Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T14:03:00.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Wind-tunnel tests of a heavy-class helicopter optimised for drag reduction*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2016

G. Gibertini ,
A. Zanotti ,
G. Droandi ,
D. Grassi ,
G. Campanardi ,
F. Auteri ,
A. Aceti  and
A. Le Pape
G. Gibertini
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
A. Zanotti*
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
G. Droandi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
D. Grassi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
G. Campanardi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
F. Auteri
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
A. Aceti
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
A. Le Pape
Affiliation:
ONERA – The French Aerospace Lab, Applied Aerodynamics Department, 8 Rue des Vertugadins, F-92190, MeudonFrance
*
alex.zanotti@polimi.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Wind-tunnel tests of a heavy-class helicopter model were carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of several components optimised for drag reduction by computational fluid dynamics analysis. The optimised components included different hub-cap configurations, a fairing for blade attachments and the sponsons. Moreover, the effects of vortex generators positioned on the back ramp were investigated. The optimisation effect was evaluated by comparison of the drag measurements carried out for both the original and the optimised helicopter configurations. The comprehensive experimental campaign involved the use of different measurement techniques. Indeed, pressure measurements and stereo particle image velocimetry surveys were performed to achieve a physical insight about the results of load measurements. The test activity confirms the achievement of an overall reduction of about 6% of the original model drag at cruise attitude.

Keywords

Drag reductionhelicopterwind tunnelparticle image velocimetry
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 120 , Issue 1231 , September 2016 , pp. 1446 - 1467
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2016 

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.)

Footnotes

*

The original version of this article was published with an incorrect list of authors. A notice detailing this has been published and the error rectified in the online and print PDF and HTML copies.

References

REFERENCES

1. Martin, D.M., Mort, R.W., Squires, P.K. and Young, L.A. Hub and pylon fairing integration for helicopter drag reduction, American Helicopter Society 47th Annual Forum, 6-8 May 1991, Phoenix, Arizona, US.Google Scholar
2. Allan, B.G. and Schaeffler, N.W. Numerical investigation of rotorcraft fuselage drag reduction using active flow control, American Helicopter Society 67th Annual Forum, 3-5 May 2011, Virginia Beach, Virginia, US.Google Scholar
3. Lienard, C., Allan, B.G., Le Pape, A. and Schaeffler, N.W. Comparing numerical and experimental results for drag reduction by active flow control applied to a generic rotorcraft fuselage, American Helicopter Society 71st Annual Forum, 5-7 May 2015, Virginia Beach, Virginia, US.Google Scholar
4. Ben-Hamou, E., Arad, E. and Seifert, A. Generic transport aft-body drag reduction using active flow control, Flow Turbulence Combust, 2007, 78, pp 365–382.Google Scholar
5. Breitsamter, C., Grawunder, M. and Ress, R. Aerodynamic design optimisation for a helicopter configuration including a rotating rotor head, 29th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences, 7-12 September 2014, St. Petersburg, Russia.Google Scholar
6. Green, R.B., Giuni, M., Cervinka, J., Zacho, D., Austin, P., Smith, S., Desvigne, D. and Alfano, D. The clean sky ‘CARD’ project: wind tunnel measurements of a model helicopter rotor and fuselage drag, 41st European Rotorcraft Forum, 1-4 September 2015, Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
7. Raffel, M., De Gregorio, F., Groot, K.D., Schneider, O., Sheng, W., Gibertini, G. and Seraudie, A. On the generation of a helicopter aerodynamic database, Aeronautical Journal, 2011, 115, pp 103–112.Google Scholar
8. Antoniadis, A.F., Drikakis, D., Zhong, B., Barakos, G., Steijl, R., Biava, M., Vigevano, L., Brocklehurst, A., Boelens, O., Dietz, M., Embacher, M. and Khier, W. Assessment of CFD methods against experimental flow measurements for helicopter flows, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2012, 19, pp 86–100.Google Scholar
9. Biava, M., Khier, W. and Vigevano, L. CFD prediction of air flow past a full helicopter configuration, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2012, 19, pp 3–18.Google Scholar
10. Mulleners, K., Kindler, K. and Raffel, M. Dynamic stall on a fully equipped helicopter model, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2012, 19, pp 72–76.Google Scholar
11. De Gregorio, F. Flow field characterization and interactional aerodynamics analysis of a complete helicopter, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2012, 19, pp 19–36.Google Scholar
12. Khier, W. Computational investigation of advanced hub fairing configurations to reduce helicopter drag, 40th European Rotorcraft Forum, 2-5 September 2014, Southampton, UK.Google Scholar
13. Boniface, J.C. A Computational framework for helicopter fuselage drag reduction using vortex generators, American Helicopter Society 70th Annual Forum, 20-22 May 2014, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.Google Scholar
14. Lemmens, Y., Decours, J., Fijalek, M. and Hakkart, J. Development of active horizontal stabilizer, 38th European Rotorcraft Forum, 4-7 September 2012, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
15. Gibertini, G., Auteri, F., Campanardi, G., Droandi, G., Grassi, D., Le Pape, A. and Zanotti, A. A test rig to assess the effectiveness of drag reduction devices on a heavy-class helicopter, 41st European Rotorcraft Forum, 1-4 September 2015, Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
16. Zanotti, A., Ermacora, M., Campanardi, G. and Gibertini, G. Stereo particle image velocimetry measurements of perpendicular blade vortex interaction over an oscillating airfoil, Experiments in Fluids, 2014, 55, (9), pp 1–13.Google Scholar
17. PIVview 2C/3C, User Manual, PIVTEC, www.pivtec.com, 2010.Google Scholar
18. Raffel, M., Willert, C., Wereley, S. and Kompenhans, J. Particle Image Velocimetry – A Practical Guide, 2007, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
19. Zanotti, A., Ermacora, M., Campanardi, G. and Gibertini, G. Experimental investigation of perpendicular vortex interaction by stereo particle image velocimetry, 71st American Helicopter Society Annual Forum, 5-7 May 2015, Virginia Beach, Virginia, US.Google Scholar
20. De Gregorio, F., Pengel, K. and Kindler, K. A comprehensive PIV measurement campaign on a fully equipped helicopter model, Experiments in Fluids, 2012, 53, pp 37–49.Google Scholar