Advertisement

Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology

, Volume 32, Issue 12, pp 5659–5669 | Cite as

Practical payload assessment of a prototype blade for agricultural unmanned rotorcraft

  • Y. M. Koo
  • J. G. Hong
  • B. A. Haider
  • C. H. Sohn
Article
  • 16 Downloads

Abstract

Unmanned rotorcraft represents a new paradigm in agricultural activities. Rotor-blade design to improve lift performance was necessitated because payload-mounted flights suffer from a lack of lift. A prototype of rotor blade, comprising the V2008B airfoil, was assessed on an agricultural rotorcraft. The lift corresponding to the collective pitch angle (CPA) and rotor speed was measured on field and compared with a base-line blade. Measurements demonstrated that the prototype blade could sustain a maximum payload of 589 N, resulting in a total lift of 1256 N. Thus, an increase of 10.5 % in total lift was accomplished, compared with a base-line of 1137 N. Simulation also indicated that total lift equals 1269 N at CPA = 10°, approximately 1.0 % greater than the experimental lift. However, a practical spray payload would be reduced due to the ground effect and uncertainty, existing during an anchored field experiment. The ground effect from the experimental operation close to the ground would reduce 10 % of the total lift, resulting in 1138 N for hovering. Furthermore, uncertainty existed in stick control inputs and local wind conditions, resulting in fluctuations of rotor speed and payload. The standard deviation of net lift was ±45.33 N; therefore, the minimum net lift of the low envelope assessed from the uncertainty analysis would be 426 N.

Keywords

Rotor blade Field lift test Uncertainty Ground effect Agricultural unmanned rotorcraft 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Y. M. Koo, C. S. Lee, T. S. Seok, S. K. Shin, T. G. Kang, S. H. Kim and T. Y. Choi, Aerial application using a small RF controlled helicopter (I)–status and cost analysis, Journal of Biosystems Engineering, 31 (2) (2006) 95–101, https://doi.org/10.5307/JBE.2006.31.2.095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Y. M. Koo, Performance comparison of two airfoil rotor designs for an agricultural unmanned helicopter, Journal of Biosystems Engineering, 37 (1) (2012) 1–10, https://doi.org/10.5307/JBE.2012.37.1.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    R. W. Prouty, Helicopter performance, stability, and control, Kreiger Pub., Malabar, FL, USA (2002).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    J. G. Leishman, Principles of helicopter aerodynamics, Cambridge University Press, N.Y., USA (2002).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Y. M. Koo, Development of a pilot friendly control system with a roll–balancing unmanned agricultural helicopter, MAFF Research Report. 11–1541000–00863–01 (2011).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    C. B. Park, Helicopter aerodynamics, R. W. Prouty (Ed.), Kyngmoon Publishing Co., Seoul, Korea (1992).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Y. S. Won, B. A. Haider, C. H. Sohn and Y. M. Koo, Aerodynamic performance evaluation of basic airfoils for agricultural unmanned helicopter using wind tunnel test and CFD simulation, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 31 (12) (2017) 5829–5838, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206–017–1125–x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    P. Doerffer and O. Szulc, Numerical simulation of model helicopter rotor in hover, Task Quarterly, Institute of Fluidflow Machinery PAS, 12 (3) (2008) 227–236.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    B. A. Haider, C. H. Sohn, Y. S. Won and Y. M. Koo, Aerodynamically efficient rotor design for hovering agricultural unmanned helicopter, Journal of Applied Fluid Mechanics, 10 (5) (2017) 1461–1474, https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub. jafm.73.242.27541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    D. R. Abhiram, R. Ganguli, D. Harursampath and P. P. Friedmann, Robust design of small unmanned helicopter for hover performance using Taguchi method, Paper No. 2017–0015, The 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Grapevine, TX, USA (2017), https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017–0015.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    B. A. Haider, C. H. Shon, Y. S. Won and Y. M. Koo, Aerodynamic performance optimization for the rotor design of a hovering agricultural unmanned helicopter, Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, 31 (9) (2017) 4221–4226, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206–017–0820–y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    F. X. Caradonna and C. Tung, Experimental and analytical studies of a model helicopter rotor in hover, The Sixth European Rotorcraft and Powered Lift Aircraft Forum, September 16–19, Bristol, England (1980).Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    A. E. Winkelmann, J. B. Barlow, J. K. Saini, J. D. Anderson Jr. and E. Jones, The effects of leading edge modifications in the post–stall characteristics of wings. AIAA 18th Aerospace Sciences Meeting; Jan. 14–16, Pasadena, CA, AIAA–80–0199 (1980).Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Y. M. Koo, T. S. Seok, S. K. Shin, C. S. Lee and T. G. Kang, Aerial application using a small RF controlled helicopter (III)–lift test and rotor system, Journal of Biosystems Engineering, 31 (3) (2006) 182–187, https: //doi.org/10.5307/JBE.2006. 31.3.182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    S. K. Lee, G. Y. Choi and S. M. Chang, The foundations of helicopter flight, S. Newman, Inter–vision publishing Co., Seoul, Korea (2003).Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    A. Betz, The ground effect on lifting propellers, NACA TM 836, 17 (2) (1937) 68–72.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    I. C. Cheeseman and W. E. Bennett, The effect of the ground on a helicopter rotor in forward flight, ARC R.&M. No.3021 (1957).Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    J. S. Hayden, The effect of the ground on helicopter hovering power required, The 32th Annual National Forum of the American Helicopter Society, Washington DC, May 10–12 (1976).Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Y. Tanabe, T. Saito, N. Ooyama and K. Hiraoka, Investigation of the downwash induced by rotary wings in ground effect, International Journal of Aeronautical and Space Sciences, 10 (1) (2009) 20–29, https://doi.org/10.5139/ijass. 2009. 10.1.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    C. Siva, M. S. Murugan and R. Ganguli, Effect of uncertainty on helicopter performance predictions, Proc. IMechE, 224(G), Journal of Aerospace Engineering (2009) 549–562, https://doi.org/10.1243/09544100jaero638.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    C. Siva, M. S. Murugan and R. Ganguli, Uncertainty quantification in helicopter performance using Monte Carlo simulation, Journal of Aircraft, 48 (5) (2011) 1503–1511, https://doi.org/10.2514/1.c000288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Y. M. Koo, Y. S. Won, J. G. Hong, B. A. Haider and C. H. Sohn, In–situ measurement of lift and CPA for the rotor performance analysis of an agricultural helicopter, Proceedings of the KSAM & KSPA 2016 Autumn Conference, 21 (2) (2016) 72.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    H. J. Park, Y. M. Koo, Y. Bae, M. Oh, C. O. Yang and M. H. Song. Flight dynamic identification of a model helicopter using CIFER (I)–flight test for the acquisition of transmitter input data, Journal of Biosystems Engineering, 36 (6) (2011) 467–475, https: //doi.org/10.5307/JBE.2011.36.6.467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    H. J. Jeong, A study on the aerodynamic analysis of 3–D helicopter rotor in hovering for design, M.S. Thesis, Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Ulsan, Ulsan, Korea (2005).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. M. Koo
    • 1
  • J. G. Hong
    • 1
  • B. A. Haider
    • 2
  • C. H. Sohn
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Agricultural Civil and Bio-industrial EngineeringKyungpook National UniversityDaeguKorea
  2. 2.School of Mechanical EngineeringKyungpook National UniversityDaeguKorea

Personalised recommendations