HELICOPTER VIBRATIONS

EFFECT OF VIBRATIONS
 DURING FORWARD FLIGHT, THE VIBRATORY LOADS
PRODUCE THE FOLLOWING EFFECTS
 CAUSE DISCOMFORT TO PILOT & CREW
 EQUIPMENT DETERIORATION
 FATIGUE DAMAGE TO THE STRUCTURE
 REDUCED EFFECTIVENESS OF WEAPON DELIVERY
 INCREASED MAINTENANCE
 THESE EFFECTS INCREASE WITH INCREASE IN SPEED
& USE OF THE VEHICLE
 PRESENTLY, THE MAXIMUM VIBRATORY LEVEL
REQUIREMENT IS 0.1g IN THE FUSELAGE
 IN FUTURE, IT CAN BE REDUCED TO 0.05g OR EVEN
0.02g WITH STRINGENT VIBRATION CONTROL
METHODS
2
HUMAN RESPONSE TO VIBRATORY LEVEL

3
INTRUSION INDEX CRITERIA
 BASED ON ADS-27
 THE INDEX IS EVALUATED BY NORMALIZING
THE TRI-AXIAL ACCELEROMETER DATA FOR
THE FOUR LARGEST PEAKS IN FREQUENCY
DOMAIN
 ADS-27 REQUIREMENTS
 PILOT SEAT < 1.2
 WEAPON SYSTEM OPERATION < 1 IN LEVEL
FLIGHT
 VIBRATION LEVEL GOOD = 0.8
4
INTRUSION INDEX CRITERIA

5
 SOURCES OF VIBRATION
 THE SOURCES OF VIBRATION TO THE FUSELAGE ARE
 THE ROTOR HUB SHEARS (FORCES) AND MOMENTS
 ENGINE
 TRANSMISSION
 AERODYNAMIC PRESSURE PULSES ON THE FUSELAGE DUE TO
ROTOR
 OF THESE, THE PREDOMINANT SOURCE OF
VIBRATION IS THE MAIN ROTOR
 DURING STEADY FLIGHT, THE PERIODIC LOADS DUE
TO ALL THE BLADES ARE SUMMED UP AT THE HUB
 DURING SUMMATION SOME OF THE HARMONICS ARE
CANCELLED AND THE REMAINING HARMONIC
COMPONENTS ARE TRANSMITTED TO THE FUSELAGE
6
SOURCES OF VIBRATION

7
 VIBRATION CONTROL
 THE PREDOMINANT FREQUENCY OF THE
FUSELAGE VIBRATION IS NΩ (OR N/REV IN
NON-DIMENSIONAL FORM)
 MOST OF THE VIBRATION CONTROL
DEVICES/SCHEMES ATTEMPT TO REDUCE
THE VIBRATORY LEVELS AT THIS
PARTICULAR FREQUENCY
 VIBRATION MINIMIZATION TECHNIQUES
ADOPTED SO FAR, CAN BE CLASSIFIED AS
 PASSIVE CONTROL METHODOLOGIES OR
 ACTIVE CONTROL METHODOLOGIES

8
 PASSIVE CONTROL TECHNIQUES

 STRUCTURAL OPTIMIZATION
 HUB OR BLADE MOUNTED PENDULUM TYPE
VIBRATION ABSORBERS
 VIBRATION ISOLATION DEVICES LIKE DYNAMIC
ANTI-RESONANT VIBRATION ISOLATION (DAVI)
 ANTI-RESONANT ISOLATION SYSTEM (ARIS)
 LIQUID INERTIA VIBRATION ELIMINATOR (LIVE)

9
 STRUCTURAL MODIFICATION OR OPTIMIZATION
 THE MAIN OBJECTIVE IS TO DESIGN A STRUCTURE
THAT GIVES THE BEST PERFORMANCE.
 STRUCTURAL MODIFICATIONS
 LIKE STIFFENING A LOCAL MEMBER OR A PANEL
BASED ON ADHOC DECISIONS OR CERTAIN DESIGN
THUMB RULES EVOLVED BY EXPERIENCE.
 STRUCTURAL OPTIMIZATION INVOLVES
 THE FORMULATION OF A MATHEMATICAL PROBLEM,
 HAVING AN OBJECTIVE FUNCTION (PERFORMANCE
INDEX),
 CONSTRAINT RELATIONS AND
 THE DESIGN VARIABLE
10
STRUCTURAL MODIFICATION OR OPTIMIZATION

 USING WELL DEVELOPED MATHEMATICAL

PROCEDURES, AN OPTIMIZATION PROBLEM IS TO
BE SOLVED TO ARRIVE AT THE VALUES OF THE
DESIGN VARIABLES, MEETING THE CONSTRAINT
RELATIONS AND PROVIDING THE BEST
PERFORMANCE INDEX
 IN THE CASE OF HELICOPTER VIBRATION, THE IDEA
OF STRUCTURAL OPTIMIZATION IS
 TO DESIGN A STRUCTURE (EITHER BLADE OR FUSELAGE)
TO HAVE MINIMUM VIBRATORY RESPONSE AND
 MEETING THE CONSTRAINTS ON FREQUENCY, STABILITY
RESPONSE AND WEIGHT.

11
PASSIVE VIBRATION CONTROL DEVICES

 CAN BE CLASSIFIED DEPENDING UPON

THE LOCATION OF ATTACHMENT OF
THESE DEVICES
 ROTATING SYSTEM CONTROL OR
 NON-ROTATING SYSTEM CONTROL.

12
 ROTATING SYSTEM CONTROL
 TYPES
 BLADE MOUNTED PENDULUM ABSORBERS
 HUB MOUNTED BIFILAR ABSORBERS AND
 MONOFILAR ABSORBERS.
 CALLED ABSORBERS SINCE THEY ABSORB THE
ENERGY FROM ROTOR LOADS AND REDUCE THE
LOADS TRANSMITTED TO THE FUSELAGE STRUCTURE.
 SINCE THESE DEVICES ABSORB THE ENERGY, THEY
ARE DESIGNED TO VIBRATE NEAR RESONANCE.
 THE NATURAL FREQUENCY OF THESES DEVICES ARE
TUNED TO PROVIDE MAXIMUM ENERGY ABSORPTION
AT A PARTICULAR EXCITATION FREQUENCY
13
BLADE MOUNTED PENDULUM ABSORBERS (PENDABS)

 PRODUCE AN OPPOSING DYNAMIC SHEAR LOADS

AT THE POINT OF ATTACHMENT TO NULLIFY THE
VIBRATORY LOADS DUE TO EXTERNAL BLADE
LOADS
 THE NATURAL FREQUENCY IS TUNED TO A
SPECIFIC PER/REV FREQUENCY
 FOR A MISTUNED PENDAB, THE RESULTING
VIBRATION LOAD WOULD BE MUCH WORSE THAN
WITHOUT PENDAB
 FIGURE SHOWS THAT THE MAXIMUM REDUCTION
IS ACHIEVED WHEN THE PENDULUM FREQUENCY
IS 3.87/REV LOCATED IN THE RANGE OF 18% TO
24% OF THE SPAN OF THE BLADE
14
BLADE MOUNTED PENDULUM ABSORBERS (PENDABS)

15
EFFECT OF SPANWISE LOCATION

16
EFFECT OF PENDAB

17
BLADE MOUNTED PENDULUM ABSORBERS (PENDABS)

 ADVANTAGES
 RELATIVELY SIMPLE TO DESIGN, ANALYZE AND
INSTALL.
 THEY ARE EFFECTIVE IN SUBSTANTIALLY
REDUCING THE HUB SHEARS AT THE BLADE ROOT.
 DISADVANTAGES
 WEIGHT PENALTY
 PRESENCE OF DAMPING IN THE PENDAB IS
DETRIMENTAL TO ITS PERFORMANCE.
 WEAR AND TEAR

18
 BLADE MOUNTED PENDULUM ABSORBERS (PENDABS)

 DISADVANTAGES (CONTINUED)
 REDUCE ONLY ONE COMPONENT OF BLADE ROOT
SHEAR AT ONE PARTICULAR CHOSEN FREQUENCY.
 SEPARATE PENDABS ARE REQUIRED FOR LOAD
MINIMIZATION IN EACH HARMONIC
 CHANGE IN THE PITCH ANGLE OF THE BLADE LEADS
TO THE CHANGE IN ORIENTATION, COUPLING
(USUALLY ADVERSE) BETWEEN FLAP AND LAG
BENDING OCCURS.
 THEY INCREASE THE AERODYNAMIC DRAG OF THE
ROTOR.
 CARE MUST BE EXERCISED IN DESIGNING TO AVOID
MISTUNING.
19
ROTOR BIFILAR ABSORBERS
 THE BIFILAR MASS IS ATTACHED TO
THE HUB THROUGH A SUPPORT ARM.
 THE ABSORBER MASS IS ALLOWED TO
HAVE AN OSCILLATORY MOTION IN
THE LEAD-LAG DIRECTION.
 THE ABSORBER MASS HAS ONLY
TRANSLATIONAL MOTION IN THE
PLANE OF ROTATION

20
ROTOR BIFILAR ABSORBERS

21
 ROTOR BIFILAR ABSORBERS
 ADVANTAGES
 THE DEVICE IS SIMPLE AND IS ATTACHED TO THE
HUB RATHER THAN ON THE BLADE.
 DUE TO ROLLER BEARINGS, IT HAS A GOOD
FATIGUE LIFE AND
 IT HAS LOW INHERENT DAMPING.
 SINCE THIS DEVICE IS SUPPORTED ON THE HUB,
IT DOES NOT INTRODUCE ANY COUPLING IN THE
BLADE DUE TO PITCH VARIATION.
 DISADVANTAGES
 THE DEVICE IS HEAVY.
 IT CAN REDUCE ONLY IN-PLANE HUB LOADS.
22
MONOFILAR ABSORBER
 MONOFILAR ABSORBER IS A TWO-DEGREES
OF FREEDOM ABSORBERS
 TRANSLATIONAL (IN THE PLANE OF ROTATION)
AND
 ROTATIONAL(ABOUT MANDREL BEARING AXIS)
 HENCE THIS CAN BE TUNED TO REDUCE
VIBRATORY LOADS AT TWO FREQUENCIES,
NAMELY (N + 1)Ω AND (N – 1)Ω.

23
MONOFILAR ABSORBER

24
NON-ROTATING SYSTEM CONTROL

 USUALLY MOUNTED BETWEEN THE

FUSELAGE AND THE GEARBOX
SUPPORT SYSTEM
 TYPES
 ANTI-RESONANT DEVICES
 NODAMATIC ISOLATION SYSTEM
 FOCUSED PYLON

25
NON-ROTATING SYSTEM CONTROL

26
 ANTI-RESONANT DEVICES
 THE ISOLATOR HAS A SPRING, A DAMPER AND A TUNING
MASS WHICH ACTS AS AN ABSORBER
 WHEN THE ISOLATOR STIFFNESS IS VERY LARGE THERE
IS NO ISOLATION, SINCE BOTH GEARBOX/ROTOR MASS
(MA) AND FUSELAGE MASS (MB) MOVE AS ONE UNIT.
 BY TUNING THE ISOLATOR SPRING AND MASS, AIRFRAME
(MB) MOTION CAN BE BROUGHT TO ALMOST ZERO.
 SINCE BASED ON ANTI-RESONANT PRINCIPLE, HENCE,
THESE DEVICES ARE KNOWN AS
 ANTI-RESONANT ISOLATION SYSTEM (ARIS) AND
 DYNAMIC ANTI-RESONANT VIBRATION ISOLATION (DAVI).
 SOME DEVICES USE LIQUID INERTIA VIBRATION ISOLATOR (LIVE)
27
LIVE UNIT

28
 NODAMATIC ISOLATION SYSTEM
 THE ROTOR/GEARBOX UNIT IS MOUNTED ON A
STRUCTURE ON WHOSE NODAL POINTS THE FUSELAGE
IS SUPPORTED
 THE ROTOR IS SUPPORTED ON A BEAN AND THE
FUSELAGE IS ATTACHED AT THE NODAL POINTS OF THE
BEAM.
 THE REACTION LOADS AT THE NODAL POINTS ARE
REDUCED BY THE TUNING MASSES ATTACHED AT THE
TWO ENDS OF THE BEAM.
 THESE MASSES ARE ALSO USED TO ADJUST THE FIRST
NATURAL FREQUENCY OF THE BEAM TO BE EQUAL TO
THE EXCITATION FREQUENCY.
 EVEN THOUGH THESE SYSTEMS ARE EFFECTIVE, THEY
ARE HEAVY
29
NODAMATIC ISOLATION SYSTEM

30
 FOCUSED PYLON
 MOST OF THE DEVICES, DESCRIBED ABOVE, ARE DESIGNED TO
ELIMINATE THE VIBRATING SHEAR LOADS.
 HOWEVER BY PROVIDING THREE OR FOUR ISOLATORS, THE
ROTATIONAL LOADS CAN ALSO BE MINIMIZED
 THE FOCUSED PYLON IS A MECHANISM WHICH CAN BE USED TO
ELIMINATE THE VIBRATORY MOMENTS.
 IN THIS SCHEME, THE ROTOR/GEAR BOX UNIT IS SUPPORTED BY
TWO MORE PARALLEL LINKAGES
 THE FUSELAGE, 2-LINKAGES AND GEARBOX CONSTITUTE A 4-BAR
LINKAGE SYSTEM.
 THE LINKAGES ARE INCLINED IN SUCH A WAY THAT THE FOCAL
POINT IS AT THE CENTRE OF GRAVITY OF THE GEAR BOX.
 THIS ARRANGEMENT MAKES THE SYSTEM ACT AS A ROTATIONAL
ISOLATION

31
FOCUSSED PYLON

32
ACTIVE CONTROL TECHNIQUES
 HIGHER HARMONIC CONTROL (HHC)
OF BLADE PITCH ANGLE
 INDIVIDUAL BLADE CONTROL (IBC)
 ACTIVE FLAP CONTROL (AFC)
 ACTIVE CONTROL OF STRUCTURE
RESPONSE (ACSR).

33
 HHC & IBC
 IN HHC AND IBC SCHEMES, THE PURPOSE IS TO OSCILLATE THE
BLADE AT FREQUENCIES, WHICH ARE HARMONICS OF THE ROTOR
R.P.M., IN ADDITION TO THE 1/REV BLADE PITCH INPUT
REQUIRED FOR FLIGHT CONTROL.
 THE HIGHER HARMONIC BLADE PITCH CONTROL CAN BE
IMPLEMENTED IN PRACTICE, BY USING ACTUATORS EITHER IN
THE NON-ROTATING FRAME (BELOW THE SWASH-PLATE IN THE
FIXED FRAME) OR IN THE ROTATING FRAME (ABOVE THE SWASH
PLATE IN THE ROTATING FRAME).
 THIS FIRST APPROACH, CALLED THE CONVENTIONAL HHC, CAN
BE REGARDED AS A ROTOR CONTROL SCHEME. IN THIS SCHEME,
THE PITCH ANGLES OF ALL THE BLADES IN THE ROTOR SYSTEM
ARE CONTROLLED SIMULTANEOUSLY. IN THE SECOND APPROACH,
KNOWN AS INDIVIDUAL BLADE CONTROL (IBC), THE PITCH
ANGLE OF EACH BLADE IS CONTROLLED INDEPENDENTLY.

34
HHC & IBC

35
 HHC & IBC
 THE MAJOR DISADVANTAGES
 ROTOR BLADE STALL AT HIGH FORWARD
SPEEDS
 HIGH POWER REQUIREMENTS AND
 DIFFICULTIES IN MEETING AIR
WORTHINESS CRITERIA, SINCE THE HIGHER
HARMONIC ACTUATORS ARE IMPLEMENTED
IN PRIMARY FLIGHT CONTROL PATH

36
 ACTIVE FLAP CONTROL
 TO OVERCOME THE DIFFICULTIES AND DRAWBACKS
OF HIGHER HARMONIC BLADE PITCH CONTROL
 INSTEAD OF OSCILLATING THE WHOLE BLADE
FROM THE ROOT, A TRAILING EDGE FLAP SITUATED
AROUND 0.7R TO 0.9R IS CONTROLLED.
 ACTIVELY CONTROLLED FLAP REQUIRES LESS
POWER THAN CONVENTIONAL HIGHER HARMONIC
SCHEMES AND HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO REDUCE
THE VIBRATORY LOADS.
 CURRENTLY RESEARCH EFFORT IS AIMED AT
FURTHER ANALYSIS AND TO DEVELOP A SMART
ACTUATOR FOR THE FLAP CONTROL

37
ACTIVE FLAP CONTROL

38
ACTIVE CONTROL OF STRUCTURAL RESPONSE

 THIS SCHEME IS BASED ON THE PRINCIPLE OF

SUPERPOSITION OF TWO INDEPENDENT
RESPONSES OF A LINEAR SYSTEM, SUCH THAT THE
TOTAL RESPONSE IS ZERO.
 IN THE CASE OF HELICOPTERS, THE FUSELAGE IS
EXCITED BY THE APPLICATION OF CONTROLLED
FORCES BY EXTERNAL ACTUATORS AT SELECTED
LOCATIONS SUCH THAT THE COMBINED RESPONSE
OF THE FUSELAGE DUE TO ROTOR LOADS AND THE
EXTERNAL ACTUATOR FORCES IS THE MINIMUM.

39
 ACTIVE CONTROL OF STRUCTURAL RESPONSE
 THE ANALYTICAL STUDIES, AND GROUND & FLIGHT
TESTS CONDUCTED ON WESTLAND 30 HELICOPTER
HAVE SHOWN THAT IT IS POSSIBLE TO ACHIEVE
MORE THAN 80% VIBRATION REDUCTION IN
FUSELAGE.
 DURING PRELIMINARY TESTS ON SIRKOSKY-76, IT
WAS OBSERVED THAT THIS SCHEME REDUCES NOT
ONLY N/REV VIBRATORY LOADS BUT ALSO 1/REV
VIBRATION IN FUSELAGE.
 THE MAJOR ADVANTAGES OF THIS SCHEME ARE
 LESS POWER REQUIREMENTS,
 MINIMAL AIR WORTHINESS REQUIREMENTS AND
 ONE CAN SELECTIVELY CHOOSE THE LOCATIONS WHERE THE
VIBRATION HAS TO BE MINIMIZED.
40
41
42
THANKYOU

43