Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:07:12.619Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A multi-disciplinary toolbox for rotorcraft design

Part of: Rotorcraft Virtual Engineering Conference 2016

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2018

P. Weiand  and
A. Krenik
P. Weiand*
Affiliation:
German Aerospace Center (DLR), Institute of Flight Systems, Braunschweig, Germany
A. Krenik
Affiliation:
German Aerospace Center (DLR), Institute of Flight Systems, Braunschweig, Germany
*
*peter.weiand@dlr.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to outline the structure of the DLR integrated rotorcraft design process. The complexity of rotorcraft design requires the development of the tools directly by the specialists of the respective institutes, where the tools are continuously refined and published to authorised users. The integration of the tools into a suitable software framework by means of distributed computation and the harmonisation of the tools among each other are presented. This framework delivers a high level of modularity making the layout and testing of the process very flexible. This design environment covers the conceptual and preliminary design phases. Not only conventional main/tail rotor configurations can be designed, but also some other configurations with more than one main rotor. The fundamental concept behind the layout of the tools is demonstrated, especially the use of scaling and optimisation loops in connection with the different levels of fidelity and the different phases of design.

Keywords

Rotorcraftvirtual engineeringintegrated design
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 122 , Issue 1250 , April 2018 , pp. 620 - 645
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2018 

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

This is a version of a paper first presented at the RAeS Virtual Engineering Conference held at Liverpool University, 8–10 November 2016.

References

REFERENCES

1.Raymer, D. P. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, 2006, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, Virginia, US.Google Scholar
2.Nicolai, L and Carichner, G. Fundamentals of Aircraft and Airship Design, Volume 1. 2010, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, Virginia, US.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Layton, D. M. Introduction to Helicopter Design, 1992, AIAA Professional Studies Series, Salinas, California, US.Google Scholar
4.Roskam, J. Aircraft Design, 1985, Design, Analysis and Research Corporation (DARcorporation), Lawrence, Kansas, US.Google Scholar
5.Johnson, W. NDARC - NASA Design and Analysis of RotorCraft, NASA/TP–2009-215402, 2009, Moffett Field, California, US.Google Scholar
6.Boer, J.-F. and Stevens, J. Helicopter life cycle cost reduction through pre-design optimisation, 32nd European Rotorcraft Forum, 12–14 September 2006, Maastricht, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
7.Khalid, A. and Schrage, D. P. Helicopter design cost minimization using multidisciplinary design optimization, American Helicopter Society 63rd Annual Forum and Technology Display, 1–3 May 2007, Virginia Beach, Virginia, US.Google Scholar
8.Basset, P.-M., Tremolet, A., Cuzieux, F., Schulte, C., Tristrant, D., Lefebvre, T., Reboul, G., Richez, F., Burguburu, S., Petot, D. and Paluch, B. The C.R.E.A.T.I.O.N. project for rotorcraft concepts evaluation: The first steps, 37th European Rotorcraft Forum, 13–15 September 2011, Vergiate and Gallarate, Italy.Google Scholar
9.Bachmann, A. and Kunde, M. Advances in generalization and decoupling of software parts in a scientific simulation workflow system, The 4th International Conference on Advanced Engineering Computing and Applications in Sciences - ADVCOMP 2010, 25–30 October 2010, Florence, Italy.Google Scholar
10.Litz, M., Seider, D., Bachmann, A. and Kunde, M. Integration framework for preliminary design tool chains, Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress 2011, 27–29 September 2011, Bremen, Germany.Google Scholar
11.Seider, D., Fischer, P. M., Litz, M., Schreiber, A. and Gerndt, A. Open source software framework for applications in aeronautics and space, 2012 IEEE Aerospace Conference, 3–10 March 2012, Big Sky, Montana, US.Google Scholar
12.Bachmann, A., Kunde, M., Litz, M., Schreiber, A. and Bertsch, L. Automation of aircraft pre-design using a versatile data transfer and storage format in a distributed computing environment, 3rd International Conference on Advanced Engineering Computing and Applications in Sciences - ADVCOMP 2009, 11–16 October, 2009, Sliema, Malta.Google Scholar
13.Liersch, C. M. and Hepperle, M. A distributed toolbox for multi-disciplinary preliminary aircraft design, CEAS Aeronaut. J, 2011, 2, (1–4), pp 57–68.Google Scholar
14.Benoit, B., Kampa, K., von Grünhagen, W., Basset, P.-M. and Gimonet, B. HOST, a general helicopter simulation tool for Germany and France, American Helicopter Society 56th Annual Forum, 2–4 May 2000, Virginia Beach, Virginia, US.Google Scholar
15.Pitt, D. M. and Peters, D. A. Theoretical prediction of dynamic-inflow derivatives, 6th European Rotorcraft and Powered Lift Aircraft Forum, 16–19 September, 1980, Bristol, England.Google Scholar
16.Chen, R. T. N. A survey of nonuniform inflow models for rotorcraft flight dynamics and control applications, NASA Technical Memorandum 102219, November 1989.Google Scholar
17.Leishman, J. G. Principles of Helicopter Aerodynamics, 2006, Cambridge University Press, New York, New York, US.Google Scholar
18.Johnson, W. Rotorcraft Aeromechanics, 2013, Cambridge University Press, New York, New York, US.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Kunze, P. Evaluation of an unsteady panel method for the prediction of rotor-rotor interactions in preliminary design, in 41th European Rotorcraft Forum, 1–4 September, 2015, Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
20.Powell, M. J. D. A View of Algorithms for Optimization without Derivatives, Math. TODAY, vol. 43(5), 2007. Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
21.Kunze, P. Parametric fuselage geometry generation and aerodynamic performance prediction in preliminary rotorcraft design, 39th European Rotorcraft Forum, 3–6 September, 2013, Moscow, Russia.Google Scholar
22.Siggel, M. The TiGL geometry library, 3rd Symposium on Collaboration in Aircraft Design, 19–20 September 2013, Linköping, Sweden.Google Scholar
23.Maskew, B. Program VSAERO theory document - NASA CR-4023, 1987 Redmond, Washington, US.Google Scholar
24.Beltramo, M. N. and Morris, , , M. A. Parametric Study of Helicopter Aircraft Systems Costs and Weights, 1980, Hampton, Virginia, US.Google Scholar
25.Prouty, R. W. Helicopter Performance, Stability, and Control, 1990, Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida, US.Google Scholar
26.Palasis, D. Erstellung eines Vorentwurfsverfahrens für Hubschrauber mit einer Erweiterung für das Kipprotorflugzeug, Fortschritt-Berichte VDI: Reihe 7, no. 201, 1992, Düsseldorf, Germany.Google Scholar
27.Scherer, J., Kohlgrüber, D., Dorbath, F. and Sorour, M. A finite element based tool chain for structural sizing of transport aircraft in preliminary aircraft design, Deutscher Luft- und Raumfahrtkongress 2013, 10–12 September, 2013, Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar
28.Schwinn, D. B., Kohlgrüber, D., Scherer, J. and Siemann, M. H. A parametric aircraft fuselage model for preliminary sizing and crashworthiness applications, CEAS Aeronaut. J, 2016, 7, (3), pp 357–372.Google Scholar