Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T17:23:25.855Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Modelling the aeroelastic response and flight dynamics of a hingeless rotor helicopter including the effects of rotor-fuselage aerodynamic interaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2016

I. Goulos*
Affiliation:
School of Aerospace, Transport and Manufacturing, Cranfield University, Bedford, UK

Abstract

This paper presents a mathematical approach for the simulation of rotor-fuselage aerodynamic interaction in helicopter aeroelasticity and flight dynamics applications. A Lagrangian method is utilised for the numerical analysis of rotating blades with nonuniform structural properties. A matrix/vector-based formulation is developed for the treatment of elastic blade kinematics in the time-domain. The combined method is coupled with a finite-state induced flow model, an unsteady blade element aerodynamics model, and a dynamic wake distortion model. A three-dimensional, steady-state, potential flow, source-panel method is employed for the prediction of induced flow perturbations in the vicinity of the fuselage due to its presence in the free-stream and within the rotor wake. The combined rotor-fuselage model is implemented in a nonlinear flight dynamics simulation code. The integrated approach is deployed to investigate the effects of rotor-fuselage aerodynamic interaction on trim performance, stability and control derivatives, oscillatory structural blade loads, and nonlinear control response for a hingeless rotor helicopter modelled after the Eurocopter Bo105. Good agreement is shown between flow-field predictions and experimental measurements for a scaled-down isolated fuselage model. The proposed numerical approach is shown to be suitable for real-time flight dynamics applications with simultaneous prediction of structural blade loads, including the effects of rotor-fuselage aerodynamic interaction.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2015

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.Leishman, J., Bhagwat, M. and Bagai, A.Free-vortex filament methods for the analysis of helicopter rotor wakes, J Aircr, September-October 2002, 39, (5), pp 759775.Google Scholar
2..Brown, R.E.Rotor wake modeling for flight dynamic simulation of helicopters, AIAA J, January 2000, 38, (1), pp 5763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Renaud, T., O’Brien, D., Smith, M. and Potsdam, M.Evaluation of isolated fuselage and rotor-fuselage interaction using computational fluid dynamics, J American Helicopter Soc, January 2008, 53, (1), pp 317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Berry, J. and Bettschart, N. Rotor-fuselage interaction: Analysis and validation with experiment, May 1997, NASA, TM 112859.Google Scholar
5.Berry, J.D. and Althoff, S.L. Computing induced velocity perturbations due to a helicopter fuselage in a free stream, 1989, NASA, TM-4113.Google Scholar
6.Crimi, P. and Trenka, A.R. Theoretical prediction of the flow in the wake of a helicopter rotor. Addendum: Effects due to a fuselage in a constant, nonuniform flow, 1966, Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, BB-1994-S-3.Google Scholar
7.Keys, C. Rotary-wing aerodynamics, Volume II - Performance prediction of helicopters, 1979, NASA, CR-3083.Google Scholar
8.Johnson, W. and Yamauchi, G.K.Applications of an analysis of axisymmetric body effects on rotor performance and loads, August 1984, Tenth European Rotorcraft Forum, The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
9.Schweitzer, S.Computational Simulation of Flow around Helicopter Fuselages, MSc thesis, 1999, Pennsylvania State University, USA.Google Scholar
10.Ghee, T., Berry, J., Zori, L. and Elliot, J. Wake geometry measurements and analytical calculations on a small-scale rotor model, 1997, NASA, TP 3584.Google Scholar
11.Lorber, P.F. and Egolf, T.A. An unsteady helicopter rotor-fuselage interaction analysis, 1988, NASA, CR-4178.Google Scholar
12.Lee, B.S., Jung, M.S. and Kwon, O.J.Numerical simulation of rotor-fuselage aerodynamic interaction using an unstructured overset mesh technique, J Aeronautical and Space Sci, March 2010, 11, (1), pp 19.Google Scholar
13.Kelly, M.E., Duraisamy, K. and Brown, R.E.Predicting blade vortex interaction, airloads and acoustics using the vorticity transport model, 23-25 January 2008, AHS Specialists’ Conference on Aeromechanics, San Francisco, CA, USA.Google Scholar
14.van der Wall, B.G.A comprehensive rotary-wing database for code validation: HART II International Workshop, Aeronaut J, February 2011, 115, (1164), pp 91102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.O’Brien, D.M.Analysis of Computational Modeling Techniques for Complete Rotorcraft Configurations, PhD thesis, May 2006, School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.Google Scholar
16.O’Brien, D. and Smith, M.J.Understanding the physical implications of approximate rotor methods using an unstructured CFD method, September 2005, 31st European Rotorcraft Forum, Florence, Italy.Google Scholar
17.O’Brien, D.M. and Smith, M.J.Analysis of rotor-fuselage interactions using various rotor models, January 2005, AIAA 43rd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, No AIAA-2005-468, Reno, NV, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Biedron, R.T. and Lee-Rausch, E.M.Computation of UH-60A airloads using CFD/CSD coupling on unstructured meshes, 3-5 May 2011, 67th Annual Forum of the Annual Forum of the American Helicopter Society, Virginia Beach, VA, USA.Google Scholar
19.Johnson, W.Technology drivers in the development of CAMRAD II, January 1994, American Helicopter Society Aeromechanics Specialists’ Conference, San Fransisco, CA, USA.Google Scholar
20.Boyd, D.D.HART-II acoustic predictions using a coupled CFD/CSD method, 27-29 May 2009, 65th Annual Forum of the American Helicopter Society, Grapevine, TX, USA.Google Scholar
21.Sa, J.H., You, Y.H., Park, J.-S., Jung, S.N., Park, S.H. and Yu, Y.H.Assessment of CFD/CSD coupled aeroelastic analysis solution for HART II rotor incorporating fuselage effects, 3-5 May 2011, 67th Annual Forum of the American Helicopter Society, Virginia Beach, VA, USA.Google Scholar
22.Smith, M.J., Lim, J.W., van der Wall, B.G., Baeder, J.D., Biedron, R.T., Boyd, D.D., Jayaraman, B., Jung, S.N. and Min, B.-Y.The HART II International Workshop: An assessment of the state of the art in CFD/CSD prediction, CEAS Aeronaut J, December 2013, 4, (4), pp 345372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.van der Wall, B.G., Bauknecht, A., Jung, S.N. and You, Y.H.Semi-empirical modeling of fuselage-rotor interference for comprehensive codes: The fundamental model, CEAS Aeronaut J, May 2014, 5, (2), pp 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Padfield, G.D.Helicopter Flight Dynamics, 2007, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Theodore, C.Helicopter Flight Dynamics Simulation with Refned Aerodynamic Modeling, PhD thesis, 2000, University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
26.Goulos, I., Pachidis, V. and Pilidis, P.Lagrangian formulation for the rapid estimation of helicopter rotor blade vibration characteristics, Aeronaut J, August 2014, 118, (1206).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Goulos, I.Simulation Framework Development for the Multidisciplinary Optimization of Rotorcraft, PhD thesis, 2012, School of Engineering, Cranfield University, Bedfordshire, UK.Google Scholar
28.Goulos, I., Pachidis, V. and Pilidis, P.Helicopter rotor blade flexibility simulation for aeroelasticity and flight dynamics applications, J American Helicopter Soc, October 2014, 59, (4).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Goulos, I., Pachidis, V. and Pilidis, P.Flexible rotor blade dynamics for helicopter aeromechanics including comparisons with experimental data, Aeronaut J, March 2015, 119, (1213).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Goulos, I. and Pachidis, V.Real-time aeroelasticity simulation of open rotor with slender blades for the multidisciplinary design of rotorcraft, ASME J. Eng Gas Turbines and Power, January 2015, 137, (1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Bhagwat, M.J. and Leishman, J.G.Stability, consistency and convergence of time-marching free-vortex rotor wake algorithms, J American Helicopter Soc, January 2001, 46, (1), pp 5971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Goulos, I., Giannakakis, P., Pachidis, V. and Pilidis, P.Mission performance simulation of integrated helicopter-engine systems using an aeroelastic rotor model, ASME J Eng Gas Turbines and Power, 2013, 135, (9).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33.Katz, J. and Plotkin, A.Low-Speed Aerodynamics, 2001, Cambridge Aerospace Series, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34.Hess, J.L. and Smith, A.M.O.Calculation of non-lifting potential flow about arbitrary three-dimensional bodies, 1962, Douglas Aircraft Division, Report No ES 40622, Long Beach, CA, USA.Google Scholar
35.Peters, D.A., Boyd, D.D. and He, C.J.Finite-state induced-flow model for rotors in hover and forward flight J American Helicopter Soc, October 1989, 34, (4), pp 517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36.Peters, D.A. and He, C.J.Correlation of measured induced velocities with a finite-state wake model, J American Helicopter Soc, July 1991, 36, (3), pp 5970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37.Peters, D.How dynamic inflow survives in the competitive world of rotorcraft aerodynamics, J American Helicopter Soc, January 2009, 54, (1), pp 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38.Yu, K. and Peters, D.Nonlinear state-space modeling of dynamic ground effect, J American Helicopter Soc, July 2005, 50, (3), pp 259268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39.Peters, D.A., Morillo, J.A. and Nelson, A.M.New developments in dynamic wake modeling for dynamics applications, J American Helicopter Soc, April 2003, 48, (2), pp 120127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40.Rosen, A. and Isser, A.A Model of the unsteady aerodynamics of a hovering helicopter rotor that includes variations of the wake geometry, J American Helicopter Soc, July 1995, 40, (3), pp 616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41.Krothapalli, K.R.Helicopter Rotor Dynamic Inflow Modeling for Maneuvering Flight, 1998, PhD thesis, School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.Google Scholar
42.Krothapalli, K.R., Prasad, J.V.R. and Peters, D.A.Helicopter rotor dynamic inflow modeling for maneuvering flight, J American Helicopter Soc, April 2001, 46, (2), pp 129139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43.Zhao, J.Dynamic Wake Distortion Model for Helicopter Maneuvering Flight, March 2005, PhD thesis, School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.Google Scholar
44.Prasad, J.V.R., Fanciullo, T. and Peters, J.Z.A.Toward a high fidelity inflow model for maneuvering and in-ground effect flight simulation, 9-11 May 2001, 57th Annual Forum of the American Helicopter Society, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
45.Prasad, J.V.R., Zhao, J. and Peters, D.A.Modeling of rotor dynamic wake distortion during maneuvering flight, 6-9 August 2001, 2001 AIAA Atmosphere Flight Mechanics Conference, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
46.Zhao, J., Prasad, J. and Peters, D.A.Validation of a rotor dynamic wake distortion model for helicopter maneuvering flight simulation, June 2004, 60th Annual Forum of the American Helicopter Society, Baltimore, MA, USA.Google Scholar
47.Zhao, J., Prasad, J.V.R. and Peters, D.A.Rotor dynamic wake distortion model for helicopter maneuvering flight, J American Helicopter Soc, October 2004, 49, (4), pp 414424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48.Leishman, J.G. and Beddoes, T.S.A semi-empirical model for dynamic stall, J American Helicopter Soc, July 1989, 34, (3), pp 317.Google Scholar
49.Noonan, K.W. and Bingham, G.J. Two-dimensional aerodynamic characteristics of several rotorcraft aerofoils at Mach numbers from 0·35 to 0·90, January 1977, NASA Langley Research Center, TM X-73990.Google Scholar
50.Peters, D.A. and Haquang, N.Dynamic inflow for practical applications, J American Helicopter Soc, October 1988, 33, (4), pp 6468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
51.Pitt, D.M. and Peters, D.A.Theoretical prediction of dynamicinflow derivatives, Vertica, March 1981, 5, (1), pp 2134.Google Scholar
52.Gaonkar, G.H. and Peters, D.A.Effectiveness of current dynamic-inflow models in hover and forward flight, J American Helicopter Soc, April 1986, 31, (2), pp 4757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
53.Staley, J.A. Validation of rotorcraft flight simulation program through correlation with flight data for soft-in-plane hingeless rotor, 1976, USA AMRDL-TR-75-50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
54.Peterson, R.L., Maier, T., Langer, H.J. and Tranapp, N.Correlation of wind tunnel and flight test results of a full-scale hingeless rotor, January 1994, American Helicopter Society Aeromechanics Specialist Conference, San Francisco, CA, USA.Google Scholar
55.Padfield, G.D., Basset, P.M., Dequin, A.M., von Grunhagen, W., Haddon, D., Haverdings, H., Kampa, K. and McCallum, A.T.Predicting rotorcraft flying qualities through simulation modelling, September 1996, A review of key results from Garteur AG06, 22nd European Rotorcraft Forum, Brighton, UK.Google Scholar
56. AGARD, Rotorcraft system identification, 1991, Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development, AGARD LS 178.Google Scholar
57.Kaletka, J. and Gimonet, B.Identification of extended models from BO-105 flight test data for hover flight condition, August 1995, 21st European Rotorcraft Forum, Saint Petersburg, Russia.Google Scholar
58.Amer, K.B. Theory of helicopter damping in pitch or roll and a comparison with flight measurements, 1950, NACA, TN 2136.Google Scholar
59.Bramwell, A.R.S., Done, G. and Balmford, D.Bramwell’s Helicopter Dynamics, 2001, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
60.Bagai, A. and Leishman, J.G.Rotor free-wake modeling using a pseudo-implicit technique – including comparisons with experimental data, J American Helicopter Soc, April 1995, 40, (3), pp 2941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar