4.7 Article

Simple multiple reference frame for high-order solution of hovering rotors with and without ground effect

Journal

AEROSPACE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 111, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ast.2021.106518

Keywords

High-order methods; Rotorcraft; CFD; IGE; OGE; Ground effect

Funding

  1. EPSRC [EP/P020259/1]
  2. ARCHER through UK Turbulence Consortium [EPSRC] [EP/L000261/1, EP/R029326/1]
  3. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior - Brasil (Capes) [001, 88881.128864/2016-01]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the aerodynamic performance of the Caradonna and Tung and S-76 helicopters in hover was investigated using a new numerical method. The predictions were compared with experimental data, showing good agreement. The simplified concept of multiple reference frame technique was utilized to define the frame of reference at the solver level, avoiding complex mesh interface handling.
In the present work, the aerodynamic performance of the Caradonna and Tung and S-76 in hover were investigated using a simplified concept of multiple reference frame (MRF) technique in the context of high-order Monotone Upstream Centred Scheme for Conservation Laws (MUSCL) cell-centred finite volume method. In the present methodology, the frame of reference is defined at the solver level by a simple user input avoiding the use of mesh interface to handle the intersections between frames of reference. The calculations were made for both out-of-ground-effect (OGE) and in-ground-effect (IGE) cases and compared with experimental data in terms of pressure distribution, tip-vortex trajectory, vorticity contours and integrated thrust and torque. The predictions were obtained for several ground distances and collective pitch angle at tip Mach number of 0.6 and 0.892. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available