Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (36)
- Article (24)
- Part of a Book (7)
- Report (2)
- Book (1)
Keywords
- UAV (3)
- Aeroelasticity (2)
- Obstacle avoidance (2)
- 1P hub loads (1)
- Actuator disk modelling (1)
- Aircraft design (1)
- Aircraft sizing (1)
- Automotive safety approach (1)
- Autonomy (1)
- BET (1)
- Blade element method (1)
- Bumblebees (1)
- CFD (1)
- CFD propeller simulation (1)
- Correlations (1)
- Cost function (1)
- Crashworthiness (1)
- Design rules (1)
- Drag (1)
- Finite element method (1)
Institute
- Fachbereich Luft- und Raumfahrttechnik (70) (remove)
This paper compares several blade element theory (BET) method-based propeller simulation tools, including an evaluation against static propeller ground tests and high-fidelity Reynolds-Average Navier Stokes (RANS) simulations. Two proprietary propeller geometries for paraglider applications are analysed in static and flight conditions. The RANS simulations are validated with the static test data and used as a reference for comparing the BET in flight conditions. The comparison includes the analysis of varying 2D aerodynamic airfoil parameters and different induced velocity calculation methods. The evaluation of the BET propeller simulation tools shows the strength of the BET tools compared to RANS simulations. The RANS simulations underpredict static experimental data within 10% relative error, while appropriate BET tools overpredict the RANS results by 15–20% relative error. A variation in 2D aerodynamic data depicts the need for highly accurate 2D data for accurate BET results. The nonlinear BET coupled with XFOIL for the 2D aerodynamic data matches best with RANS in static operation and flight conditions. The novel BET tool PropCODE combines both approaches and offers further correction models for highly accurate static and flight condition results.
High aerodynamic efficiency requires propellers with high aspect ratios, while propeller sweep potentially reduces noise. Propeller sweep and high aspect ratios increase elasticity and coupling of structural mechanics and aerodynamics, affecting the propeller performance and noise. Therefore, this paper analyzes the influence of elasticity on forward-swept, backward-swept, and unswept propellers in hover conditions. A reduced-order blade element momentum approach is coupled with a one-dimensional Timoshenko beam theory and Farassat's formulation 1A. The results of the aeroelastic simulation are used as input for the aeroacoustic calculation. The analysis shows that elasticity influences noise radiation because thickness and loading noise respond differently to deformations. In the case of the backward-swept propeller, the location of the maximum sound pressure level shifts forward by 0.5 °, while in the case of the forward-swept propeller, it shifts backward by 0.5 °. Therefore, aeroacoustic optimization requires the consideration of propeller deformation.
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.