Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T08:48:15.079Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Horizontal tail local angle-of-attack and total pressure measurements through static pressure ports and Kiel pitot

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2019

R. M. Granzoto*
Affiliation:
Embraer S.A., São José dos Campos, Brazil
L. A. Algodoal
Affiliation:
Embraer S.A., São José dos Campos, Brazil
G. J. Zambrano
Affiliation:
Embraer S.A., São José dos Campos, Brazil
G. G. Becker
Affiliation:
Embraer S.A., São José dos Campos, Brazil

Abstract

Aircraft handling qualities may be influenced by wing-tip flow separations and horizontal tail (HT) reduced efficiency caused by loss of local dynamic pressure or local tailplane flow separations in high angle-of-attack manoeuvres. From the flight tester’s perspective, provided that the test aircraft presents sufficient longitudinal control authority to overcome an uncommanded nose-up motion, this characteristic should not be a safety factor. Monitoring and measuring the local airflow in the aircraft’s HT provides information for safe flight-test envelope expansion and data for early aerodynamic knowledge and model validation. This work presents the development, installation and pre-flight calibration using computational fluid dynamics (CFD), flight-test calibration, results and benefits of differential pressure based local angle-of-attack and total pressure measurements through 20 static pressure ports and a Kiel pitot. These sensors were installed in a single-aisle, four-abreast, full fly-by-wire medium-range jet airliner with twin turbofan engines and conventional HT (low vertical position).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© Royal Aeronautical Society 2019 

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

A version of this paper was presented at the 31st ICAS Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences in Belo Horizonte, Brazil in September 2018

References

REFERENCES

Eppel, J.C., Riddle, D.W. and Steves, V.C. Flight Measured Downwash of the QSRA, Ames Research Center, 1988, Moffett Field, California.Google Scholar
Honeywell Precision Pressure Transducer (PPT) Data Sheet.Google Scholar
CFD++ Documentation’, Metacomp Technologies Inc., retrieved from http://www. metacomptech.com, accessed in March 2017.Google Scholar
Scalabrin, L.C., Ciloni, P., Antunes, A., Becker, G.G., Souza, M.A., and Granzoto, R.M. EMBRAER Contribution to HiLiftPW-3, 2018 AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA SciTech Forum, (AIAA 2018-1036). Google Scholar
Sparlat, P. R. Strategies for turbulence modelling end simulations, International J Heat and Fluid Flow, 2000, 21, pp 252263.Google Scholar