1 the S-61/Sea King with Carson Composite Blades
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The S-61/Sea King with Carson Composite Blades Part 1 H.C.Curtiss Frank Carson Adrian Neve Princeton University Carson Helicopters, Inc QinetiQ Princeton, NJ, USA Perkasie, PA Farnborough, UK Discussion Abstract Carson Helicopters new composite main This paper is in two parts. The first part rotor blades for the S61 received an STC of this paper describes various from the FAA in 2003. The blades use improvements that Carson Helicopters is advanced airfoil sections, have swept developing in their program to tips and are constructed of composite modernize the S61. The new composite materials. The rotor blades are in main rotor blades, designed and commercial use in the USA, Canada, developed by Carson Helicopters, have South America, and Africa. The blade produced significant gains the aircraft development is described in Reference 1. payload and range. The new rotor blades These new blades have yielded were approved by the FAA in 2003, and significant performance gains for the more than 60 sets are currently in use by S61 that are reflected in FAA approved Carson and other commercial operators. supplements to the S61 flight manuals Also, a version of these blades modified (References 2 and 3 for example). for a folding hub is currently installed on Reference 2 deals with increased hover Royal Navy Sea King helicopters. Six performance in and out of ground effect sets are in operational use on Sea Kings and Reference 3 with increased Category in Afghanistan. As a result of the A performance. The approval process is success of these blades and the in progress with EASA. significant gains in performance provided, Carson Helicopters has been Hover Figure of Merit developing other improvements for the aircraft. These include a glass cockpit, Flight test as well as operational vibration reduction and a new tail rotor. experience has demonstrated that the The first part of the paper describes efficiency of the new rotor is high. It these improvements. The second part of was of interest to determine the value of the paper will discuss the results of a the hover figure of merit of the new flight test program conducted on a Sea rotor. Since no isolated rotor ground King and present various results tests were conducted on the new rotor, obtained. QinetiQ conducted the flight direct measurements of the rotor test program on the Sea King. performance were not available. 1 Therefore, an approach using flight test Carson flight test data gives the aircraft data from the aircraft with both sets on figure of merit (MAC) when it is blades and thrust stand measurements equipped with each rotor. Now, since for the metal baseline blades was thrust stand data are available for the developed. First, an aircraft figure of baseline metal blades, giving the figure merit (MAC) is defined based on the of merit of the metal blade rotor (MRM), weight (W) and total power required to all the quantities Equation (4) are hover (PT): determined by experiment and MRC can be calculated. 1.5 MAC = .707W /PT (1) Recall that Equation (4) is true at The isolated rotor figure of merit (MR), constant total power (PTC = PTM) and it is which is the quantity of interest, based desirable to find the corresponding rotor on rotor thrust (T) and main rotor power thrust coefficient. The rotor figure of to hover (P R), is defined by the merit (MR) is a function of rotor power. relationship: The rotor power was measured in flight test with metal blades and this 1.5 MR= .707T /PR (2) information is used to determine the rotor figure of merit corresponding to the Equation (1) divided by Equation (2) total power condition used in evaluating yields: Equation (4), and consequently the figure of merit of the composite rotor 1.5 MAC /MR = (W/T) x (P R/PT) (3) corresponding to the power condition. The thrust of the more efficient If the same aircraft is compared in hover composite rotor is greater than that of with two different main rotors, one the metal rotor at this condition. The composite and one metal at the same thrust coefficient of the composite rotor total power (P T), the ratio of main rotor is now found from the calculated power (P R) to total power (PR/PT), is composite rotor figure of merit equal, independent of the main rotor determined by Equation (4). Thus, the design. Although the fuselage download thrust coefficient corresponding to each may vary slightly with different main condition is determined. No assumptions rotor designs, this small effect can be regarding download, blockage etc are neglected in the current discussion. involved in this approach. The results of Consequently, the ratio of aircraft figure this analysis, based on flight data, are of merit (MAC) to rotor figure of merit shown in Fig. 1 indicating the very high (M R) is the same in these two instances, figure of merit of the Carson rotor. independent of the main rotor Generally the aircraft figure of merit characteristics, and so the following with the composite rotor is 13 to 14% relationship between the various figures higher than that of the aircraft with metal of merit exists. (The final subscript blades at the same total power. refers to the aircraft with composite (C) or metal (M) main rotor blades.) MRC = MRM x (MACC/MACM) (4) 2 Figure 1. Figure of Merit of Carson Figure 2. Comparison of Flapwise and Rotor from Flight test Chordwise Stiffness of Metal and Composite Blades Composite Blade Stiffness Glass Cockpit An important design feature of these The glass cockpit is well on its way to composite rotor blades needs to be replacing the conventional instrument emphasized at this point. The spanwise panel in all types of aircraft. To continue distribution of flap and chord stiffness of modernization and improvement of the these advanced blades are essentially the S61, Carson is flight testing a glass same as those of the metal blades. Figure cockpit for this aircraft. Vector 2 compares the stiffness values. This Aerospace Helicopter Services has stiffness matching was a design successfully flown a fully integrated objective. The mass characteristics also glass cockpit from Sagem Avionics in a match the metal blades closely and Carson S61. Carson’s major design consequently the composite blades have objectives in the development of the very similar dynamic characteristics to glass cockpit configuration for the S61 the metal blades. This design are to develop a user friendly system, as requirement for the new composite well as one that is maintenance friendly, blades was achieved. The torsional and also of low cost. Test flying is characteristics are not shown here, but currently underway and it is expected experimental values determined on the that this modification will be available aircraft in flight, show that the torsion for the aircraft in the fall. The unit is frequency (about 7.7 P at operating shock mounted and experiences very RPM) is somewhat higher than that of little vibration. It is configured such that the metal blade. Other features of the it can easily be incorporated in other blade design have been reported in helicopters of similar size. Reference 1. This matching results in no change in the dynamic characteristics of Five identical display screens are used in the aircraft or the handling qualities of place of the more usual four. The central the aircraft although Carson pilots have screen contains the engine instrument reported that it appears easier maintain a displays. The pilot and copilot have two hover with the new blades. screens each. One screen contains flight 3 instruments and the other display is instances these units were not installed selectable with maps/airfield approaches, in the aircraft. Often, the units that were and other options available. The caution installed were not carefully maintained. panel has been separated from these If not regularly maintained, the unit displays and located below the small tends, after some usage, to amplify GPS and transceiver screens rather than vertical vibrations rather than damp having a caution appear as a pop-up on them as illustrated by flight data taken one of the main screens. by Carson in a study of the effectiveness of the damper presented below. Also, it All modern sensors are incorporated may be noted that this system is often with the glass cockpit, replacing the tuned to damp vibrations at five times original 1959 equipment in the aircraft. the original design rpm of the aircraft The sensors achieve redundancy by (100%NR). However, the normal using special dual elements as necessary operating rpm of the aircraft in for IFR flight. commercial use is 103% NR. Carson made comparative measurements with Cockpit Vibration the device tuned to 100% and 103% (5P). Tuning to 103% coupled with Attention to detail can lead to maintaining the system properly has significant gains in vibration reduction. produced a dramatic reduction in cockpit In this connection, Carson has found the vertical vibration. Figure 3 presents the Honeywell/Chadwick VXP system results of surveys of vertical vibration analyzer/balancer to be very useful for peak amplitude at 5P in the cockpit in measurement and adjustment to reduce ips. A number of cases are shown. For a vibration. The S61 is normally equipped reference, the vibration levels at rotor with a very effective bifilar in-plane speeds of 100% and 106% are shown for absorber mounted on the rotor hub that the aircraft at mid cg at various airspeeds significantly reduces lateral vibrations in with no absorber installed. A number of the aircraft fuselage. This type of results are added at an indicated airspeed vibration absorber has the distinct of 110 kts, mid cg, 103% NR.