You are on page 1of 6

AEROELASTIC ANALYSIS OF THE BLADE SAILING PHENOMENON IN HELICOPTER

UNDER MAGNETORHEOLOGICAL-HYSTERETIC EFFECTS

Kleber A. L. Castão1, Luiz C. S. Góes2, José M. Balthazar3, Roberto L. C. B. Ramos4


1
ITA – Tecnologial Institute of Aeronautics, São José dos Campos, Brazil, kcastao@gmail.com
2
ITA – Tecnologial Institute of Aeronautics, São José dos Campos, Brazil, goes@ita.br
3
UNESP – Sao Paulo University, Rio Claro, Brazil, jmbaltha@rc.unesp.br
4
UFABC – University of ABC, Santo Andre, Brazil, rlcbramos@gmail.com

Abstract: This paper analyzes the response of a helicopter survivability of shipboard helicopters and improve the safety
blade-sailing under effect of a Magnetorheological Damper of military operations in the hostile maritime environment.
(MRD) in the presence of unsteady flow effects. The The application of Magnetorheological dampers (MRD)
aeroelastic analysis focuses on the performance of a semi in this type of problem can mean a great incentive to study
active control device with respect to the reduction of blade the applications of intelligent materials with respect to the
flapping vibrations in hingelles rotors during engagement elimination and control of aeroelastic phenomena, in
shipboard operations. The effect of the MRD in the system helicopters and on aircraft. These studies may also signify a
is to increase the structural damping to improve the blade great advance in the study of these materials, because its
behavior under the conditions that will be presented. The application in helicopters and aircraft require the
simulation results show that the inclusion of the MRD in the development of these devices and materials quickly and
aeroelastic model proposed can yield tunnel-strike results effectively important.
suppression and significant reduction in upward blade tip It is this kind of situation we want to present here; the
deflections at the unsteady wind-over-deck conditions. application of these materials, trying to solve aeroelastics
problems.
Keywords: Helicopter Blade Sailing, Magnetorheological-
hysteretic Damper, Unsteady Flow. 2. MRD MODELING

1. INTRODUCTION It is well known that the Magnetorheological Fluid


(MRF) consists of a mineral oil based fluid (or silicone,
Flow-induced unsteady loads are often related to large water, etc.) with micron magnetic particles in suspension,
vibrations and damage in flexible structures. Shipboard which line up in parallel to a applied magnetic field, forming
helicopters, operating in the hostile maritime environment a species of chain. When the structure is submitted to a
from frigate-like platforms, are especially susceptible to vibration, these chains break, wasting energy and, the
these effects during rotor engagement/disengagement magnetic field cause the reconstruction of them. The
operations under high wind-over-deck (WOD) conditions. continuous breaking and reconstitution of these chains allow
These dangerous conditions are amplified by the ship the fluid to waste energy of the system [2], by responding in
structure, which generates flow velocity gradients and this way, the damping presents a hysteretic behavior.
vortices over the flight deck. The problem of flight in the The hysteretic model of MRD used in this paper was
vicinity of ships is usually called Dynamic Interface (DI) presented Pierrick Jean in your PhD thesis [3]. This model
problem [1]. Among the dynamic phenomena in the DI that considers several properties of the damper in each region of
must be analyzed and controlled, one is especially important the operation, pre-yield and pos-yield, for example.
for rotary-wing aircraft: blade sailing. Below, are presented the equations that represent the
Blade sailing is an aeroelastic transient phenomenon that hysteretic model:
is characterized by the occurrence of large flapping
=Fd k pre ( ic )( x2 − x1 ) + c pre ( x2 − x1 )
vibrations in the blade, possibly associated with tunnel
(Tanden rotors helicopters) and tail-boom (conventional = x1 k pre ( ic )( x2 − x1 ) + c pre ( ic )( x2 − x1 ) − χ ( x1 , ic )
m1 
helicopters) strikes, due to fluid-structure interactions during
= χ ( x1 , ic ) Fy ( ic ) tanh (α x1 ) + c post ( ic ) x1
engagement or disengagement operations of helicopter
rotors under high wind conditions. The blade-sailing control k pre ( i=c) a pr + bpr tanh ( c pr ic ) (1)
problem has a theoretical importance, due to the nonlinear
=c pre cte = , α cte
time-varying characteristics of the associated blade flapping
oscillator, which is also subjected to large disturbances. ⎛ cy dy −i / d ⎞
Fy ( ic ) =
−i / c
Semi-active aeroelastic control strategies, aimed at a y + by ⎜ 1 + e +c y
e c
⎟⎟
y

⎜ d −c cy − d y
prescribing a low-vibration behavior for shipboard rotors in ⎝ y y ⎠
the DI by using smart-materials controllers, can enhance the c post ( i=
c) a po + bpo tanh ( c poic )

1
Proceedings of the 9th Brazilian Conference on Dynamics Control and their Applications
Serra Negra, SP - ISSN 2178-3667 1074
AEROELASTIC ANALYSIS OF THE BLADE SAILING PHENOMENON IN HELICOPTER UNDER MAGNETORHEOLOGICAL-HYSTERETIC EFFECTS
Kleber A. L. Castão, Luiz Carlos Sandoval Goes, Roberto Luiz da Cunha Barroso Ramos
.

Where Fd is the force generated by the damper and The simplified diagram of forces at a planar blade
element, see [4], illustrates the main factors that govern the
k pre , c pre , χ ( x1 , ic ) , Fy , c post , α are values that control blade-sailing behavior. The resulting moments about the
the hysteresis loop of the model and are related to the flapping hinge in conjunction with the droop/flap stop
characteristics of the fluid and to the characteristics of the effects, modeled as a nonlinear rotational spring
(representing the stiffness), determine the blade tip
device. Note that the parameters k pre , Fy and c post are deflections related to the angle β. Ship motion effects are not
dependent of the applied current in the damper. Below Fig.1 included.
shows the hysteresis loops obtained by simulations of the Fig. 3 shows the flow velocity components in the plane
model. of the rotor for the proposed blade-sailing model,
considering the WOD conditions. VWOD and ΨWOD are,
the magnitude and direction, respectively, of the incoming
wind velocity with respect to the ship centerline

Vy Helicopter Blade

Starboard

Ψ Blade Azimuth
Ship Centerline Angle Vx
ΨWOD
Port
Vz
Fig. 1. Hysteresis loops of the MRD model. VWOD

To summarize, we have a model of the MR damper that Figure 3: Flow velocity components for the WOD conditions.
enables one to predict the damper force as a function of
piston displacement and velocity (relative to the damper
body displacement and velocity) and of the current in the The blade-sailing modeling is based on a proposed
damper coil. rotary-wing aeroelastic scheme applied to articulated
shipboard rotor blades, according to the Figs. 1 and 2, taking
3. AEROELASTIC MODELING into account some simplifying assumptions [5]-[7].

The blade-sailing aeroelastic model to response M i − M as + M c + M s + M g + M FD =


0, (2)
problems can be greatly simplified by considering the forces
and moments actuating only in the flapping plane, as shows
Fig. 2. The forces, which act on a blade element for the where Mi is the moment due to the inertial forces, Mas is the
simplified blade-sailing planar model, appear according to a moment due to the aerodynamic forces related to the ship
rotating frame of the blade. airwake, collective/cyclic commands and rotor blade
motions, Mc is the moment due to the centrifugal forces, Ms
is the moment due to the droop and flap stops, and Mg is the
moment due to the gravity effects.
The total moment due to the inertial forces at each blade
z Aerodynamical element with mass dm at station r is given by:
Forces
Centrifugal R
Force
M i = ∫ r β dm r = I B β , (3)
0

Inertial Force where IB is the blade moment of inertia about the center of
rotation and β is the blade flapping angle.
Weight The total moment due to the centrifugal forces at each
β x blade element with mass dm at station r is given by:
R
M c = ∫ r sin β Ω 2 r cos β dm =
I B Ω 2 sin β cos β ≈ I B Ω 2 β
0
Fig. 2: Forces at a flapping planar blade element for the proposed
blade-sailing model (rotating frame) (4)

2
Proceedings of the 9th Brazilian Conference on Dynamics Control and their Applications
Serra Negra, SP - ISSN 2178-3667 1075
where R is the rotor radius and Ω, the rotor rotational speed, In Eq. 8, k is a constant related to the cantilevered,
is time-dependent during the engagement or disengagement elastic blade behavior. Therefore, the nonlinear spring
rotor operations. The approximation for small flapping moment due to the stops, can be modeled as:
angles is applied.
Considering a uniform distribution of the blade mass µ, M s = I Bσ1 (β) , (9)
the total moment due to the acceleration of gravity g is:
R
R2 3 3 where the function σ1 (β) is given by:
=Mg ∫ μ=
0
g cos β rdr μ=
g cos β I B
2 2R
g cos β ≈ I B
2R
g

(5) σ1 (β) = ω2nr (β − βFS ),if β > βFS


Articulated rotors usually have droop and flap stops, σ1 (β=
) 0,if βDS ≤ β ≤ βFS (10)
located near the blade roots, aimed at restricting the
downward and upward flapping deflections, respectively, σ1 (β) = ω2nr (β − βDS ),if β < βDS
during low rotational speeds. During hover and forward
flight regimes, the stops remain deactivated. where βDS and βFS are, respectively, the droop and flap stop
To model the blade structural dynamics, it is assumed a angles. From Eqs. (2), (3), (4), (5), and (9) the articulated-
flexible rotating blade, whose flapping motion about a hinge rotor blade-sailing dynamics with the effect of MRD, is
located near the root is restricted by droop and flap stops. A represented by the following equations:
simplified model for the flexible blade dynamics can be
obtained by considering the flapping motion as constituted 3
by a rigid mode between the stops and cantilevered modes I B β + I B Ω2 β + I Bσ ( β ) + FB ( β , i ) =−IB g + M as
beyond the stop angles [8]. The stop effects can be captured 2R
in a form suitable for the control design and analysis by (11)
considering a single nonlinear rotational spring, whose where term Mas is the moment due to the aerodynamic
stiffness is negligible between the stops, where the forces related to the ship airwake, collective/cyclic
articulated blade behaves as a rigid beam, and much commands and rotor blade motions.
increased beyond the stop angles, where the articulated The three-dimensional ship airwake pattern can be
blade behaves as a cantilever beam, affected by the non- modeled according to the mean ( Vx , Vy , Vz ) and
rotating blade flexibility properties, which are associated
with the flapwise bending stiffness and the natural fluctuating ( Vx′, Vy′, Vz′ ) flow velocity WOD components,
frequencies. Figs. 3 and 4 illustrate the blade deflections as follows [8]:
during droop stop contacts [8] and the nonlinear rotational
spring approximation [5]-[7], respectively.
The spring constant Kβ can be obtained from a simplified Vx = Vx + Vx ,
model for a flexible, hingeless blade, with Southwell
coefficient approximately 1 and rotating flapping natural Vy = Vy + Vy , (12)
frequency ωr given by Dowell (1995):
Vz = Vz + Vz ,

ω r2 ≈ + Ω 2 =ω nr2 + Ω 2 , (6) The flow field that affects the rotor behavior is non-
IB uniform and unsteady, thus, the three velocity components
vary with space and time. Mean flow velocity gradients
where ωnr is the blade non-rotating flapping natural arise due to the ship geometry and the fluctuating flow
frequency. velocity components arise due to the ship geometry and also
According to Eq. 6, the parameter Kβ, related to the to the meteorological effects, like turbulence from storms.
cantilevered mode of the blade behavior beyond the stops, is To simplify the aeroelastic analysis, only the lateral (90º
given by: or 270º) wind condition is considered, focusing the ship air
wake modeling on the effects of the horizontal and vertical
velocity components related to this worst-case blade-sailing
K β = I B ω nr2 , (7) condition [10]. The WOD velocity component Vx is
where neglected. For a typical frigate-like configuration with only
EI yy one flight deck, as considered in this work, the WOD
ω nr2 = k . (8) horizontal velocity Vy for the lateral condition can be
μR 4 considered uniform along the shipboard rotor.

3
Proceedings of the 9th Brazilian Conference on Dynamics Control and their Applications
Serra Negra, SP - ISSN 2178-3667 1076
AEROELASTIC ANALYSIS OF THE BLADE SAILING PHENOMENON IN HELICOPTER UNDER MAGNETORHEOLOGICAL-HYSTERETIC EFFECTS
Kleber A. L. Castão, Luiz Carlos Sandoval Goes, Roberto Luiz da Cunha Barroso Ramos
.

The mean flow vertical velocity related to the interaction The lift force dL and the aerodynamic moment dMas for
between the lateral undisturbed wind flow and a typical a blade element can be obtained from the following
frigate-like structure can be approximated by a linear equations:
distribution along the flight deck and the helicopter rotor
[9]-[10]. Therefore, for a rotor blade element at radial θ 0 = θ.75 − (3 / 4)θtw
station r and azimuth , and constant WOD horizontal
velocity component Vy, the WOD mean vertical velocity, θ = θ 0 + θ1s sin Ψ + θ1c cos Ψ + θtw (r / R)
according to the linear distribution approximation (“linear
gust model”), is given by:
α= θ − (U P / U T ) (16)
dL = (1/ 2) ρU T2 caα dr
r
=Vz K vVy sin Ψ (13) dM as = r dL
R
Eq. 16 yields the following aerodynamic moment at a
Unsteady flow effects can be modeled by considering a
blade element on the radial position r:
sinusoidal gust across the rotor disk for the WOD
fluctuating vertical velocity component, representing the
θ 0= θ 0.75 − ( 3 4 ) θtw , θ= θ 0 + θ1s sin Ψ + θ1c cos Ψ + θtw ( r R ) (17)
effects of the dominant frequency ωf of the ship air wake on
the helicopter rotor, as follows: α= θ − (U P U T ) , dL = (1 2 ) ρU T2 caα dr , dM as = rdL

Vz′ = K f Vy sin ω f t (14) Substituting the expressions for the blade-element flow
velocities given by Eq. 16 into Eq. 17 and integrating along
the blade, yields:
The gust amplitude parameters Kv and Kf, and the
sinusoidal gust frequency ωf govern the flow-induced
unsteady loads associated with the WOD vertical velocity
⎪ ( )−
R ⎧θ Ωr − V cos Ψ + V sin Ψ ⎫
2
1 ⎪
component, which characterizes a flow field over the flight M as = ρ ac ∫ ⎨
y x
⎬ rdr
0 ⎪ − ( Ωr − V y cos Ψ + Vx sin Ψ ) ⎡ r β + (Vy sin Ψ + Vx cos Ψ ) β − Vz ⎤ ⎪
2 
deck that varies with space and time according to Eqs. 13 ⎩ ⎣ ⎦⎭
and 14. (18)
The aerodynamic components affecting a shipboard rotor
blade can be calculated according to the blade-element Considering that:
theory, as follows [8]:
μ R3 3ρ acR Vx V
Vx = VWOD cos ΨWOD , Vy = VWOD sin ΨWOD , =IB ;γ ≡ ; μx ≡ ; μy ≡ y (19)
3 μ ΩR ΩR
U T = Ωr - Vy cos Ψ + Vx sin Ψ, (15)
where γ is the Lock number and μx, μy are advance ratio
U = rβ + (V sin Ψ + V cos Ψ)β - V
P y x z parameters, Eq. 18 yields for the blade aerodynamic
moment:
In particular, ΨWOD is equal to 90° for lateral port side
M as = M ai + M atw + M aβ + M aβ + M az (20)
winds and to 270° for lateral starboard side winds. UP and
UT are, respectively, the normal and tangential flow velocity where:
components at the blade element at radial station r, azimuth
γΩ 2 ⎡ 8
1 + (μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) + 2(μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) ⎥ θ i
2⎤
and flapping angle β. These flow velocity components are M ai = I B
8 ⎢⎣ 3 ⎦
illustrated in Fig. 6, according to the blade-element theory γΩ 2 ⎡ 1 1 1
+ (μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) + (μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) ⎥ θ tw
2⎤
[11]. is the WOD vertical velocity at a blade element and M atw = IB
2 ⎣⎢ 5 2 3 ⎦
is the time-varying rotational speed during shipboard γΩ ⎡ 4
− 1 − (μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ )⎥ β

M aβ = I B
engagement or disengagement operations. 8 ⎢⎣ 3 ⎦
γΩ 2 ⎡ 4
zB M aβ = IB ( ) ⎤
− (μ x cos Ψ + μ y sin Ψ ) + μ y2 − μ x2 sin 2Ψ + 2 μ x μ y cos 2Ψ ⎥ β
8 ⎣⎢ 3 ⎦
dL γΩ ⎧⎡ 4 ⎡4 ⎤ ⎫
⎨ 1 + (μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ )⎥ Vzg + ⎢ + 2(μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ )⎥ Vzu ⎬

M az = I B
8R ⎩⎢⎣ 3 ⎦ ⎣3 ⎦ ⎭
Rotor Blade

Directions of the (21)


Aerodynamic Forces
UT θ
yB and
φ dD
UP
θi = θ0 + θ1s sin Ψ + θ1c cos Ψ
=Vzg K vVy sin Ψ (22)
Figure 6: Aerodynamic forces and flow velocities at a blade element.
Vzu = K f Vy sin ω f t

4
Proceedings of the 9th Brazilian Conference on Dynamics Control and their Applications
Serra Negra, SP - ISSN 2178-3667 1077
Table 1: Parameters used in the simulations.

In Eq. 20, M ai , M atw , M aβ , M aβ , M az are, γ (Lock number) 7.96


Ω0 (nominal rotor rotational speed) 27.65 rad/s
respectively, the aerodynamic moments due to the blade Vy (lateral WOD velocity) - 42.5 kt
pitch input, to the blade built-in twist, to the blade flapping Vx (longitudinal WOD velocity) 0 kt
rate, to the blade flapping angle, and to the WOD vertical R (rotor radius) 25.5 ft
velocity. The WOD vertical velocity factor related to the ωnr (blade non-rotating flapping 6 rad/s
flow velocity gradients Vzg in Eq. 21 is valid, in particular, frequency)
for lateral wind conditions (Vx = 0, ΨWOD = 90º or 270º), βDS (droop stop angle) - 1o
according to the linear distribution approximation for the βFS (flap stop angle) 1o
ship airwake given by Eq. 13. For more details, see [5]-[7]. θ.75 (collective pitch angle) 3o
Then, the equations obtained to represent this problem θtw (built-in twist angle) - 8.5o
and with the MRD effect are θ1s (longitudinal cyclic angle) 2.5o
θ1c (lateral cyclic angle) 0.0693o
γΩ ⎡ 4 ⎤
β + 1 + ( μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) ⎥ β +
8 ⎢⎣ 3 ⎦ They are based on the H-46 Sea Knight shipboard
⎧ γ ⎡4 ⎤⎫ helicopter, which has a history of several tunnel-strike
Ω 2 ⎨1 + ⎢ ( μ x cos Ψ + μ y sin Ψ ) − ( μ y2 − μ x2 ) sin 2Ψ − 2μ x μ y cos 2Ψ ⎥ ⎬ β +
⎩ 8 ⎣3 ⎦⎭ occurrences during engagement and disengagement
γ Ω 2
⎡ 8 2⎤
operations in the DI.
σ ( β ) + FD = ( )
β , i 1 + ( μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) + 2 ( μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) ⎥ θ u
8 ⎢⎣ 3 ⎦ Now, we show the results of the simulated conditions.
γΩ ⎡2
8 2⎤
+ 1 + ( μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) + 2 ( μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) ⎥ θi +
8 ⎢⎣ 3 ⎦
γΩ 2 ⎡ 1 1 1 2⎤
+ ( μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) + ( μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) ⎥ θtw
Without MRD i = 0A i = 0.5A i = 1.0A Tunnel strikes

2 ⎢⎣ 5 2 3 ⎦
0.25

0.2
γΩ ⎧ ⎡ 4 ⎤ ⎡4 ⎤ ⎫
+ ⎨ 1 + ( μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) ⎥ Vzg + ⎢ + 2 ( μ x sin Ψ − μ y cos Ψ ) ⎥ Vzu ⎬
8 R ⎩ ⎢⎣ 3
0.15
⎦ ⎣3 ⎦ ⎭
Flapping Response (rad)

0.1
3
− g 0.05
2R
(23) 0

-0.05

The term in red represents the effect of MRD in the


-0.1

-0.15
equation. Put this equation in state variable form, becomes -0.2
possible to obtain the behavior of our system under MRD -0.25
effects and in unsteady flow effects. 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Time
2.5 3 3.5 4

4. NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS Figure 7: Flapping response to first condition

Is possible to observe that, in the first condition (Fig. 7),


In the numerical simulations, are presented four the simulation of blade sailing phenomenon without the
conditions, obtained by the combinations of the parameters MRD effect show that the blade reaches the tail boom of the
of horizontal WOD velocities and linear WOD gust to helicopter. But, with the inclusion of the MRD in the rotor
obtain situations where the blade sailing phenomenon is and increasing the current applied to the damper, we get a
worst, that is, the blade reaches the tail of the helicopter. good attenuation of the blade amplitude, showing an
The current applied to the MRD is increased to obtain a lot alternative to suppression of the phenomenon, with a little
of results in order to show the effect of this device, applied current in the damper, using little energy.
searching a good suppression of the blade sailing In the second simulation, see Fig. 8, is showed a
phenomenon. condition where the blade exceeds the amplitude that occurs
The combinations used in the simulations are: the tunnel strikes. This condition is very dangerous. Hence,
1. A starboard side uniform WOD horizontal velocity of we show the MRD effect in this situation.
42.5 kt with a WOD linear gust parameter Kv equal to 0.1; For this conditions, see Fig. 8, where the blade of the
2. A starboard side uniform WOD horizontal velocity of helicopter exceeds the given limit, we present a reduction of
45 kt with a WOD linear gust parameter Kv equal to 0.1; motion of the blade, effectively reducing the phenomenon
3. A starboard side uniform WOD horizontal velocity of studied.
42.5 kt with a WOD linear gust parameter Kv equal to 0.25;

The parameters used in these simulations are the same


used in [8] and [11] and are presented in the Table 1.

5
Proceedings of the 9th Brazilian Conference on Dynamics Control and their Applications
Serra Negra, SP - ISSN 2178-3667 1078
AEROELASTIC ANALYSIS OF THE BLADE SAILING PHENOMENON IN HELICOPTER UNDER MAGNETORHEOLOGICAL-HYSTERETIC EFFECTS
Kleber A. L. Castão, Luiz Carlos Sandoval Goes, Roberto Luiz da Cunha Barroso Ramos
.

0.25
and Structures, Newport Beach, California, 2000.
Without MRD i = 0A i = 0.5A i = 1.0A Tunnel Strikes

0.2 [3]Pierrick, J., “Isolation vibratoire par contrôle semi-actif


0.15 d’amortisseurs magnéto-rhéologiques pour l’interface
lanceur/charge utile” PhD. Thesis, Conservatoire
Flapping Response (rad)

0.1

0.05
National des Arts et Métiers, ONERA, French, 2006.
0 [4] Johnson, W. Helicopter Theory. [S.l.]: Dover, p. 1-767,
-0.05 1994
-0.1
[5] Ramos, R. L. C. B., “Aeroservoelastic Analysis of the
-0.15 Blade-Sailing Phenomenon in the Helicopter-Ship
-0.2
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Dynamic Interface”. Thesis (D.Sc.) – Technological
Time Institute of Aeronautics, Brazil, 2007.
Figure 8: Flapping response to first condition [6]Ramos, R.L.C.B., de Andrade, D., Goes, L.C.S.,
“Individual Blade Root Control of Helicopter Blade
Without MRD i = 0A i = 0.5A i = 1.0A Tunnel Strikes Sailing for Articulated Shipboard Rotors”, 65th
American Helicopter Society Annual Forum, 2009a.
0.3

0.2
[7]Ramos, R.L.C.B., de Andrade, D., Goes, L.C.S.,
Flapping Response (rad)

Aeroservoelastic Analysis of a Proposed Helicopter


0.1
Blade- Sailing Feedback Control System in Unsteady
0
Flow, 8th Brazilian Conference on Dynamics, Control
and Applications, Bauru, May 18-22, 2009b.
-0.1 [8]Keller, J.A., 2001, “Analysis and control of the transient
aeroelastic response of rotors during shipboard
-0.2
engagement and disengagement operations”. Thesis
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Time
2.5 3 3.5 4 (PhD) - The Pennsylvania State University.
[9]Newman, S.J., 1990, “A Theoretical Model for Predicting
Figure 9: Flapping response to first condition the Blade Sailing Behaviour of a Semi-Rigid Rotor
Helicopter”. Vertica, 14, (4), p. 531-544.
The MRD also remove the blade sailing phenomenon in
[10]Geyer JR., W.P., Smith, E.C., Keller, J.A., 1998,
the third condition. Note that, in first and second conditions
“Aeroelastic Analysis of Transient Blade Dynamics
with I = 0A, the tunnel strikes is removed, but in this
During Shipboard Engage/Disengage Operations”.
condition with I = 0A, the phenomenon is not removed.
Journal of Aircraft, v. 35, n. 3, p. 445-453.
With the increase of the current, the objective is reached.
[11] Dowell, E.H. et al. (ed.). A Modern Course in
Aeroelasticity. Kluwer Academic, 1995. Chapter 7. p.
5. CONCLUSION
370-437.
This work was presented the formulation of the
phenomenon of helicopter blade sailing, when considering
the Unsteady flow. It was considered in this formulation, the
addition of an MRD on the root of the blade, trying to
increase the structural damping of the rotor, more precisely
in the flapping motion, because in this degree of freedom is
that occurs the studied phenomenon
It was shown that with this addition, it is possible to
reduce the amplitude of the blade sailing phenomenon in
approximately 30%, depending on the current applied to the
buffer, in other words, the simulation results showed that a
MRD device can significantly reduce the blade-sailing
vibrations, avoiding tunnel-strike occurrences at severe
unsteady flow conditions.

REFERENCES

[1] Rhoades, M.M.; Healey, J.V. Flight deck aerodynamics


of a nonaviation ship. Journal of Aircraft, v. 29, n. 4, p.
619-626, Jul.-Aug. 1992.
[2] Liu Y., Gordaninejad F. ; Evrensel C. A. ; Wang X.,
Hitchock A., Semi active Control of A Bridge Using
Controllable Magneto-Rheological Dampers,
Proceedings of SPIE Conference on Smart Materials

6
Proceedings of the 9th Brazilian Conference on Dynamics Control and their Applications
Serra Negra, SP - ISSN 2178-3667 1079

You might also like