Helicopter Sizing by Statistics

AHS Forum 58, June 2002
Helicopter Sizing by Statistics

Omri Rand Vladimir Khromov
Faculty of Aerospace Engineering Technion Israel Institute of Technology Haifa 32000, Israel.
Presented at the American Helicopter Society 58th Annual Forum, Montreal, Canada, June 11-13, 2002.
Faculty of Aerospace Eng., Technion - I.I.T.

1
Introduction
Sizing is the first and an important stage in helicopter preliminary design process. Preliminary design tools are relatively simple and were developed for fast design cycles.
Design trends analysis is a well known technique in which flying configurations are analyzed in order to conclude or identify a trend which is common to many configurations, and therefore, it may represent physical constrains which are not clear and evident at the early stages. Design trends analysis is useful for the sizing stage in its broad sense: geometrical sizing and preliminary sizing of performance, power required, etc. The present study is based on a (partial) database for more than 180 conventional single rotor helicopter configurations. The analysis has been carried out using advanced computerized correlation technique which is based on Multiple Regression Analysis.

2
The Analysis Methodology

Multiple Regression Analysis (MRA):
... . Y = a X1 X 2 X 3
A computerized algorithm has been coded to generate and select hundreds of combinations of independent variables, in order to identify the groups that provide high correlation measure. The purpose was to find design trends that contain minimal number of independent unknowns (preferably one or two) that exhibit high correlation indicators. Error definition:
(%) = 100
| EV - DBV | DBV
where EV and DBV stand for the estimated value and the database value, respectively. For each case we shall present the averaged AVER and maximum MAX error obtained, defined by
AVER
1 N i N i =1
and
MAX
= max( i )
where N is the number of configurations involved,
is the error calculated for the i-th configuration.

3
The Analysis Methodology (cont.)

Multiple Regression Correlation Measure:
1 R 2 = 1 i = N
e yi yie j e yi y j
i =1
e where yi are the data base values, y is the averaged data base value, and yi are the estimated values.
Hence, R = 1 stands for a perfect correlation, while in most cases the minimal value of R was set to be above 0.9 in order to conclude that a correlation is of a value and represents a genuine trend.
The Database
The database used is the one stored in RAPID/RaTE (Rotorcraft Analysis for Preliminary Design / Rand Technologies & Engineering) - a desktop rotorcraft analysis package . RAPID/RaTE is designed to model general rotorcraft configurations, conventional helicopters and tilt-rotors. RAPID/RaTE performs trim response, mission analysis, vibration analysis, stability analysis, and both flight mechanics and aeroelastic simulations.

4
The Analysis Methodology Scheme

RAPID/RaTE Helicopter Configurations DATABASE Generation of helicopter parameters combinations {Xi, i=1,2,} Filtering of Database configurations for selected parameters groups Calculation of the MRA parameters and the multiple correlation measure R
AVER Evaluating error estimation .... , MAX
a , , , , e tc .
Identification of parameter combinations with high correlation measures Helicopter Configuration Model
Helicopter Design trends

5
Main Scheme of Helicopter Sizing

Vertical tail average chord, 12% Tail Rotor RPM, 6.6% Tail Rotor Solidity Hover Tip Speed 170-250 m/sec Tail rotor Blade number Main Rotor RPM, Hover Rotor RPM, 6.5% Tail Rotor chord, 10% 6% Main rotor chord, 10% Fuel value (liters), 11.5% Empty Weight, 9.3% Useful load, 9.5% Fenestron diameter, 7.7% Tail rotor diameter, 7.6% Horizontal tail arm, 16% Horiz. tail area, 29% Range with standard fuel, S/L
Gross Weight
Total power T-O, 14.3% T-O Transmission rating, 8%
Overall length, rotor turning, 1.7% Main rotor Blade number Fuselage Length, 6.2% Tail Rotor Arm, 3.3% Height to rotor head, 7% Vertical tail Arm, 4.2% Width over landing gears, 10% Long range speed, 6.5% Clearance Fuselage - Ground .3-.7 m Main Rotor Solidity Main Rotor Diameter, 6% Disc load
Total power Max cont., 10.5% Max cont. Transm. rating, 9%
Max speed, S/L Never exceed speed, 5.9%

6

a MT = f ( D) aVT = f ( D)
FH = f ( D)
Helicopter Geometry Sizing Parameters
FL = f ( D)
RT FL = f ( D)
FW = f ( D)
TR cTR = f (W0 , N B )
c = f (W0 , N B ) = f ( N B , D, c)
DLOAD & D = f (W0 ,Vmax )
cVT = f ( DTR )
TR TR = f ( N B , DTR , cTR )
TR = f ( DTR )
DTR = f (W0 )
= f ( D)
a HT = f (W0 )
S HT = f (W0 )

7
Main Rotor Diameter

The " square cube" scaling law: D W0 1 3
40
40 30 Error (%) 20 10 0 Average error Max error 7
D = f (W0 )
30 21 6
D = f (W0 ,Vm )
Main Rotor Diameter (m)
30
20
10
D=f (W f (W 0)) ) max D = f (W (GW &V 0, Vm Estimation

0 10 20 30 40
D = 0.980 W00.308, where D is in [m] and W0 is in [kg] ( = 7%, = 30%, R = .9606)

AVER MAX
Main Rotor Diameter Estimation (m)
0.515, D = 9.133 W00.380 / Vm Vm is in [km / hr] S / L ( = 6%, = 21%, R = .9744).

AVER MAX

8
Main Rotor Disc Loading

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000
Disc )) DiscLoading Loading (kg/m22
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20
80
Gross Weight (kg)
RAH-66 Comanche CH-53E Mi-6 & Mi-22 Mi-26
Disc Loading (kg/m2)
10 0
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0
RAH-66 Comanche Estimation
Database configurations
ASI Ultrasport 254

2000 4000 6000 8000
Database configurations Estimation

10000 12000 14000 16000
Gross Weight (kg)

9
Wing & Disc Loading Comparison

60
2 Wing & Disc Loading (lb f t 2) W ing/D isk Loading (lb / f t /)
50
Helicopter Database configurations Disc Loading (rotory-wing) Wing Loading Upper boundary (fixed-wing) Wing Loading Lower boundary (fixed-wing)
2.94 (W
1/3
40
- 6) Fixe d-wing
30
[McCormick, 1995]
1.54 (W
1/3
- 6)
[Current study]
.334 (W
1/3
20
[McCormick, 1995]
- .74)
10
0 0 10 20 30
1/3
40
50
60
(Gross Weight, lb)

10
Wing & Disc Loading

1000
Jet transport/bomber
Wing & Disk Loading (kg/m2)
586
Some transport helicopters Civil/utility low speed helicopters
100
Sailplane
30
73
73
10
20 7.5
Fixed-wing typical loading [Raymer, 1999]
Rotary-wing typical loading [Raymer, 1999]
Rotary-wing [Current study]

11
Main Rotor Blade Chord & Solidity

1
Main Rotor Blade Chord (m)
0.8
c = .0108 W00.540 / Nb0.714 ,

where c is in [m] and W0 is in [ kg] ( AVER = 10%, MAX = 41%, R = .9535).
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Main Rotor Blade Chord Estimation (m)

12
Main & Tail Rotor Angular Velocity
5000
Rotor Angular Velocity (RPM)
4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 5
Main Rotor Database Main Rotor Estimation Tail Rotor Database Tail Rotor Estimation FENESTRON Database
10
Rotor Diameter (m)
15
20
25
30
35

13
Main & Tail Rotor Angular Velocity (cont.)

Main Rotor: = 2673. / D 0.829 where is in [ RPM ] and D is in [m] ( AVER = 6%, MAX = 35%, R = .9630). Tail Rotor: 0.828 [ RPM ] = 3475. / DTR ( AVER = 7%, MAX = 16%, R = .9737)
or
800
Main Rotor Angular Velocity (RPM)
600
400
200
[rad / sec] = 364. / D

where DTR is in [m].
0.828 TR
0 0 200 400 600 800
Main Rotor Angular Velocity Estimation (RPM)

14
Main & Tail Rotor Tip Speed

300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0
Tip Speed (m/s)
Main Rotor Database configurations Tail Rotor Database configurations Fenestron Database configurations
Main Rotor Estimation Tail Rotor Estimation
5 10
Rotor Diameter (m)
15
20
25
30
35
Main Rotor: V Tail Rotor: V
TIP
TIP
= 140. D 0.171, where V TIP is in [m / sec] 0.172 , where V TIP is in [m / sec] = 182. DTR
15
Tail Rotor Diameter

8
Tail Rotor Diameter (m)
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 10000 20000
Database configurations Estimation FENESTRON Estimation

FENESTRON configurations
DTR = .0895 W00.391 where DTR is in [m] and W0 is in [ kg] ( = 8%, = 25%, R = .9754)
AVER MAX
F = .3081 W 0.154 DTR 0
Gross Weight (kg)
30000
40000
50000
60000
2 USAAMRDL Report 1974: D / DTR = [7.0 7.3] .27 DL {lb / ft }
RAPID/RaTE analysis:
D / DTR = 6.88 .19 DL {lb / ft 2}

16
Tail Rotor Arm

25
20
Tail Rotor Arm (m)
15
RAPID / RaTE analysis:
. , a MT = .5107 D 1061
10
Database configurations RAPID+ Estimation RAPID/RaTE Estimation USAAMRDL Report 1977 Ref. 13 Estimation
0 5 10 15 20 25
where a MT and D is in [m] ( AVER = 3%, MAX = 14%, R = .9907).
Tail Rotor Arm Estimation (m)

USAAMRDL Report 1977: a MT = ( D + DTR ) / 2 + .5 feet

17
Tail Rotor Blade Chord & Solidity

0.5
cTR = .0058 W00.506 / NbTR 0.720 ,

where cTR is in [m] and W0 is in [ kg] ( AVER = 10%, MAX = 30%, R = .9437).
Tail Rotor Blade Chord (m)
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Database configurations (without FENESTRON)
Tail Rotor Blade Chord Estimation (m)

18
Horizontal Tail Surface Area

SHT = .0021 W00.758 ,
9 8
where SHT is in [m2 ] and W0 is in [ kg] ( AVER = 29%, MAX = 214%, R = .9117).
Mi-26
Surface Area of 2 Horizontal Tail (m )
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000
Database configurations Mi-28 Estimation
Gross Weight (kg)

20
Vertical Tail Surface Arm

20 18 16
Vertical Tail Arm (m)
14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 5 10 15 20
aVT = .5914 D 0.995,

where aVT and D are in [m] ( AVER = 4%, MAX = 20%, R = .9853).
25 30 35

21
Vertical Tail Average Chord

Average Chord of Vertical Tail (m)
3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5
Database configurations (Diameter < 3.5 m) Database configurations (Diameter > 3.5 m) Database configurations (FENESTRON) Estimation (Diameter < 3.5 m) Estimation (Diameter > 3.5 m) Estimation (FENESTRON)
0.927 cVT = .909 DTR
Fenestron
1745 . cVT = .161 DTR DTR < 35 . m ( = 12%, = 43%, R = .9709)

AVER MAX
106 . cVT =6 .297 DTR 7
D .9 m 8 TR > 35
Tail Rotor Diameter (m)
where cVT and DTR are in [m]
For Fenestron configurations
cVT DTR
22
Configuration Length
40 35
Fuselage Length
30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 5 10 15
50 45 40 35 30
Estimation
20
25
30
35
40

. FLRT = 1.09 D 103 ( = 2%, = 9%, R = .9982) where FLRT and D are in [m].
AVER MAX
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
25 20 15 10 5 0

23
Overall Length, Rotor Turning (m)
FL = 0.824 D 1.056 ( = 6%, = 17%, R = .9807) Database configurations where FL and D are in [m].
AVER MAX
Fuselage Height and Width

9
Height to Rotor Head (m)
8 7 6 5 4 3
FH = 0.642 D 0.677 ( = 7%, = 25%, R = .9371) where FH and D are in [m].

AVER MAX
Mi-26
1 0 0 5 10 15 20
Estimation
25 30 35
Mi-6 & Mi-22
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
FW = 0.436 D 0.697 ( = 10%, = 40%, R = .8818) where FW and D are in [m].

AVER MAX
EH 101
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Width Over Landing Gears/Skids (m)

24
Fuselage-Ground Clearance
Clearance Fuselage - Ground (m)
0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000
Gross Weight (kg)

25
Empty Weight & Useful Load

0 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000
Gross Weight (kg)
Empty Weight (kg)
Helicopter Database configurations Rotor-wing Estimation Fixed-wing Estimation [McCormick, 1995]
WE = 0.4854 W0 1.015, ( AVER = 9%, MAX = 30%, R = .9932), where
WE and W0 are in [kg]

7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 14000
WU = 0.4709 W0 0.99, ( AVER = 10%, MAX = 46%, R = .9870), where
WU and W0 are in [kg]

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Gross Weight (kg)

26
Useful Load (kg)
Empty Weight & Useful Load (continued)

14000
Weight Estimation (kg)
12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
W0 = WPL + WF + WC + WE

WU
.4709 W00.99 +.4854 W01.015

Useful Load Est. + Empty Weight Est. Empty Weight Estimation Useful Load Estimation
W0
Gross Weight (kg)

27
Empty Weight & Useful Load (continued)

Empty Weight / Gross Weight, %
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Fixed-wing [McCormick, 1995]
Fixed-wing [Raymer, 1999]
Rotary-wing [Raymer, 1999]
Rotary-wing [current study]

74
80 70 60 50 45 30 42
Upper bound Lower bound
* Group Weight Statement of the US military.

28
Fuel Value
W0 = WPL + WF + WC + WE

WU
WF = 0.0038 W0 0.976 Rg 0.650,
Rg
= Range with standard fuel at sea level
3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Fuel Value (liters)
( AVER = 11%, MAX = 33%, R = .9942), where WF is fuel value in [liters], W0 is in [kg],
and Rg is range with standard fuel, S / L in [km].
Fuel Values Estimation (liters)

29
Speed
1.0565, VNE = .8215 VM ( AVER = 6%, MAX = 20%, R = .9399),
1.0899 , VLR = .5475 V M ( AVER = 6%, MAX = 31%, R = .9408),
where VNE is never exceed speed (S / L) in [km / hr], VLR is long range speed (S / L) in [km / hr],
VM is in [km / hr],
Speed; S/L (km/hr)
400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0
Long Range Speed Database configurations Long Range Speed Estimation Never Exceed Speed Database configurations Never Exceed Speed Estimation
VM
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Max Speed; S/L (km/hr)

30
Take-Off Total Power & Transmission Rating

0 25000 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 Gross Weight (kg)
Total Power T-O (kW)
20000 15000 10000 5000 0
PTO is the take - off total power in [ kW ] and W0 is in [ kg]

12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 35000
PTO = .0764 W0 1.1455, ( AVER = 14%, MAX = 37%, R = .9891), where
TTO = .0366 W0 1.2107 , ( AVER = 8%, MAX = 22%, R = .9943), where
transmission rating in [ kW ] and W0 is in [ kg]
TTO is the take - off
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
Gross Weight (kg)

31
T-O Transmission Rating (kW)
Max Continuous Total Power & Transmission Rating

Max Continuous Total Power Estimation
0 12000 3000 6000 9000 12000
Database Estimation
Max Continuous Total Power (kW)
9000
0.9760 , PMC = .0013 W0 0.9876 V M ( AVER = 10%, MAX = 37%, R = .9889), where PMC is the Max Cont. total power in [kW ], W0 is in [kg], V M is Max speed in [km / hr ]
12000
CH - 53E
6000
EH 101
9000
3000
6000
EH 101
1.3393, TMC = .000141 W0 0.9771 VM ( AVER = 9%, MAX = 20%, R = .9870), where
3000
TMC is the Max Cont. transmission rating in [kW ], W0 is in [kg], VM is in [km / hr]
3000
6000
9000
0 12000
Max cont. transmission rating estimation (kW)

32
Max Continuous Transmission rating (kW)
Power & Transmission Loading

Power loading = the ratio of the take off gross weight over the maximum engine power. Transmission loading = the ratio of the take off gross weight over the take-off transmission rating.
10 Power/Transmission Loading (kg/kW) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000
Mi - 26 MINI-500 BRAVO
Transmission Loading Database configurations Transmission Loading Estimation Power Loading Database configurations Power Loading Estimation
Gross Weight (kg)

33
Power & Transmission Loading

Propeller powered aircrafts
10
Power / Transmission Loading (kg/kW)
8 6 4 2 0
9 6.4
6 4.9
6.3
3.5 1.8
Rotary-wing typical power loading [Raymer, 1999]
2.6
Rotary-wing power loading [Current study] Rotary-wing transmission loading [Current study]
Fixed-wing typical power loading [Raymer, 1999]

34
RAPID/RaTE Helicopter Sizing Software

35
Concluding Remarks
A database for conventional helicopter configurations has been established and studied using advanced computerized correlation technique which is based on multiple regression analysis. Design trends were obtained and demonstrated. Currently, such data can not be found in the open literature. The study presented in this paper is expected to give designers a perspective of the existing flying designs and their inter-correlation. This is extremely important in the early preliminary stages where sizing issues are discussed in order to activate the preliminary design process. The collection of design trends presented in this paper contains also valuable information when comparison of performance of various configurations is under discussion. The present study results have been implemented as an autonomous component of RAPID/RaTE package.
36

Helicopter Sizing by Statistics

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Helicopter Sizing by Statistics

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

AHS Forum 58, June 2002