Refine
Year of publication
Institute
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (37)
- Article (27)
- Part of a Book (7)
- Report (2)
- Book (1)
Keywords
- Obstacle avoidance (3)
- UAV (3)
- Aeroelasticity (2)
- Path planning (2)
- 1P hub loads (1)
- Actuator disk modelling (1)
- Aircraft design (1)
- Aircraft sizing (1)
- Automotive safety approach (1)
- Autonomy (1)
Lifting propellers are of increasing interest for Advanced Air Mobility. All propellers and rotors are initially twisted beams, showing significant extension–twist coupling and centrifugal twisting. Torsional deformations severely impact aerodynamic performance. This paper presents a novel approach to assess different reasons for torsional deformations. A reduced-order model runs large parameter sweeps with algebraic formulations and numerical solution procedures. Generic beams represent three different propeller types for General Aviation, Commercial Aviation, and Advanced Air Mobility. Simulations include solid and hollow cross-sections made of aluminum, steel, and carbon fiber-reinforced polymer. The investigation shows that centrifugal twisting moments depend on both the elastic and initial twist. The determination of the centrifugal twisting moment solely based on the initial twist suffers from errors exceeding 5% in some cases. The nonlinear parts of the torsional rigidity do not significantly impact the overall torsional rigidity for the investigated propeller types. The extension–twist coupling related to the initial and elastic twist in combination with tension forces significantly impacts the net cross-sectional torsional loads. While the increase in torsional stiffness due to initial twist contributes to the overall stiffness for General and Commercial Aviation propellers, its contribution to the lift propeller’s stiffness is limited. The paper closes with the presentation of approximations for each effect identified as significant. Numerical evaluations are necessary to determine each effect for inhomogeneous cross-sections made of anisotropic material.
Aircraft configurations with propellers have been drawing more attention in recent times, partly due to new propulsion concepts based on hydrogen fuel cells and electric motors. These configurations are prone to whirl flutter, which is an aeroelastic instability affecting airframes with elastically supported propellers. It commonly needs to be mitigated already during the design phase of such configurations, requiring, among other things, unsteady aerodynamic transfer functions for the propeller. However, no comprehensive assessment of unsteady propeller aerodynamics for aeroelastic analysis is available in the literature. This paper provides a detailed comparison of nine different low- to mid-fidelity aerodynamic methods, demonstrating their impact on linear, unsteady aerodynamics, as well as whirl flutter stability prediction. Quasi-steady and unsteady methods for blade lift with or without coupling to blade element momentum theory are evaluated and compared to mid-fidelity potential flow solvers (UPM and DUST) and classical, derivative-based methods. Time-domain identification of frequency-domain transfer functions for the unsteady propeller hub loads is used to compare the different methods. Predictions of the minimum required pylon stiffness for stability show good agreement among the mid-fidelity methods. The differences in the stability predictions for the low-fidelity methods are higher. Most methods studied yield a more unstable system than classical, derivative-based whirl flutter analysis, indicating that the use of more sophisticated aerodynamic modeling techniques might be required for accurate whirl flutter prediction.
Next-generation aircraft designs often incorporate multiple large propellers attached along the wingspan (distributed electric propulsion), leading to highly flexible dynamic systems that can exhibit aeroelastic instabilities. This paper introduces a validated methodology to investigate the aeroelastic instabilities of wing–propeller systems and to understand the dynamic mechanism leading to wing and whirl flutter and transition from one to the other. Factors such as nacelle positions along the wing span and chord and its propulsion system mounting stiffness are considered. Additionally, preliminary design guidelines are proposed for flutter-free wing–propeller systems applicable to novel aircraft designs. The study demonstrates how the critical speed of the wing–propeller systems is influenced by the mounting stiffness and propeller position. Weak mounting stiffnesses result in whirl flutter, while hard mounting stiffnesses lead to wing flutter. For the latter, the position of the propeller along the wing span may change the wing mode shapes and thus the flutter mechanism. Propeller positions closer to the wing tip enhance stability, but pusher configurations are more critical due to the mass distribution behind the elastic axis.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) constantly gain in versatility. However, more reliable path planning algorithms are required until full autonomous UAV operation is possible. This work investigates the algorithm 3DVFH* and analyses its dependency on its cost function weights in 2400 environments. The analysis shows that the 3DVFH* can find a suitable path in every environment. However, a particular type of environment requires a specific choice of cost function weights. For minimal failure, probability interdependencies between the weights of the cost function have to be considered. This dependency reduces the number of control parameters and simplifies the usage of the 3DVFH*. Weights for costs associated with vertical evasion (pitch cost) and vicinity to obstacles (obstacle cost) have the highest influence on the failure probability of the local path planner. Environments with mainly very tall buildings (like large American city centres) require a preference for horizontal avoidance manoeuvres (achieved with high pitch cost weights). In contrast, environments with medium-to-low buildings (like European city centres) benefit from vertical avoidance manoeuvres (achieved with low pitch cost weights). The cost of the vicinity to obstacles also plays an essential role and must be chosen adequately for the environment. Choosing these two weights ideal is sufficient to reduce the failure probability below 10%.