Advertisement

Using High-Speed Stereophotogrammetry to Collect Operating Data on a Robinson R44 Helicopter

  • Troy Lundstrom
  • Javad Baqersad
  • Christopher NiezreckiEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)

Abstract

Stereophotogrammetry in conjunction with three-dimensional point tracking (3DPT) algorithms has proven to be a highly robust measurement technique when used to perform dynamic measurements on small, rotating systems. This measurement technique can be scaled up to much larger systems and has several desirable features for helicopter and wind turbine measurement applications that include: (1) it is non-contact and doesn’t require the use of roll rings or slip rings for signal transmission, (2) the applied measurement targets have a negligible effect on the aerodynamics, mass or stiffness of the structure, and (3) position data can be readily collected on many hundreds of points over what is capable using conventional multi-channel data acquisition systems and transducers. A field test was conducted in which operating data was collected on the main rotor of a Robinson R44 helicopter in both grounded and hovering operating conditions. The first part of this work describes the experimental setup and data acquisition process of the test performed and the second part of this work presents some of the results including blade dynamics and extracted operating deflection shape information for a Robinson R44 Helicopter.

Keywords

Stereophotogrammetry Operational modal analysis Helicopter rotor dynamics Rigid body correction Harmonic content 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully appreciate the financial support for this work provided by the U.S. Army Research Office Nanomanufacturing of Multifunctional Sensors Ref. Award Number: W911NF-07-2-0081 and the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0900534, entitled “Dynamic Stress–Strain Prediction of Vibrating Structures in Operation”. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or Army Research Office. The research team is indebted to Stephen Booth of STB Enterprises for providing access to and piloting the helicopter.

References

  1. 1.
    Helfrick MN, Pingle P, Niezrecki C, Avitabile P (2009) Optical non-contacting vibration measurement of rotating turbine blades. In: 27th conference and exposition on structural dynamics, IMAC XXVII, Jacksonville, FLGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Warren C, Niezrecki C, Avitabile P (2011) Determination of wind turbine operating deflection shapes using full-field 3D point-tracking. In: 29th IMAC, a conference on structural synamics. Jacksonville, FL, pp 217–226Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Warren C, Niezrecki C, Avitabile P (2011) Optical non-contacting vibration measurement of rotating turbine blades II. In: 28th IMAC, a conference on structural dynamics. Jacksonville, FL, pp 39–44Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lundstrom T, Niezrecki C, Avitabile P (2011) Rigid body correction using 3D digital photogrammetry for rotating structures. In: SEM annual conference on experimental and applied mechanics. Uncasville, CT, pp 307–321Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lundstrom T, Baqersad J, Niezrecki C, Avitabile P (2012) Using high-speed stereophotogrammetry techniques to extract shape information from wind turbine/rotor operating data. In: 30th IMAC, a conference on structural dynamics. Jacksonville, FL, pp 269–275Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kalpoe D, Khoshelham K, Gorte B (2011) Vibration measurement of a model wind turbine using high speed photogrammetry. In: Videometrics, range imaging, and applications XI: proceedings, MunichGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Paulsen US, Erne O, Moeller T, Sanow G, Schmidt T (2009) Wind turbine operational and emergency stop measurements using point tracking videogrammetry. In: Proceedings of the 2009 SEM annual conference and exposition, AlbuquerqueGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Paulsen US, Schmidt T, Erne O (2010) Developments in large wind turbine modal analysis using point tracking videogrammetry. In: 28th IMAC, a conference on structural dynamics. Jacksonville, FL, pp 187–198Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ozbek M, Rixen DJ (2011) Optical measurements and operational modal analysis on a large wind turbine: lessons learned. In: 29th IMAC, a conference on structural dynamics Jacksonville, FL, pp 257–276Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ozbek M, Rixen DJ, Erne O, Sanow G (2010) Feasibility of monitoring large wind turbines using photogrammetry. 35(12):4802–4811Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ozbek M, Mengt F, Rixen DJ, Van Tooren MJL (2011) Identification of the dynamics of large wind turbines by using photogrammetry. In: 28th IMAC, a conference on structural dynamics. Jacksonville, FL, pp 351–359Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    zbek M, Rixen DJ (2012) Operational modal analysis of a 2.5 MW wind turbine using optical measurement techniques and strain gauges. Wind Energy. doi:10.1002/we.1493Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lawson M (2011) Measurement of deformation of rotating blades using digital image correlation. University of Texas, AustinGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schneider O (2005) Analysis of SPR measurements from HART II. Aerospace Sci Technol 9:409–420zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schneider O, Van Der Wall BG, Pengel K (2003) HART II blade motion measured by stereo pattern recognition (SPR). In: American Helicopter Society 59th annual forum. Phoenix, AZGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schneider O, Van Der Wall BG (2003) Final analysis of HART II blade deflection measurement. In: Twenty-ninth European rotorcraft forum. Friedrichshafen, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Olson L, Barrows D, Abrego A, Burner A (2010) Blade deflection measurements of a full-scale UH-60A rotor system. In: 2010 AHS specialists’ conference on aeromechanicsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lundstrom T (2012) Dynamic measurement and analysis of large-scale rotating systems using stereophotogrammetrry. M.Sc. thesis, University of Massachusetts Lowell, LowellGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Robinson Helicopter Company (2002) R44 II pilot’s operating handbook. Robinson Helicopter, TorranceGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    PONTOS v6.2 user manual (2009) GOM mbH, Mittelweg 7-8, 38106 Braunschweig, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lundstrom T, Niezrecki C, Avitabile P (2011) Appropriate rigid body correction for analyzing the dynamics of rotating structures using 3D digital photogrammetry. In: Proceedings of the 8th international workshop on structural health monitoring, Stanford, 13–15 Sept 2011Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Groover C, Tretheway M, Maynard K, Lebold S (2005) Removal of order domain content in rotating equipment signals by double resampling. Mech Syst Signal Process 19(3):483–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Peeters B, Cornelius B, Jannssens K, Van der Auweraer H (2007) Removing disturbing harmonics in operational modal analysis. In: Proceedings of IOMAC 2007, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Randall R, Sawalhi N (2011) A new method for separating discrete components from a signal. Sound Vibr 45(5):6–9Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Troy Lundstrom
    • 1
  • Javad Baqersad
    • 1
  • Christopher Niezrecki
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Structural Dynamics and Acoustic Systems Laboratory, Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of Massachusetts LowellLowellUSA

Personalised recommendations