Forward Flight Lecture2
Forward Flight Lecture2
ROTORCRAFT AEROMECHANICS 4
forward speed the advancing blade tip is at almost zero incidence (and zero lift). A symmetrical section at zero lift at a Mach number of 0.8 has zero pitching moment, but a cambered section has a strong nose down pitching moment, as shown in the figure.
Cambered aerofoil 0 M = 0.8 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.4 0.035 Cambered aerofoil
0.2
Cm
0.6 0.04 0.045 0.8 M = 0.7 0.05 0.055 0.5 1 0 0.2 0.4 x/c 0.6 0.8 1
0.6
0.9
The effects of this large, camber-induced, pitching moment on the advancing blade tips can be severe and so the rotor blade and section is designed to minimize the root pitching moment on the advancing blade. The next figure illustrates the problem and 2 shows the torsional load (represented by M C m ) for a cambered and a symmetrical tip aerofoil around the azimuth.
0.01
0.005
0.02 0
50
100
250
300
350
It is evident that the cambered section produces a large once-per-rev oscillatory load
ROTORCRAFT AEROMECHANICS 4
each time the advancing blade passes 90 degrees azimuth. The loads are very high, despite the fact that aerofoil stall is not encountered in this example. It is for this reason that the symmetrical NACA0012 section was used for many years as the basic rotor blade section. This aerofoil, although simple, has reasonably high stall incidence, low pitching moment and tolerable transonic effects. The NACA0012, and NACA 23012, form the basis of several modern rotor blade sections developed by NPL and the RAE in the UK. If a basic NACA0012 section is used with an extended and drooped leading edge as a means to introduce camber then the resulting aerofoil (e.g the NPL 9615) can give a 10% increase in C Lmax with a small increase in M dd and an acceptable pitching moment at zero lift. Essentially, the nose droop allows an increase in camber without increasing the curvature of the upper surface of the aerofoil & hence avoids the increase in upper surface shockwave strength normally associated with aerofoil camber. The allowable amount of nose droop using this design strategy is limited by the nose down moment that occurs from the underside suction peak (and possible shock wave) resulting from the droop. The introduction of aerofoil camber by this method is illustrated in the next figure.
0.05 t/c
ROTORCRAFT AEROMECHANICS 4
analysis at NPL by Wilby and Pearcey in the 1960's (most of the material for this lecture was in fact provided by P.Wilby). Their research has led to even better section designed by a combination of experience, tunnel testing (at ARA) and CFD methods at RAE and Westland Helicopters in the RAE 9645 section which is used as the main lifting aerofoil on the Lynx helicopter. These modern rotor aerofoils are still UK classified but their general design and use on the Lynx rotor is described below. Lynx rotor aerofoil case study. The result of many years of tunnel testing (using oscillatory pitching tests to reflect the changing incidences met by rotor blades) and development from the original RAE/NPL 9615 section is a set of three aerofoils each used for a different purpose on the Lynx rotor. RAE 9645 is the main lifting aerofoil used on the Lynx helicopter and is employed between 65% and 85% blade span. This aerofoil is used to achieve the best possible retreating blade stall behaviour. To determine the section's retreating blade stall behaviour, the section is tested in conditions similar to those found on a retreating Lynx blade. A close approximation to these conditions is obtained in a wind tunnel at M=0.3, and where the aerofoil model undergoes sinusoidal pitching at 30Hz and 8 degrees half amplitude. This frequency is selected to obtain a similar reduced c U between test conditions and real life. An aerofoil undergoing frequency such oscillations experiences dynamic stall (which we will discuss in a later lecture)where the change in pitching moment can be as much as 500% of the static stall moment break. The magnitude of the pitching moment break is plotted against the maximum aerofoil incidence in a cycle and the resulting intercept with the incidence axis is a measure of the maximum achievable blade incidence on the rotor. This type of `critical dynamic incidence' diagram, for the RAE9645 is shown below.
RAE 9645
C change at stall
10 AOA
12
14
16
18
20
The RAE 9645 achieves a 30% increase in maximum lift coefficient over the NACA 0012. It is around 12% thick and its (approximate due to the classified nature of the aerofoil) shape is shown in the following figure:
ROTORCRAFT AEROMECHANICS 4
This aerofoil has a moderate nose down moment at zero lift resulting from its `nosedroop' camber and so its pitching moment on the rotor blade is balanced by a RAE 9648 section inboard, from the hub up to 65% rotor radius. The RAE 9648 is also 12% thick but has a reflexed trailing edge providing a nose up moment. There is a penalty in using this aerofoil at high Mach numbers because of the lower critical Mach number introduced by reflex camber- however, this is not as important for the inboard sections because their Mach numbers are not too high, even at high advance ratio.
Finally a tip aerofoil section, the RAE 9634 is used between 85% and 100% span. This aerofoil is designed to delay transonic flow effects and, consequently, it is only 8.3% thick.
ROTORCRAFT AEROMECHANICS 4
The following figure shows the drag coefficients and pitching moments of these three aerofoils. The figure also shows the maximum incidence these aerofoils can sustain in an oscillatory pitch test without stalling. The RAE 9645 is seen to be far superior in dynamic lifting capability and the RAE9634 the best transonic aerofoil.
0.03 0.025 0.02
C
D
0.9
AOA
16
15 RAE 9634
RAE 9634
14
RAE 9648
0.6
0.9
0.35
0.5
Sweeping the tip is another strategy used on modern helicopters to delay transonic effects and will be discussed in the next lecture.