and Amer, K.B., The YAH-64 Empennage and tail rotor – A technical history, American Helicopter Society 38th Annual Forum Proceedings, Anaheim, CA, USA, 4-7 May 1982, pp 247–261.Google Scholar
16. Main, B.J. and Mussi, F., EH101 – Development Status Report, Proceedings of the 16th European Rotorcraft Forum, Glasgow, UK, 18-20 September 1990, pp III.2.1.1-12.Google Scholar
17. Cassier, A., Weneckers, R. and Pouradier, J., Aerodynamic development of the Tiger helicopter, proceedings of the American Helicopter Society 50th Annual Forum, 11-13 May 1994, Washington DC, USA.Google Scholar
18. Eglin, P., Aerodynamic design of the NH90 helicopter stabilizer, Proceedings of the 23rd European Rotorcraft Forum, 16-18 September 1997, Dresden, Germany, pp 68.1–10.Google Scholar
19. Frederickson, K.C. and Lamb, J.R., Experimental investigation of main rotor wake induced empennage vibratory airloads for the RAH-66 Comanche helicopter, Proceedings of the American Helicopter Society 49th Annual Forum, 19-21 May 1993, St Louis, MO, USA, pp 1029–1039.Google Scholar
20. Dingeldein, R.C., Wind-tunnel studies of the performance of multi-rotor configurations, NACA TN-3236, August 1954.Google Scholar
21. Paglino, V.M. and Beno, E.A., Full-scale wind-tunnel investigation of the advancing blade concept rotor system, USAAMRDL TR 71-25, August 1971.Google Scholar
22. Halley, D.H., ABC helicopter stability, control, and vibration evaluation on the Princeton dynamic model track, American Helicopter Society 29th Annual Forum, Washington, DC, USA, May 1973.Google Scholar
23. Paglino, V.M., Forward flight performance of a coaxial rigid rotor, American Helicopter Society 27th Annual Forum, May 1971, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
24. Sheridan, P.F. and Smith, R.P., Interactional Aerodynamics – A New Challenge to Helicopter technology, J American Helicopter Society, January 1980, 25, (1), pp 3–21.Google Scholar
25. Leishman, J.G., Principles of Helicopter Aerodynamics, 2nd Ed, 2006, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
26. Farassat, F. and Succi, G.P., A review of propeller discrete frequency noise prediction technology with emphasis on two current methods for time domain calculations, J Sound and Vibration, 1980, 71, (3), pp 399–419.Google Scholar
27. Kelly, M.E., Duraisamy, K. and Brown, R.E., Blade vortex interaction and airload prediction using the vorticity transport model, American Helicopter Society Specialists’ Conference on Aeromechanics, San Francisco, CA, USA, 23-25 January 2008.Google Scholar
28. Magliozzi, B., Hanson, D.B. and Amiet, R.K., Aeroacoustics of Flight Vehicles: Theory and Practice, NASA, USA.Google Scholar