Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T00:33:05.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Validation of a rotorcraft mathematical model in autorotation by use of gyroplane flight tests

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

V. M. Spathopoulos
V. M. Spathopoulos*
Affiliation:
Athens, Greece
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aircraft handling qualities in autorotation are critical in determining the level of safety of rotorcraft. For helicopters suffering from an engine failure, transcending from powered to autorotative flight occurs rapidly and requires immediate and accurate pilot reaction. Although it is important for the handling qualities in this flight state to be predicted correctly, obvious difficulties will exist in using flight tests as a means of validation when autorotation constitutes an abnormal mode of operation. In the research work presented in this paper an alternative approach is applied, of configuring a generic rotorcraft model as a gyroplane, a type of vehicle for which its main rotor is constantly in autorotation. Flight tests are used for the validation purposes both for steady state and dynamic response cases. Results are produced to complement those already existing for a dissimilar gyroplane type thus increasing the level of confidence obtained. It is concluded that important handling qualities indicators such as the steady state trends are correctly predicted although limitations are imposed due to rotor speed discrepancy.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 108 , Issue 1079 , January 2004 , pp. 51 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2004 

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. Padfield, G.D. Helicopter Flight Dynamics, 1996, Blackwell Science.Google Scholar
2. Pegg, R.J. A flight investigation of a lightweight helicopter to study the feasibility of fixed-collective-pitch autorotations, NASA TN D-5270, June 1969, pp 4.Google Scholar
3. Segner, D.R. AH-56A Compound helicopter autorotation characteristics, Society of Experimental Test Pilots, Technical Review, 1973, 11, (2), pp 29–47.Google Scholar
4. Houston, S.S. Thomson, D.G. and Coton, F. The aerodynamics of gyroplanes, 1994-1997, CAA Contract No 7D/S/1125, Progress Report Phases 1–3.Google Scholar
5. Houston, S.S. Validation of a rotorcraft mathematical model for autogyro simulation, J Aircr, 2000, 37, (3), pp 403–409.Google Scholar
6. Houston, S.S. Validation of a non-linear individual blade rotorcraft flight dynamics model using a perturbation method, Aeronaut J, Aug/Sept 1994, 98, (977), pp 260–266.Google Scholar
7. Chen, R.T.N. A survey of non-uniform inflow models for rotorcraft flight dynamics and control applications, Vertica, 1990, 14,(2), pp 147–184.Google Scholar
8. Pitt, D.M. and Peters, D.A. Theoretical prediction of dynamic inflow derivatives, Vertica, 1981, 5, pp 21–34.Google Scholar
9. Gaonkar, G.H. and Peters, D.A. A review of dynamic inflow modelling for rotorcraft flight dynamics, Vertica, 1988, 12, (3), pp 213–242.Google Scholar
10. Peters, D.A. and Haquang, N. Dynamic inflow for practical applications, J American Helicopter Soc, October 1988, Technical Note, pp 64–68.Google Scholar
11. Doyle, S.A. Thomson, D.G. Modification of a helicopter inverse simulation to include an enhanced rotor model, J Aircr, 2000, 37, (3), pp 536–538.Google Scholar
12. Johnson, W. Helicopter Theory, 1980, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
13. Glauert, H. A General theory of the autogyro, Nov 1926, Aeronautical Research Committee Reports and Memoranda No 1111.Google Scholar
14. Houston, S.S. Identification of autogyro lateral/directional stability and control characteristics from flight test, 1998, Proc Inst Mech Eng, 212, Part G, J Aerospace Eng, pp 271–285.Google Scholar