THE DESIGN OF HELICOPTER ROTOR BLADE WITH

TIP SHAPE WINGLET

A MINIPROJECT REPORT

Submitted by

BHARATHAN G 1601007
NAMBI RAJAN M 1601018
VIGNESH S 1601031

in partial fulfillment for the award of the

degree of

BACHELOR OF

ENGINEERING IN

AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING

PSN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY

Melathediyoor, Tirunelveli - 627152

(An Autonomous Institution affiliated to Anna University,

Chennai) Approved by AICTE, Recognized by UGC under section

2(f)

An ISO 9001:20015 certified Institution

NOVEMBER – 2019
 BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

Certified that this project report “THE DESIGN OF HELICOPTER ROTOR

BLADE WITH TIP SHAPE WINGLET” is the bonafide work of “BHARATHAN

G(1601007) ,NAMBI RAJAN M(1601018) ,VIGNESH S(1601031) ” that carried

out the project work under my supervision.

SIGNATURE SIGNATURE

Mr.A.KASIVISWANATHAN, M.E Mr.M.GODWIN JOE, M.E

Head of the department, Supervisor,

Dept of Aeronautical Engineering, Dept of Aeronautical Engineering,

PSNCET PSNCET

Tirunelveli-627152 Tirunelveli-627152

Submitted for the B.E project work viva –voice at The PSN college of Engineering
and Technology , Tirunelveli- 627152 , on……………………

External Examiner Internal Examiner

i
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to express sincere thanks to the chairman of our college,

Dr. P.SUYAMBU and the principal Dr.V.MANIKANDAN, for providing better
working environment and educational facilities.

We are much grateful to Mr.A.KASIVISWANATHAN, M.E of the Head of

department of Aeronautical Engineering for this encouragement discussion, valuable
comments and many innovative ideas. Without his timely help it would have been
impossible for us to complete this work.

We acknowledge in no less the qualified and excellent assistance rendered by

Mr. M.GODWIN JOE, M.E Department of Aeronautical Engineering. We own a
department of gratitude for his valuable suggestion, kind inspiration and
encouragement. We most sincerely thank our staff members, for their constant
inspiration and encouragement.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER
TITLE PAGE NO
NO
LIST OF FIGURES iv
LIST OF TABLE v
ABSTRACT vi
SYMBOLS AND ABBREVATIONS vii
1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 LITERATURE REVIEW 3
3 BASICS OF HELICOPTER 4
3.1 Anatomy of a Helicopter 4
4 BASICS OF HELICOPTER ROTOR 7
4.1 Main Rotor system 7
4.2 Controls system 9
4.3 Important parts 10
4.4.1 Swash plate 10
4.4.2 Stabilizer bar 11
5 PRESENT WORK 12
5.1 The theoretical model 12
5.2 Wing tip design 13
5.3 Review of helicopter rotor blade tip shapes 16
5.4 ANSYS – Analysis 17
5.5 Project Construction 23
6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 26
6.1 Hover flight 26
6.2 ANSYS developing results 27
7 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE 31
REFERENCES 32
 LIST OF FIGURES
SL.NO CONTENTS PAGE NO
1 BASICS OF HELICOPTER 4
Fig.3.1 Anatomy of helicopter UH-1C 4
Fig. 3.2 Helicopter assembly 6
Fig.3.3 Typical helicopter driven train 6
BASICS OF HELICOPTER ROTOR 7
2 Fig.4.1 Main rotor system 7
Fig.4.2 Rotor system drawing 8
Fig.4.3 Controls of helicopter 9
Fig.4.4 Swash plate model 10
Fig.4.5 Swash plate working 11
3 PRESENT WORK 12
Fig.5.1 – 5.3The theoretical model 12 – 13
Fig.5.4 Location of the vortex core in relation to the wing 14
tip, (a) with sharp lateral edge (as preferred by Hoerner),
(b) on wing with round edge, (c) flow around tip tank
Fig.5.5 Aerodynamic Performance of three families of 15
wings as a function of planform and wing tip shape
Fig.5.6 Review of helicopter rotor blade tip shapes 16
Fig.5.7 – 5.17ANSYS – Analysis 17 – 23
Fig.5.18 – 5.21 Project Construction 23 – 25
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 26
Fig.6.1 – 6.2Hover flight 26 – 27
Fig.6.3 Comparison of lift with winglet 27
Fig.6.4 Comparison of drag with winglet 28
Fig.6.5- 6.6 Three view of blade assembly 28 – 29
Fig.6.7 Static pressure contour 29
Fig.6.8 Velocity contour across the blade 30
Fig.6.9 Vector plot 30
 LIST OF TABLES
SL.NO CONTENTS PAGE NO
1 PRESENT WORK 12
Table. 5.1The rotor blade without winglet condition 18
Mesh details
Table. 5.2 The rotor blade with winglet condition Mesh 21
details
 ABSTRACT

A design of helicopter rotor blade with tip design technology has been carried
out with a view to undertaking subsequent computations to evaluate the performance
of new tip designs. Then, rotor blade tip shapes that have been used or suggested for
use, on past and present rotorcraft are examined to obtain a better understanding of the
helicopter tip design problem. In parallel, the modification traces the development of
analysis tools to evaluate the performance of the rotor and blade tip design. It is clear
that in the past, the designer relied heavily on classical aerodynamic knowledge,
supplemented by experience and intuition, supported by wind tunnel and model rotor
testing, and relatively low-order aerodynamic calculations. New rotor designs were,
and still are the subject of intensive flight test verification.
 SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

A : area

AI : intake highlights area

A t h : throat area

APR : augmented power rating

AR : aspect ratio

A W : wetted area

a : speed of sound; acceleration

: Average acceleration at 0.7 V2

ac : aerodynamic centre

B : breadth, width

b : span

CR : CB root chord

CD : drag coefficient

Cedi : induced drag coefficient

CDp : parasitic drag coefficient

CDpmin: minimum parasitic drag coefficient

CDw : wave drag coefficient

Cv : specific heat at constant volume

CF : overall skin friction coefficient; force coefficient

Cr : local skin friction coefficient; coefficient of friction

CL : lift coefficient

Cl : sectional lift coefficient; rolling moment coefficient

CLi : integrated design lift coefficient

CLα : lift curve slope

CLβ : sideslip curve slope

Cm : pitching-moment coefficient

Cn : yawing-moment coefficient

Cp : pressure coefficient; specific heat at constant pressure

Cr : thrust coefficient

CHT : horizontal tail volume coefficient

D : Drag

E : Endurance

e : Oswald efficiency

g : Acceleration due to gravity

G : Factor due to ground effect

JA,JT : Symbols

H : Height from ground

HOB : Obstacle height

Kt : Proportionality constant

Kuc : Factor depends on flap

deflection KA,Kr: Symbols

L : Lift
 𝐿
( )loiter: Lift-to-drag ratio at loiter
𝐷

𝐿
( )cruise: Lift-to-drag ratio at cruise
𝐷

M : Mach number of aircraft

mff : Mission segment fuel fraction

N : Time between initiation of rotation and actual

R : Range

Re : Reynolds Number

R/C : Rate of climb

S : Wing Area

Sa : Approach distance

Sab : Distance required to clear an obstacle after becoming airborne

Sf : Flare distance

Sg : Ground roll

Sref. : Referance surface area

Swet. : Wetted surface area

T : Thrust

P : Power

Pcruise : Thrust of cruise

Ptake-off : Thrust at take-off

𝑃
( )loiter : Thrust-to-weight ratio at loiter
𝑊
 𝑃
( )cruise : Thrust-to-weight ratio at cruise
𝑊
 𝑃
( )takeoff: Thrust-to-weight ratio at take-off
𝑊

Vcruise : Velocity at cruise

Vstall : Velocity at stall

VLO : Lift off Speed

VTD : Touch down speed

Wcrew : Crew weight

Wempty : Empty weight of

aircraft Wfuel : Weight of fuel

Wpayload : Payload of aircraft

Wo : Overall weight of aircraft

𝑊
: Wing loading
𝑆

ρ : Density of air

µ : Dynamic viscosity

µr : Co-efficient of rolling friction

λ : Tapered ratio

θOB : Angle between flight path and take-off

β : Turning angle

ϕ : Gliding angle

R/C : Rate of climb

 CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

The unique combination of hover and forward flight capability makes the helicopter
one of the most versatile types of aircraft. Yet these unique capabilities give rise to the
need to reach a compromise in many aspects of the design, and the aerodynamic
design of the rotor is no exception. The helicopter rotor must be both efficient in hover
and capable of carrying a useful payload in cruising flight. The design of the rotor
blade and the tip in particular, has a powerful influence on the overall performance,
vibration and acoustics of the helicopter.

For a conventional single main rotor with tail rotor configuration, in forward flight the
tips of the blades experience a strong cyclic variation in the Mach number and the
Reynolds number together with large changes in angle of attack and side-slip. The lift
must be balanced between the advancing and retreating blades, and a significant
proportion of the load is carried in the forward and rearward sectors of the rotor disc.
On the advancing blade the flight speed adds to the rotational speed of the blade and
the Mach number can approach the sonic boundary, while on the retreating blade high
lift-coefficients are demanded due to the low dynamic head, and the retreating blade
stall boundary imposes a limitation on the flight envelope of the helicopter. Even in
hover, where the flow may be considered as steady (and in the idealized case of an
isolated rotor may have axial symmetry of the wake), the blade tips must be designed
for mid-subsonic Mach numbers (0.58–0.66), and also take into account relatively low
Reynolds numbers, in the range of 1–4 million. While efforts to enhance the
performance of the main rotor have a direct impact on the overall performance of the
helicopter, there is also a need to provide an efficient tail rotor to avoid excessive
power consumption and provide good maneuverability

Tail rotors tend to operate at high blade loadings, and so the need here is for a tip
design that minimizes, or at least delays, the drag rise associated with separation at
high angles of attack at mid subsonic Mach numbers and associated low Reynolds.
Other rotorcraft configurations are not exempt from the basic conflict between hover
and cruising flight requirements. For example, in the case of the tilt-rotor the aim is to
maintain the rotors in axial flow, although even here there are many compromises to
be made and similar design conditions of high blade loading at moderate-sub-sonic
Mach numbers and relatively low Reynolds numbers remain.

1
In addition to striving to enhance the aerodynamic performance, the helicopter
designer must also consider the acoustic signature of the rotorcraft, perhaps by placing
constraints on the tip Mach number, or blade loading. Most helicopters suffer blade–
vortex interaction noise in descending flight manoeuvres on the approach. Nowadays,
the demand is for both a quiet and efficient vehicle, with greater payload range
capability than ever before.

Over the past 60 years or so, many blade designs have been put forward, and design
trade-off studies undertaken. Blade taper and twist help to improve the Figure of Merit
in hover, but give rise to premature stall and increase the risk of high vibration in
cruising flight, althoughmost modern helicopters now incorporate some twist and also
employ advanced low-pitching moment aerofoil sections.

When sweep is required, the problem is to avoid significant offset of the aerodynamic
centre, and the tip shape should enhance, rather than degrade the performance of the
rotor. While much can be learnt from fixed-wing wind tunnel tests, it is difficult to
transfer the results directly to a rotor, and model-scale rotor testing brings its own low
Reynolds number questions, not to mention difficulties in measuring all relevant
parameters in the necessary detail. In the past, many model rotor tests have been
undertaken to support the development of strip-theory-based rotor models with
prescribed or free-wakes.

More advanced theories to take into account compressibility were later applied, but
even so it was difficult to capture all the flow states experienced by the rotor and the
final blade tip design was the subject of much reasoning and sometimes arbitrary
judgements. However, as methods of analysis improve, some of the early guess-work
can be replaced by a deeper understanding of the fundamental physics of the flow-
field in the tip region. Recent developments in Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
now offer an opportunity to make further improvements and better optimise the tip
shape for helicopter rotors. These modern numerical methods, such as the Helicopter
Multi-Block (HMB) code which is used in the UK, start from the surface geometry
and a set of boundary conditions and are well placed not only to capture the physics of
the flow in the tip region, but also the flow around the complete helicopter.

The work presented in this project the development of helicopter tip shapes with a
view to subsequent simulation and the evaluation of new helicopter blade tip designs.
Against this background new designs may be put forward and properly evaluated.
Once the blade airloads in the tip region are known with greater precision, the overall
performance of the whole helicopter will be able to be better appraised.
 CHAPTER-2

LITERATURE

REVIEW

The lift Characteristics Analysis of Rotor Blade Based on ANSYS by Nian-zhao

Jiang, Xiang-lin Ma, Zhi-qing Zhang, Those three-estimation compelled part show
for helicopter rotor edge require been worked with APDL tongue, that point utilizing
this model, those static quality and the segment qualities something like rotor edge
require been investigated with ANSYS programming gathering. All through the
Investigation of dynamic trademark, those impact of aeromechanic essentialness and
extended imperativeness applying will sharpened steel require been completely
observed as. Also, the full outline about rotor edge require been introduced in this
project.

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF THE MAIN ROTOR BLADE FOR A LIGHT

HELICOPTER - CASE OF HOVERING FLIGHT MODE by Diana
CAZANGIU, in MAY 2014, in might 2014, those aviation industry arrangements
starting with the start with structures with extraordinary necessities Similarly as
amazing lightweight Also withstanding with a huge number from claiming load
situations. Flight science imperatives prompt supplementary restrictions, those
outcomes constantly the mind boggling state will support the fuselage, those rotor
blades alternately the wings skin.

This project displays a static structural dissection of the fundamental rotor sharpened
steel for the light helicopter. To recreate the mechanical conduct technique of the
blade, a limited components strategy might have been utilized. An instance from
claiming hovering flight mode might have been acknowledged.

While the focus of this work is on helicopter tip shapes, much can be learnt by also
looking at wing tip developments in the fixed-wing field since the underlying fluid
dynamics are essentially common. This literature survey is therefore divided into two
sections. Firstly ideas are considered from fixed wing aircraft which may be usefully
applied to the rotorcraft problem. In the second part of the survey tip shapes used on
past and current helicopter blades are identified, and the reasons for their development
are probed. The available methods for analysis of blade tip aerodynamics are also
reviewed.
 CHAPTER-3

BASICS OF HELICOPTER

Air resistance behaves the same way as fluid resistance. When you try to swim
through water, the faster you swim, the harder it becomes. For air resistance, a surface
moving through the air will experience drag the faster it moves. What helicopter does
is use the air resistance to create a lifting force. When the leading edge of a surface is
higher and the rear edge is lower, air flow would strike the surface and be pushed
down. The air flow pushing downward is the same as the surface being pushed
upward, which creates lift. For aircraft, the slanted under surface of wing and rotor
blade allows air to create lift.

A helicopter rotor is powered by the engine, through the transmission, to the rotating
mast. The mast is a cylindrical metal shaft which extends upward from helicopter and
is driven by the transmission. At the top of the mast is the attachment point for the
rotor blades called as hub. The rotor blades are then attached to the hub.

3.1 Anatomy of a Helicopter:

Here are some of the component parts that make up a helicopter. {While this is an
example of one specific helicopter (UH-1C), not all helicopters will have all of the
parts listed here, but some of its kind.}

Fig.3.1 Anatomy of helicopter UH-1C

 Rotor Blade: The rotary wing that provides lift for the helicopter.

 Stabilizer Bar: Dampens control inputs to make smoother changes to the rotor
system.

 Swash plate: Transfers non-moving control inputs into the spinning rotor
system.

 Cowling: The aerodynamic covering for the engine.

 Mast: Connects the transmission to the rotor system.

 Engine: Provides power to the rotor systems.

 Transmission: Takes power from the engine and drives both rotor systems.

 Greenhouse Window: A tinted window above each of the pilot seats.

 Fuselage: The body of the helicopter.

 Cabin Door: Allows access to the cabin and cockpit.

 Skids: Landing gear that usually have no wheels or brakes.

 Cross tube: The mounting tubes and connection for the skids.

 Motor Mount: A flexible way to attach the engine to the fuselage.

 Tail boom: Also known as an "empenage" is the tail of the helicopter.

 Synchronized Elevator: A movable wing that helps stabilize the helicopter in

flight.

 Tail rotor: Provides anti-torque and in-flight trim for the helicopter.

 Tail Rotor Driveshaft: Provides power to the tail rotor from the transmission.

 45 Degree Gearbox: Transfers power up the vertical fin to the 90 degree

gearbox.

 90 Degree Gearbox: Transfers power from the 45 degree gearbox to the tail
rotor.

 Vertical Fin: Holds the tail rotor and provides lateral stabilization.

 Tail Skid: Protects the tail boom when landing.

 Fig. 3.2 Helicopter assembly

Fig.3.3 Typical helicopter driven train

 CHAPTER-4

BASICS OF HELICOPTER ROTOR

4.1 Main Rotor System:

Fig.4.1 Main rotor system

 Root: The inner end of the blade where the rotors connect to the blade grips.

 Blade Grips: Large attaching points where the rotor blade connects to the hub.

 Hub: Sits atop the mast, and connects the rotor blades to the control tubes.

 Mast: Rotating shaft from the transmission, which connects the rotor blades to
the helicopter.

 Control Tubes: Push \ Pull tubes that change the pitch of the rotor blades.

 Pitch Change Horn: The armature that converts control tube movement to
blade pitch.

 Pitch: Increased or decreased angle of the rotor blades to raise, lower, or

change the direction of the rotors thrust force.

 Jesus Nut: Is the singular nut that holds the hub onto the mast. (If it fails, the
next person you see will be Jesus).
Fig.4.2 Rotor system drawing
4.2 Controls:

Fig.4.3 Controls of helicopter

 Swash Plate: Turns non-rotating control movements into rotating control

movements.

 Collective: The up and down control. It puts a collective control input into the
rotor system, meaning that it puts either "all up", or "all down" control inputs
in at one time through the swash plate. It is operated by the stick on the left
side of the seat, called the collective pitch control. It is operated by the pilots
left hand.

 Cyclic: The left and right, forward and aft control. It puts in one control input
into the rotor system at a time through the swash plate. It is also known as the
"Stick". It comes out of the center of the floor of the cockpit, and sits between
the pilots legs. It is operated by the pilot’s right hand.

 Pedals: These are not rudder pedals, although they are in the same place as
rudder pedals on an airplane. A single rotor helicopter has no real rudder. It has
instead, an anti-torque rotor (Also known as a tail rotor), which is responsible
for directional control at a hover, and aircraft trim in forward flight. The pedals
are operated by the pilots feet, just like airplane rudder pedals are. Tandem
rotor helicopters also have these pedals, but they operate both main rotor
systems for directional control at a hover.
4.3 Important Parts:

4.3.1 Swash plate:

Fig.4.4 Swash plate model

The swash plate assembly has two primary roles:

 Under the direction of the collective control, the swash plate assembly can
change the angle of both blades simultaneously. Doing this increases or
decreases the lift that the main rotor supplies to the vehicle, allowing the
helicopter to gain or lose altitude.

 Under the direction of the cyclic control, the swash plate assembly can change
the angle of the blades individually as they revolve. This allows the helicopter
to move in any direction around a 360-degree circle, including forward,
backward, left and right.

The swash plate assembly consists of two plates -- the fixed and the rotating swash
plates -- shown above in blue and red, respectively. The rotating swash plate rotates
with the drive shaft (green) and the rotor's blades (grey) because of the links (purple)
that connect the rotating plate to the drive shaft. The pitch control rods (orange)
allow the rotating swash plate to change the pitch of the rotor blades. The angle of the
fixed swash plate is changed by the control rods (yellow) attached to the fixed swash
plate. The fixed plate's control rods are affected by the pilot's input to the cyclic and
collective controls. The fixed and rotating swash plates are connected with a set of
bearings between the two plates. These bearings allow the rotating swash plate to spin
on top of the fixed swash plate.
 Fig.4.5 Swash plate working

The pitch of main rotor blades can be varied cyclically throughout its rotation in order
to control the direction of rotor thrust vector (the part of the rotor disc where the
maximum thrust will be developed, front, rear, right side, etc.). Collective pitch is
used to vary the magnitude of rotor thrust (increasing or decreasing thrust over the
whole rotor disc at the same time). These blade pitch variations are controlled by
tilting and/or raising or lowering the swash plate with the flight controls. The vast
majority of helicopters maintain a constant rotor speed during flight, leaving only the
angle of attack of the blades as the sole means of adjusting thrust from the rotor.

The swash plate is two concentric disks or plates; one plate rotates with the mast,
connected by idle links, while the other does not rotate. The rotating plate is also
connected to the individual blades through pitch links and pitch horns. The non-
rotating plate is connected to links which are manipulated by pilot controls,
specifically, the collective and cyclic controls.

The swash plate can shift vertically and tilt. Through shifting and tilting, the non-
rotating plate controls the rotating plate, which in turn controls the individual blade
pitch.

4.3.2 Stabilizer bar:

Arthur M. Young found that stability could be increased significantly with the
addition of a stabilizer bar (also called a flybar) perpendicular to the two blades. The
stabilizer bar has weighted ends which cause the bar to stay relatively stable in the
plane of rotation. The stabilizer bar is linked with the swash plate in such a manner as
to reduce the effect of external forces on the rotor. The result is a much more stable
rotor system which eases the workload of the pilot to maintain control of the aircraft.
Stanley Hiller also arrived at a method to improve stability by adding a bar
perpendicular to the rotor, but he added short, stubby airfoils, or flaps, at each end.
Hiller's "Rotormatic" system was used to deliver cyclic control inputs to the main
rotor as a sort of control rotor, the flaps providing added stability by also dampening
the effects of external forces on the rotor.
 CHAPTER-5

PRESENT WORK

In nor mal flight conditions of helicopters the main rotor blades pass close to the tip
vortices of the preceding blades. Under certain conditions, even an intersection of
blades with vortices will occur. These Blade Vortex Interactions (BY) are to some
extend responsible for impulsive noise emission, dynamic blade loads and a reduction
in rotor performance.

5.1 The theoretical model:

For the theoretical investigation of rotor - winglet configurations a suitable wake

modelling is required. Wake models are usually divided into three parts:

 Near wake
 Intermediate wake
 Far wake

For the calculation of special tip shapes an accurate modelling of the near wake is
essential. In this region a vortex lattice method is used (fig.5.1). The intermediate
wake is modelled by some revolutions of vortex spirals, which start from the various
centers of vorticity of the near wake - mostly two or three over the blade, a tip vortex,
a mid vortex and a root vortex. Finally the far wake is simulated by vortex cylinders
or several vortex rings (fig.5.2). The mid vortex, often postulated, has now been
measured by LOA (fig.5.3).

For this measurements a twisted fixed wing, distorted by a vortex simulating the tip
vortex of the preceding blade, has been used. The circulation distribution on this test
wing is very similar to that one of a rotor blade. So a comparison seems to be
permissible.

Fig.5.1
 Fig.5.2

Fig.5.3

5.2 Wing tip design:

Since there may be considerable carry-over in tip design thinking between fixed-wing
and helicopter tip shape, fixed-wing aerodynamic developments are considered in this
first section of the literature review. However, it is recognised that there are major
differences in the flow environment in which the tip shapes must function, not least of
which for the helicopter are centrifugal effects and vortex wake interactions, and
indeed dynamic and manufacturing constraints may also differ. Nevertheless, there is
commonality of purpose towards enhanced performance, and in certain cases, design
ideas may be adapted from one application to another. In addition, modern CFD
methods are being eagerly applied in both fields, and it may therefore be possible to
learn new techniques, or gain additional insight from the fixed wing field, which could
be applied to the helicopter problem.

As with helicopters, early aircraft were generally of wooden construction and

commonly had rounded wing tips on an otherwise rectangular planform. The wing
planform later became influenced by the lifting-line theory of Prandtl which
established that an elliptic planform produces a uniform downwash to give minimum
induced drag. However, since this type of planform was not easy to manufacture when
metal construction was adopted, much more basic planforms rapidly became the
norm. Pope and Glauert amongst others, present factors to account for the effect of
wing taper and/or twist on the induced drag and lift-curve slope. In the US, the inverse
of the induced drag factor is known as the Oswald efficiency factor, as given in
McCormick. The concept of breaking down the drag of an aircraft (or helicopter) into
induced (vortex) drag due to lift, and profile (viscous and wave) drag, is fundamental
to aircraft performance analysis.

Where high sub-sonic Mach number flows are of interest (for high-speed sub-sonic
aircraft and helicopter rotors) TSP Methods, Full-Potential, or Euler methods may be
used, or when viscous effects are also important, Navier–Stokes CFD methods are
required to simulate details of the flow. While CFD methods are good at capturing the
local flow field, and conserve mass, momentum and energy, it is also important to
ensure that the wake is well represented if the induced drag is to be computed
correctly.

Fig.5.4 Location of the vortex core in relation to the wing tip, (a) with sharp
lateral edge (as preferred by Hoerner), (b) on wing with round edge, (c) flow
around tip tank
Fig.5.5 Aerodynamic Performance of three families of wings as a function of
planform and wing tip shape

In this project , Fluid Dynamics of Drag, Hoerner presents a series of wing tip shapes
which had been previously tested in Germany and documented in the USA by Hoerner
Fig.5.5. The tests were carried out in a low speed wind tunnel on model-scale wings of
relatively low aspect ratio fitted with different tip caps.
 Hoerner summarises their induced drag performance by determining an effective
aspect ratio for each tip, and in his report also compares their total drag polars and lift
characteristics. Hoerner also considered the effect of cross-section shape on various
styles of tip, Fig.5.4. Hoerner’s preference was to blend the lower surface up to meet
the upper surface to achieve an overall beneficial effect, as on Tip No. 5, and the
suggested roll-up mechanism is sketched in Fig.5.4. Modern computational methods
now have the potential to offer a deeper insight into the tip design problem, and it
should be possible to reproduce the Hoerner results for a wing by a numerical
approach, provided that adequate details of the flow can be captured.

5.3 Review of helicopter rotor blade tip shapes:

Helicopter blade design has always been a compromise between aerodynamic

efficiency, structural and mass properties, and ease of construction. Since wood was a
natural choice of material for early helicopter blades, the designer initially had some
freedom in the choice of shape although it is clear that the ease of manufacture of
long, slender blades soon became the overriding consideration. For example, Cierva’s
C8L autogyro had blades with an elliptic planform, while the later C30A, had parallel
chord blades with elliptical tips.

As the helicopter developed, twisted, tapered blades best suited to hovering gave way
to simpler parallel chord low twist blades, which were almost universally adopted, as
they were easier to manufacture and gave a better compromise between hover and
forward flight. While wood has good stiffness and fatigue properties, there are some
drawbacks. One of the main problems was water ingress and the tendency for the ply
to de-laminate or warp, not to mention the difficulty of maintaining aerofoil
tolerances. Manufacture was also highly labour intensive, but the product was
versatile, and had the potential been seen, the designer could have created more or less
any tip shape he had desired. The symmetrical shape of the universally used NACA
0012 aerofoil lends itself to the creation of this type of tip. The tail rotor blades of the
Wessex (S-58), Sea King (S-61) and early Lynx all followed similar styles of constant
chord blades with aerofoil-of-revolution tip caps.

Fig.5.6
5.4 ANSYS – Analysis:

THE ROTOR BLADE WITHOUT WINGLET CONDITION:

 Blade with surface mesh:

The subdomains are often called elements or cells, and the collection of all
elements or cells is called a mesh or grid.

Fig.5.7

 Prism layer setting in T-grid:

Fig.5.8
 Blade with fluid volume:
A fluid mechanics simulation requires the air/fluid volume. For
internal fluid flow analyses, this region needs to be created as a single part.
This can be done on the SimScale platform and is called Fluid
Volume Extraction.

Fig.5.9

 Mesh details:
SURFACE TRIANGULAR PRISM LAYER

Leading surface 8mm

Bottom surface 12mm

Top surface 10mm

Tip surface 6mm

Root 14mm

Tunnel surface 70 – 100mm

Table. 5.1
 Boundary conditions setting:
 Boundary conditions are essential component of a mathematical model.
They direct the motion of flow which leads to a unique solution.
In ANSYS FLUENT (or in general in any CFD software), we are
familiar with standard boundary conditions such as inlet, outlet, wall,
symmetry etc…
 They are Dirichlet boundary condition, Neumann boundary
condition and mixed boundary condition.

Fig.5.10

 Static pressure contribution over the blades:

Static pressure over the building surfaces produced by the action of wind is
generally positive on the windward side and negative on the leeward side.

Fig.5.11
THE ROTOR BLADE WITH WINGLET CONDITION:

 After completion of first cut analysis, we finalized NACA – 9417 at 10

degree of angle of attack is giving the better results.
 The blade which we got the better result, in that the add – on part
(winglet) will be implemented and second cut analysis starts in that
configuration.
 Cad model of NACA – 9417 blade with winglet:

Fig.5.12

 Meshed model of NACA – 9417 blade with winglet:

Fig.5.13
 Prism layer setting in T-grid:

Fig.5.14
 Mesh details:
SURFACE TRIANGULAR PRISM LAYER

Leading surface 8mm

Bottom surface 12mm

Top surface 10mm

Tip surface 6mm

Root 14mm

Tunnel surface 70 – 100mm

Winglet 4mm

Table. 5.2
 Boundary condition setting:

Fig.5.15
 Static pressure contour:

Fig.5.16
  Velocity vector contour:

Fig.5.17

5.5 Project Construction:

Now here discuss about the images of my project construction see about

Fig.5.18
Fig.5.19

Fig.5.20
 Fig.5.21
CHAPTER-6

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

6.1Hover flight:

Using the vortex lattice method it was possible to calculate different tip shapes. For
first tests very simple shapes have been used. For the example of the FAVIER rotor
the calculated influence of a tapered downward pointing winglet with a lenght of
about 3% of rotor radius is shown in fig 6.1. Even this non-optimized simple winglet
decreases the gradient of the circulation distribution remarkably. The intermediate and
near wake with and without winglet are shown in figure6.1 .It is interesting to see that
the double vortex, generated by the winglet, yielded by the calculation is similar to the
double vortex in the visualization (fig. (6)). Measurements with the rotor of figure (4)
yielded a bit lower thrust but a better figure of merit with the downward pointing
winglet fig 6.2
Fig.6.1
 Fig.6.2

6.2 ANSYS developing results:

Comparison of lift with

winglet:

Fig.6.3

Here the comparison of lift distribution on helicopter rotor blade with and without
winglet. The performance on with winglet blade has lift distribution on high. Due to
increasing fuel efficiency of helicopter. So must be implementation helicopter rotor
blade winglets. They on without winglet blade the lift effect is 0.531755547 and with
winglet blade the lift effect is 0.559276767.

Comparison of drag with winglet:

Fig.6.4

Here the comparison of drag distribution on helicopter rotor blade with and without
winglet. The performance on without winglet blade has drag distribution on high. Due
to decrease fuel efficiency of helicopter. So must be implementation helicopter rotor
blade winglets. They on without winglet blade the drag effect is 0.3797994556 and
with winglet blade the lift effect is 0.282192647.

Three view of blade assembly:

Fig.6.5
 Fig.6.6

Static pressure contour:

Fig.6.7
Velocity contour across the blade:

Fig.6.8

Vector plot:

Fig.6.9
 CHAPTER-7

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE

The conclusion of report on this design of helicopter rotor blade with tip shape
winglet due to implementation of winglets in rotor blade wing tip. They on used for
increase for lift distribution increases must be decrease on drag of helicopter. Now a
days of helicopter have not used for winglets on rotor blade wing tip. They only used
for winglets design in aircraft.

Aircraft must be fixed wings on fuselage but helicopter does not, due to the helicopter
rotor blade rotary motion so they difficult for this construction, here I am reduced that
difficult problem must be this development on a project help oh ANSYS software.
The design of tip shape winglets using and analysis for ANSYS.

The performance of winglet tip shape rotor blade the lift has increases, the compared
aircraft and helicopter they more than advantages of helicopter but some
disadvantages had occur the main disadvantage on this lift efficiency. My this project
on that disadvantage make them advantage using winglets of rotor blade. The result of
increasing lift and decreasing of drag.
 REFERENCES

1. The lift Characteristics Analysis of Rotor Blade Based on ANSYS by Nian-

zhao Jiang, Xiang-lin Ma, Zhi-qing Zhang
2. Structural analysis of the main rotor blade for a light helicopter - CASE OF
hovering flight mode by diana cazangiu, in may 2014, in might 2014,
3. A review of helicopter rotor blade tip shapes by A. Brocklehurst, G.N. Barakos
in Research Gate international journal
4. The influence of winglets on rotor aerodynamics by R.Muller in Research Gate
journal
5. Effect of blade tip winglet on the rotor blade by Han Shaobing *, Zhong
Jingjun
6. Execution streamlining something like helicopter rotor blades inevitably Tom's
examining Joanne l. Walsh
7. Yamada K, Furukawa M, Inoue M, Funazaki KI. Numerical Analysis of tip
leakage flow field in a transonic compressor rotor. Proceedings of the
international gas turbine congress; 2003 Nov 2– 7; Tokyo, Japan. 2003.
8. Helicopter Flying Handbook 2012 by U.S. Department of Transportation
federal aviation administration Flight Standards Service
9. Muller RHG. Winglets on rotor blades in forward flight—a theoretical and
experimental investigation. In: 14th European rotorcraft forum, Milano, Italy;
1988.
10. Muller RHG. Special vortices at a helicopter rotor blade. Journal of the
American Helicopter Society 1990;35(4):16–22.
11. Brocklehurst A, Steijl R, Barakos G. Using CFD to understand and evaluate
tail rotor blade designs. In: AHS aeromechanics specialists’ conference, San
Francisco; 2008.
12. Beedy J. Numerical study of the flow field around the tip of oscillating wings.
In: Proceedings of the University of Glasgow Helicopter Study Weekend, the
Burn, Scotland; 2003.
13. References for wiki – pedia www.wikipedia.com