NASA CONTRACTOR REPORT 166310

UH-60A Black Hawk Engineering Simulation.Program:

Volume II-Background Report

J.J. Howlett
United Technologies
Sikorsky Aircraft
Stratford, Connecticut 06602

Prepared for
Ames Research Center
under Contract NAS2-I0626

NASA
N(lhon_-ll A(;ronauhcs and
SI.)_Ic:(; Adm_n_,_tr_llson

Ames Research Center

MotIull F,old Cahfornta 941135
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

k_F FOREWORD

This report is Volume II of two volumes prepared by the Sikorsky Division of

United Technologies Corporation for the National Aeronautics and Space Adminis-
tration, Ames Research Center, Moffet Field, California under Contract NAS2-
10626.

This contract, which was to define and validate a mathematical model of the
UH-60A BLACK HAWK helicopter at the Ames Research Center, was funded by the
U.S. Army Research and Technology Laboratories (AVRADCOM), Ames Research Center
and administered by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Ms.
Carolyn S. LaFollette was the Contract Administrator and Mr. Thomas S.
Alderete, Simulation Investigations Branch, was the Technical Monitor. The
Sikorsky Division Project Engineer for this contract was Mr. J. Howlett.
Engineering assistance was provided by Mr. W. Gerdes, Mr. D. Ruttledge and Mr.
P. Gold. Simulation software support was provided by Mr. D. Simpson.
 UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
SER-70602

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD

1 SUMMARY

2 INTRODUCTION

3 SIMULATION MODULES DESCRIPTION 4

3.1 Main Rotor Module 4
3.2 Fuselage Module 28
3.3 Empennage Module 31
3.4 Tail Rotor Module 34
3.5 Flight Control Module 40
3.6 Engine/Fuel Control Module 57
3.7 Landing Interface Module 69
3.8 Ground Effects Module 80
3.9 Gust Penetration Module" 80
3.10 Motion Module 85

4 SIMULATION TRIMMING CONCEPTS 90

5 FUTURE SIMULATION MODEL DEVELOPMENT 92

k_7
6 REFERENCES 94

k_#

iii
 UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
SER-70602

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1 Gen. Hel Flight Dynamics Simulation Model 3

3.1.1 Main Rotor Flow Diagram 5

3.1.2 Blade Geometry Definition 8
3.1.3 I0
Body Axes to Shaft Axes Transformation
3.1.4 Shaft Axes to Rotating Blade Span Axes
Transformation 16
3.1.5 Definition of Yawed Angle of Attack 17
3.1.6 23
Lag Damper Kinematic Geometry
3.1.7 Definition of Rotor Wake Skew Angle 27

3.2.1 29
Fuselage Equation Flow Diagram

Empennage Equation Flow Diagram 32

35
Empennage Axes System

Tail Rotor Equation Flow Diagram 37

Tail Rotor Axes System 38

41
3.5.1 Flight Controls Block Diagram
3.5.2 42
AFCS Simplified Block Diagram
3.5.3 Collective Flight Controls Block Diagram 44
3.5.4 Pitch Flight Controls Block Diagram 45
46
3.5.5 Roll Flight Controls Block Diagram
3.5.6 47
Yaw Flight Controls Block Diagram
3.5.7 Automatic Flight Control Panel 49
3.5.8 Flight Control Mixing Unit Schematic 51
53
3.5.9 Longitudinal Cyclic Rigging
3.5.10 54
Lateral Cyclic Rigging
3.5.11 Tail Rotor Control Rigging 55

3.6.1 59
T700 Engine Schematic
60
3.6.2 Engine Controls
64
3.6.3 Engine/Fuel Control Interface With the Rotor
3.6.4 Fuel Control Electric Control Unit 65
3.6.5 67
Engine/Fuel Control Block Diagram
68
3.6.6 Rotor Degree of Freedom Clutch Model
3.6.7 Rotor Clutch Model - Detailed Program Flow
70
Diagram

72
3.7.1 Landing Gear Tire and Strut Representation
3.7.2 Landing Module Axes System 73
75
3.7.3 Landing Gear Geometry
76
3.7.4 Gear/Ground-plane Interface Geometry
Reinitialization of Gear Line Intersection Point 79
3.7.5

iv
 UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
SER-70602

LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)

3.9.1 Definition of Gust Ring Array 82

3.9.2 Gust Table Loading Restriction 83
3.9.3 Effect of Decreasing "TABINK" on Table
Loading 84
Helicopter Penetration of Gust Front 86
Program Flow for Loading Gust Tables 87

3.10.1 Body Axes System Definition 88

V
 UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
SER-70602

1.0 SUMMARY

A non-linear mathematical model of the UH-60A BLACK HAWK heli-

copter has been developed under Contract NAS2-I0626. This
mathematical model, which is based on the Sikorsky General
Helicopter (Gen Hel) Flight Dynamics Simulation, provides the
Army with an engineering simulation for Performance and Handling
Qualities evaluations. Initially it will be applied in an
analysis mode with eventual application to real time pilot-in-
the-loop simulation.

This mathematical model is a total systems definition of the

BLACK HAWK helicopter represented at a uniform level of sophis-
tication considered necessary for Handling Qualities evalua-
tions. The model is a total force, large angle representation
in six rigid body degrees of freedom. Rotor blade flapping,
lagging and hub rotational degrees of freedom are also repre-
sented. In addition to the basic helicopter modules, supportive
modules have been defined for the landing interface, power unit,
ground effects and gust penetration. Information defining the
cockpit environment relevant to pilot-in-the-loop simulation is
presented. This same model was activated on Sikorsky's DEC PDP
KLI0 computer to generate check cases for use during the valida-
tion of the simulation at NASA.

Volume I of this report defines the mathematical model using a

k_i
modular format. The documentation of each module is self-con-
tained and includes a description, mathematical definition and
input for the BLACK HAWK. Volume II provides background and
descriptive information supportive to an understanding of the
mathematical model.

b_
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

2.0 INTRODUCTION

This report is Volume II of two volumes, which document the

mathematical model of the UH-60A BLACK HAWK helicopter. This
work was funded under Contract NAS2-I0626 by the U.S. Army
Research and Technology Laboratories (AVRADCOM), Ames Research
Center.

The objective of this contract was to provide the Army and NASA
with a well documented, operational and verified engineering
simulation of the BLACK HAWK helicopter. This work, undertaken
by Sikorsky, provides the Army with a Flying Qualities analysis
methodology for the BLACK HAWK helicopter which could eventually
be extended to a real time pilot-in-the-loop simulation. The
mathematical model provided under this contract is a total
system, free flight representation based on the Sikorsky General
Helicopter (Gen Hel) Flight Dynamics Simulation, illustrated on
Figure 2.1. It is defined at a uniform level of sophistication
currently considered appropriate for Handling Qualities evalua-
tions. This model is also considered to give representative
performance trends, but it should not be used to define critical
performance characteristics. The modular format presented
facilitates the introduction of additional or more sophisticated
modules.

Presented in this Volume is background information which is not

directly required for the mathematical definition of the BLACK
HAWK simulation model, but is supportive to an understanding of
the model. Each of the modules presented in Volume I will be
discussed. Where mathematical manipulation has been used which
has obscured the origin of equations, derivation and explanation
will be provided. Origin of experimental data used as input
will be identified and a discussion of inherent assumptions in
the model will be presented. This volume contains information
proprietry to Sikorsky Aircraft Division UTC.

It is not the intention in this report to duplicate information

provided in Volume I. However, in some areas for continuity and
completeness, repetition is unavoidable. This document should
be treated as supportive to Volume I.

The following sections discuss each of the simulation modules

presented in Volume I. Extensive reference is made to Volume I,
but rather than indicate this in the text, the respective page
numbers in Volume I, correponding to the discussion being
undertaken, are identified in a right hand margin.
_ UNITED ORIGiH_L P_E ___
TECHNOLOGIES OF POOR _'
SER-70602

FIGURE 2.1. GEN. ]-[EL.FLIGHT

DYNAMIC'S SIMULATION MODEL

Hi i n Rotor
-- Vel.,
f AIC Pos..
Accel.

""- (nglne j_UJ

f l f

J 11 =I Control Hq Serve H--

Pilot J-J-_ System I.-f'1 _del !..1' __ Sum Forces

iold IIullieai|li V
[¢l|idt ions
J u| IllillUli
I//''
JI -'I ""llor. Tall _L-

-'lVert. Tail

_ilill Rotor

r.,.,,,.O
logic

- ¢
__ SellSOl.

I AFCS Model
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

kJ
3.0 SIMULATION MODULES DESCRIPTION

3.1 MAIN ROTOR MODULE

3.1.1 Overview of the Main Rotor Module

The main rotor mathematical representation is complex and

lengthy. Therefore, an overview is presented to aid in the
understanding of the overall model prior to discussing the
details.

The main rotor model is based on a blade element analysis in

which total rotor forces and moments are developed from a
combination of aerodynamic, mass, and inertia loads, acting on
each simulated blade. The calculation elements are presented in
block diagram form on Figure 3.1.1.

Forces on the blades are derived as a result of total accelera-

tion and velocity components at the blades together with blade
pitch control inputs. Accelerations are developed from body
motion, blade motion, rotor shaft speed changes and gravity.
Velocity components are made up of body velocities, blade
motion, rotor speed, self induced downwash and gust velocities.

Before calculations at the rotor blade can proceed it is necess-

ary to implement several axes transformations. Airframe motion
developed at the center of gravity must be transferred from the
fixed body axes system into a rotating axes frame aligned along
the blade span. Total accelerations and velocities at the
blade, must be determined in order to develop the inertia and
aerodynamic loads on the blade.

The treatment of the blade segment aerodynamic force calculation

is completely non-linear. Lift and drag characteristics are
provided for in the range -180_180. Simple sweep theory is
used to modify the unyawed blade element lift coefficient. The
application of sweep theory to the determination of drag is not
well established. For this model, drag is determined by enter-
ing the drag map data with the actual yawed angle of attack.

The aerodynamic segmented loads, determined above_ are resolved

from the local wind axes into blade span axes and summed along
each blade to obtain root shears at the hinge. Subsequently
these forces are transformed into the rotating shaft axes frame
through the flapping and lagging angles. These same loads are
used to determine the aerodynamic hinge moments for use in the
flapping and lagging motion equations.

ks,

4
 TECHNOLOGIES
B _B_V
UNITED
ORIGINAL PAGE !_ SER-70602
OF POOR VL'_',.,_
_

FIGURE 3.1-I MAIN ROTOR FLOW DIAGRAM

 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

k_#
The blade inplane or lagging motion is restrained by a damper
system. In the case of BLACK HAWK the damper is non-linear and
the kinematics of this system are complicated by geometry. The
restraining moment provided by the lag damper is obtained by
tracking the damper axial velocity. This is then used to
determine axial force from a load-velocity characteristics map.

The motions in the flapping and lagging degrees of freedom are

determined from the moment balance about the blade hinges. This
balance involves aerodynamic moments, hinge restraint moments,
weight moments and inertia moments. The latter are explicitly
introduced into the equations of motion.

The three component total shear forces acting at the hinge of

each blade in the rotating shaft axes are determined by summing
aerodynamic and inertia forces. Rotor hub moments are deter-
mined from a combination of the shear forces at the hinges and
moments from the blade hinge restraint. Total rotor loads are
then obtained by summing all blades and resolving them into
fixed shaft axes. An arithmetic manipulation of these equations
is introduced on these final equations which allows the simula-
tion number of blades to be different from the actual number.
This artifice is intended for use in piloted simulation, where
reducing the number of simulated blades can be used to decrease
computer execution time requirements.

k.i
The oscillating nature of the rotor forces and moments make it
expedient to filter their outputs under some circumstances. A
simple first order filter is used. The final rotor forces and
moments are obtained by transforming the filtered shaft axes
forces and moments into body axes with the origin at the center
of gravity. These are eventually summed with other component
outputs to give the total external forces and moments at the
center of gravity.

It is necessary to make provision in these final rotor outputs

for the option of selecting to run with the engine module in or
out. If the engine is selected out, perfect rotor speed govern-
ing is assumed and the shaft torque reaction on the airframe is
assumed equal to rotor required torque. If the engine module is
activated then it's output torque is introduced into the air-
frame.

Finally, the rotor wake skew angle is determined. It is the

dependent parameter used to establish the variation of rotor
wash on the fuselage and tail.

"A-

6
 UNITED OGIES
SER-70602

A detailed description of each element of the main rotor model

follows. It should be noted that the sequencing of the program
flow in the main rotor is critical and should follow the equa-
tion flow presented in Volume I.

3.1.2 Detailed Description of the Main Rotor Module

Blade Geometry #5.1-12

The geometric definition for the rotor blade is shown in Figure

3.1.2. Many different methods can be chosen for selecting the
segment area distribution. In this BLACK HAWK simulation, an
equal annulii area approach was chosen for a programmed, auto-
mated set-up. This allows the number of segments to be mini-
mized and distributes them towards the higher dynamic pressure
regions outboard on the blade. The programmed set-up can of
course be inhibited, and any desired distribution input. The
distribution chosen may not be the best at high advance ratios
(outside the currently defined BLACK HAWK flight envelope) where
significant retreating blade stall is encountered.

The equations presented can be derived from observing that the 5.1-13
normalized rotor disk area is equ@l to_ and that the normalized
blade length is equal to (I-_-_). ,Thus the normalized equal
annulus area is equal to, __vS________+_
,_ ra ) _
kj _umoer ol _egmenns

It should be noted that the equations defined weight the center

of action of segment forces by the annulus area. Actual segment
area is determined geometrically from the segment mean chord and
segment span. The latter being determined by establishing the
distance from the hinge (assumed to have the same center for
flapping and lagging) to the inboard and outboard edges of the
annulii.

Effect of Rotor Blade Weight on CG Position 5.1-13

The Gen Hel blade element rotor; treats each blade as having its
own flapping and lagging degree of freedom. Each blade is a
separate body which imparts loads on the airframe via the hinge
pins and lag dampers. The model is arranged such that the
helicopter gross weight and center of gravity (CG) are entered
as input for convience. Therefore it is necessary to calaulate
actual airframe weight and C.G. before proceeding with the

Foot Note: # These are page numbers in Volume I relevent to

the discussion.
_ UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
ORIGINAL PAG_ IS
SER-70602
OF POOR QUALITY

FIGURE 3.1.2 BLADE GEOMETRY DEFINITION

I r

+
!

I
1
_!
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED
SER-70602

kJ
calculation. All forces and moments, and subsequent motion, are
referred to the compensated weight and center of gravity.
Somewhat inconsistently, but for convenience, the airframe
inertia input must be less that component due to the blades.

Accelerations and Velocities at the Rotor Hub in Shaft Axes

Determination of the loading on the rotor blade requires the

development of the total acceleration and velocity components at
the blade resulting from both airframe and blade motion. These 5.1-14
equations are the first part of a systematic transfer of air-
frame motion in the body axes at the center of gravity, to the
rotor blade, The translational accelerations at the rotor hub
can be derived using Appendix A of Reference I. The transla-
tional velocities are normalized (using traditional helicopter
analysis practice) by rotor tip speed. Gust component terms are
introduced into these equations. (These terms are a means of
providing gross gust inputs to the rotor when the more complex
gust penetration algorithm is not required). The Gust Module
Section details the relationship between the various gust
inputs. The motion determined at the hub in body axes is 5.1.16
formed into a fixed set of shaft axes through the shaft inclina-
tion angles i^ and i.. The angular accelerations and rates are
simllarly transforme_. These axes systems are illustrated on
Figure 3.1.3.

Rotor Shaft Speed Degree of Freedom 5.1-17

Historically, Helicopter Flight Dynamic Simulation Models have

assumed that rotor shaft speed was constant. This assumption
was made for computing expediency and to a large extent was
justifiable for the older heavy rotor systems. However, with
the trend towards lower weight fraction for the rotor system,
and with the current generation of fuel controls, significant
rotor speed excursions are experienced for some maneuvers. More
subtle effects are also being experienced with coupling in the
basic aircraft modes, as discussed in Reference 2. The BLACK
HAWK rotor model presented has been developed to allow rotor
shaft motion. Computation with the rotor shaft degree of
freedom released necessitates the introduction of a fuel control
and engine simulation to close, and stabilize, the rotor shaft
speed loop. For this simulation of BLACK HAWK, a linear, time
varying coefficient model has been developed. This engine and
fuel control model is described in Section 3.6. The actual
calculation of the rotor shaft speed degree of freedom is performed
in the Engine Module. If the rotor speed degree of freedom is 5.6-17
not required it may be selected out. Rotor speed is then fixed
at the trim value and engine torque set equal to the rotor torque.
This allows a torque reaction to be generated on the airframe. 5. I.-36
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602

,._j
FIGURE 3.1.3 BODY AXES TO SHAFT AXES TRANSFORMATION

XB' YB' ZB Body Axes System

XH, YH, ZH Hub Axes System

XS, YS, ZS Shaft Axes System

10
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

5.1-17
Rotor Azimuth Update

Under normal circumstances, the rotor azimuth update is a direct

function of the actual rotor speed and the integration time
interval, or duty cycle (TIME), chosen for computing the simula-
tion model. "TIME" should therefore be chosen to meet the
frequency response criteria of the simulation investigation or
as a minimum, PWIMR_)= 40 ° . The latter requirement is to
preserve numerical §tability. Unfortunately, under real time
operating conditions where "TIME" must equal the total execution
time of the simulation, (or computer cycle time in the case of a
time-shared system) some compromise of the frequency response
requirement is necessary. An appropriate discussion of real
time operation is given in Reference 3. A software switch is
provided for selecting DELPSR independent of TIME. If the
simulation is being run with this logic set, and TIME
(DELPS/JCg57.3) the implication is that the azimuth update is
being scaled, and rotor frequency response will be attenuated.
However it may be necessary to run in this mode to achieve
real-time operation.

It should be noted in the equations that PSIMR (_MR) is speci-

fied in the range -180___ PSIMR_ 180 with zero _imuth being
aligned over the helicopter's tail.

Blade Flapping and Lagging Rate and Displacement 5.1-18

k_i

The integration algorithm used for developing blade motion is

based on a predictive technique which assumes that blade motion
is periodic. This assumption is exact at steady state. How-
ever, for Handling Qualities investigations, and even higher
frequency applications the algorithm is acceptable. It's use in
the latter case should be validated for the specific applica-
tion. Extensive investigation of this algorithm was undertaken
by NASA Langley. (Roland Bowles). Unfortunately, this work has
not been published. The major attribute of this method is its
stability, and the necessity to carry only the last pass flap-
ping rate and displacement along during the calculation. In
addition this method is able to cope with large rotor azimuth
(_) changes between program iterations, a situation encoun-
ter_ in real time pilot-in-the-loop applications.

II
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602
AB__

The derivation of this algorithm is given below.

w'#/T_

12
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED
SER-70602

k._j

II

' - -0

The resulting per blade flapping and lagging angles are summar-
ized for output purposes into First Harmonic Fourier coefficients
of flapping and lagging. The flapping coefficients define the
unwarped rotor tip path plane and correlate with the resultant
thrust and hub moments on the rotor.

Main Rotor Airmass Degree of Freedom 5.1-20

Rotor Airmass degree of freedom modeling, at a level of sophis-

tication appropriate to Flight Dynamics Simulations, is not well
defined and suffers from a lack of test data with which it can
be validated. The inflow model presented for the BLACK HAWK
simulation is formulated from a combination of established
theory and weak empirical extrapolation. This model is primar-
ily based on a prescribed downwash distribution developed as a
function of rotor loading. Total downwash at any given blade
segment is made up of three elements.

I° A basic momentum component which results from generating 5.1-21

aerodynamic rotor thrust.

. A harmonic momentum component which derives from cyclic 5.1-21

aerodynamic hub moment on the rotor disk.

13
 UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
SER-70602

.
A harmonic component due to rotor wake blow-back with 5.1-20
increasing forward speed.

The basic component, which can be derived by application of 5.1-21

simple momentum theory to the rotor disk, (See Reference 4)
results in a uniform distribution as a function of the total
rotor aerodynamic thrust loading. The concept of cyclic com- 5.1-21
ponents of inflow stems from the fact that any rotor which
produces aerodynamic hub moments, should produce harmonic inflow
components, as a result of the reaction of the airflow to these
aerodynamic moments. These components would not exist for a
centrally hinged rotor in a steady state condition, but, would
exist in the steady state for hingeless rotors or rotors with
hinge offset (which can produce aerodynamic hub moments).
References 5 and 6 provide varying levels of analytical treat-
ment and experimental data supporting the introduction of
harmonic terms. Unfortunately, the experimental data deals
entirely with hingeless rotors. The transient characteristics
of both the thrust and moment components are represented by a
first order lag having a time constant of approximately .I sec
at hover and decreasing with increases in total velocity vector.
The provision, within the BLACK HAWK model, for aerodynamic hub
moment components for downwash, was considered important.
However, at this time it is not possible to justify input data.
Therefore, the input to these terms has been specified to zero.

In addition to the "self induced" effects discussed above, the 5.1-20

other element of harmonic inflow is a cosine component due to
wake blow-back (Glauert downwash factors). The importance of
this term, to the realistic prediction of lateral flapping at
low speed, was shown in Reference 7. As forward speed increas-
es, the wake of the rotor blows back, and in so during, causes a
redistribution of the induced downwash longitudinally across the
rotor disk. Because of the rotor phasing, this effect is
manifest in changes to lateral flapping and lateral control to
trim, especially at low speed. The approach presented for the
BLACK HAWK model is to redistribute the thrust induced uniform
downwash, as a function of the cosine of blade azimuth position.
Many methods are available for determining the harmonic coeffic-
ient. They all retain a uniform distribution at hover and phase
to a trapizoidal distribution, (aligned with the velocity
vector) with increasing forward speed. Differences between
approaches relate to the magnitude of the effect. The algorithm
used in Gen. Hel. tends to result, at high forward speed, in a
distribution of zero downwash at the front of the rotor disk and
double the uniform value at the rear. Indications are that this
effect should be stronger in the Gen. Hel. model.

14
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED
SER-70602

The downwash components discussed above are distributed around

the azimuth to obtain the total segmental downwash velocities 5.1-21
(UPDMR I, URDMR T) in rotating blade span axes. Tangential
components of doQnwash are ignored.

A final comment is necessary concerning the total uniform

(average) inflow equation (A) relative to the total blade
segment interference velocities. The latter includes com- 5.1-21
ponents of gust velocity derived from the rotor penetrating
a gust front. When the gust velocity is distributed to each
segment during this process a component of velocity is intro-
duced which must be compensated for in the average inflow
equation. An artifice has been created whereby an average
gust velocity (over all segments), UGAVMIR, is added to the in-
flow equation to maintain momentum balance in the airmass
degree of freedom. Further explanation can be found in the
Gust Module Section 3.9.

Blade Segment Velocities 5.1-22

All contributions to the total blade segment velocities -

airframe translational and rotational velocities, rotor shaft
speed, rotor blade motion and rotor interference velocities -
have been previously defined. The blade segment total velocity
components are developed in three parts. Those independent of
blade segment position, those dependent on segment position and
interference effects made up of downwash and gust effects. The
velocities at the blade segments are obtained by transforming
the fixed shaft vectors into the rotating hub axes system, then
transferring them to the blade hinge position, transforming them
into blade span axes through the Euler angles,(flapping) and_
(lagging) and finally transferring them to the segment position
on the blade. These axes transformations are illustrated on
figure 3.1.4. The three orthogonal total velocity vectors
(UPMR T, UT_T, URMR T) are used to calculate the resultant
velocity (UYAWHRI),_Iocal Mach No. (MACHFIRT) , yawed angle of
attack (AFYWMRI) and the flow yaw angle at_the blade segment. 5.1-23
The latter varlables are illustrated on figure 3.1.5. It should
be noted that the radial component of velocity is omitted in
calculating the Mach Number which is used in the aerodynamic map
look-up. Reference 8 which describes the use of simple sweep
theory, indicates that Mach Number should be based on the
unyawed component of flow.

15

\
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602

FIGURE 3.1.4 SHAFT AXES TO ROTATING BLADE SPAN AXES TRANSFORMATION

_Or /T" O_

Xs, Ys- Zs Shaft Axes System

Xsj, Yst , Z_ Roi_ing Shaft Axes System
XBS, YBS, ZBS Blade Span Axes System

UT, UR. Up Blade Element Velocities Along

XBS, YB_, ZB$ Respectively
and_ar_ _ Euler Angles with _ Rotation about
Z_ then_ Ratation About XBS.

16
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED OR|GI_A- PAGE SER-70602
OF POOR QUALITY

FIGURE 3.1.5 DEFINITION OF YAWED ANGLE OF ATTACK

(JR

mmm immmb- o

_,M,_o,v_',v;,- •

17
TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED
SER-70602

Blade Segment Angle of Attack 5.1-25

The blade segment angle of attack is defined along the yawed

direction of the local segment velocity vector as shown on
figure 3.1.5. It is made up of geometric blade pitch angle and
local wind angle of attack. In turn, geometric blade pitch
angle comprises components due to control input, control geome-
tric configuration, preformed blade twist and elastic deforma-
tion resulting from rotor loading.

The swash plate impressed blade pitch angle depends on the 5.1-24
control input to collective, 8cuff, lateral cyclic, AIS , and
longitudinal cyclic, BI_. These harmonic components are refer-
enced to rotor azimuth _ = 0) over the tail and displaced by
a swashplate rotation angle."_ The swashplate angle is defined as
positive in the normal body axes system sense (ie for BLACK HAWK
that is opposing the direction of rotor motion, but has a
negative input). Swashplate angle is a means of correcting the
phase response of the articulated rotor with offset hinges such
that body axes orthogonality is retained by the pilot's con-
trols.

Blade pitch/flap coupling, _3' and pitch/lag coupling,_ 1 , can

result from blade hinge axis angular offset or from the geome-
tric orientation of the control push rods. Although these terms
are retained in the model presented (for completeness sake),
they are both nominally equal to zero for the BLACK HAWK heli-
copter.

The blade segment dynamic twist model is a prescribed, empiri- 5.1-24

cal, representation. This simplified approach has been intro-
duced as an alternative to a more sophisticated elastic repre-
sentation, to account for the significant torsional deformation
of the BLACK HAWK rotor blade. Without these terms, collective
blade pitch and blade loading will not correlate with test data.
Basically, the technique assumes that blade tip dynamic twist is
a function of total blade loading (independent of blade pitching
moment), and that this tip twist can be distributed along the
blade span as a function of the first torsional mode deflection.
The blade loading is harmonically smoothed by using a first
harmonic fourier filter. The gain coefficients of the fourier
equation are empirically derived. The BLACK HAWK input data
only specifies a value for the steady term, as a function of
forward speed. As with all empirically derived models they may
not be universally applicable.

The final contribution to blade segment pitch angle is that due

to preformed twist. This is prescribed in terms of a map as a
function of blade segment position. Some caution is necessary
because of the non-linear tip section, where an unrealistic

18
 ORIGI:%AL PAGE _.S
TECHNOLOGIES
OF POOR QUALITY
_ ___V
UNITED SER-70602
A_A[F_

value of twist could be selected based on the automatic segment

set up algorithm. This will lead to a bias on collective pitch
and distorted blade loading.

The blade angle of attack equation is complicated by the re-

quirement to resolve blade pitch angle into the segment local
flow direction as shown in figure 3.1.5. Computationally,
information must be retained in the equation to define angle of
attack completely. (-180°_c_w_ 180). The derivation is pre-
sented below.

F_o/V _,As_ " 3. J.:5"

/-. 7

= _._,_ _. = _._
' /

19
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

By manipulation of this equation and noting that the sign of cos

in tan 8y cos _ is always +VE for ±90 ° then

(' <,<-,-
- <,<-# J

Blade Segment Lift and Drag Coefficients

The treatment of the blade segment aerodynamic force calculation

is completely non-linear. Lift and drag characteristics are
provided for the range -180_y_180. Bivariate maps, as a
function of angle of attack and Mach Number are defined in the
range -30_K_30 allowing good definition of blade stall. The
complete coverage of angle of attack allows good definition of
aerodynamic characteristics on the retreating blade side of the
rotor disc. This is important at high advance ratios. The
aerodynamic data input to the lift and drag coefficient m_p is
for the SC 1095 airfoil and was derived from two-dimensional 5.1-5!
wind tunnel tests. (Reference 9). The two-dimensional nature of through
this data requires the development of an artifice to allow it 5.1-56
to be used in a three dimensional environment. It is generally
accepted that blade segment lift coefficient can be determined
by applying simple sweep theory to the unyawed blade aerodynamic
data.

This theory is rigorously applied in the linear lift range where

the entry to the unyawed lift coefficient is transformed by the
cosine of the yaw angle (i.e._<TW_H R =6_ COS_ and the entry
Mach Number is a function of the _wed component of flow. At
higher angles of attack some liberties are taken where sweep
theory is not valid. These steps are taken to avoid discontin-
uities in blade lift data as the blade proceeds around the
azimuth. Discontinuities can result in an unstable flapping and
lagging solution. The application of sweep theory to the

20
 UNITED GIES
SER-70602

determination of drag is not well established. For this model,

drag is determined by entering the drag map data with the actual
yawed angle of attack. As previously noted a development of
sweep theory can be found in Reference 8. Sikorsky evaluations
of this theory, as applied to rotors, are documented in Refer-
ence 10.

The logic which controls the transformation of the calculated

value of yawed angle of attack, for entry into the aerodynamic 5.1-26
map, is developed in the equations. Three ranges are defined
for angles of attack greater and less than zero. Essentially,
these ranges represent the low angle of attack linear range, a
high angle of attack linear range and a center range determined
by stall angle of attack.

The loss of lift at the tip of the blade is accounted for by

factoring the lift coefficient obtained from the maps. For
BLACK HAWK, it is assumed that the blade span out to 97_ radius
is effective lifting surface. Segments straddling this point
or beyond are appropriately factored. Drag coefficient passes 5.1-27
unmodified for all segments except for the addition of a delta
profile drag component.

It has been assumed in defining the blade aerodynamics that

Reynolds Number effects and unsteady flow are of secondary
k_1 , importance and can be ignored. This may not be justifiable
under all operating conditions.

Blade Aerodynamic Shears 5.1-28

The aerodynamic force coefficients previously determined in the

wind axes system are transformed to blade span axes and dimen-
sionalized to force units. These forces are then summed across
blade segment to obtain aerodynamic shear forces at the blade
hinge. Subsequently, these forces are resolved into rotating
shaft axes. It should be noted that flapping and lagging blade
angles are Euler angles and order of treatment must be observed.

Blade Aerodynamic Moments About the Hin_

Blade Aerodynamic hinge moments are developed for each segment

from the segment forces and corresponding lift centers and then
summed across the blade segments. (It is important to note that
flapping motion because of angle definition is taking place in
the YR_ ZRN plane.) The flapping moment is then resolved into
fixed-Nhaft_xes for use in the determination of the aerodynamic
harmonic moment components, of the inflow model.

21
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

Blade Lag Damper Kinematics 5.1-30

The blade inplane or lagging motion is restrained by a damper

system. In the case of BLACK HAWK the attachment points are
such that the damper straddles the hinge, and is mounted out of
the plane of zero flapping. It is also offset from the blade
pitch axes. The kinematics of the damper are therefore compli-
cated by this geometry, and the damper experiences motion due to
blade pitch and flap, in addition to lag. A generalized repre-
sentation of this geometry is given on figure 3.1.6. The axial
velocity of the damper is determined by tracking the position of
the blade attachment relative to the fixed point on the rotor
hub. From this information, an instantaneous axial displacement
of the damper strut is obtained. The axial velocity of the
damper is then determined based on the change in displacement
since the last pass. It should be noted that the blade pitch
contribution to the motion is referenced to the cuff. (i.e.
blade pitch less twist). The resulting axial velocity of the
damper is used to enter the damper map from which axial damper
force is obtained.

The force-velocity characteristics of the damper are complex

and highly non-linear. For these reasons the damper is repre-
sented empirically. The damper characteristics presented, were
determined from BLACK HAWK test data, Reference II. These data
were obtained by stroking a damper at various frequencies and
k_i
displacements typically encountered during flight. The results
showed the force-velocity characteristics to be somewhat a
function of frequency as might be expected. It was assumed for
this BLACK HAWK model that the damper could be represented by
the first harmonic frequency. The implication being, that any
energy generated at other frequencies will be ignored. Support
for this assumption is derived from the fact that the BLACK HAWK
ground resonance mode and rotor torsional mode (both dependent
on the lag damper characteristics) are representative for this
model.

A simple flapping restraint equation is introduced into the

model for completeness sake. However, for BLACK HAWK the
flapping restraint from the elastomeric bearing is negligible
and the input coefficients for this equation are set to zero.
It should be noted that because of the damper geometry a compon-
ent of damper force will be experienced about the flapping
hinge.

22
 -_

TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED OF POOR QUALITY SER-70602

FIGURE 3.1.6 LAG DAHPER KINEHATIC GEOMETRY

(XYZ)LoHR Lag Damper Axes

XLDMR Aligned with the blade span

and (Y,Z)LDMR rotated through eLDMR

23
TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED
SER-70602

Blade Flapping and Lagging Degrees of Freedom.

The individual rotor blades in the Gen Hel simulation are

treated as separate bodies which are attached to the hub with
hinge pins in the flapping and lagging motion planes. Each
blade, therefore has its own degrees of freedom, which are
coupled to the airframe. That is, airframe motion is impressed
on the root end of the blades and in turn blade forces and
moments are transmitted into the airframe.

The rigid blade flapping and lagging motion equations provided

in this model are defined to take place about hinges which are
co-located at a point offset from the center of rotation of the
rotor. The contributions to the flapping and lagging motion are
the external aerodynamic and hinge restraint moments and the
mass and inertia moments. The inertia and mass moments arise as
a result of airframe motion, blade motion and shaft rotational
motion. It is important to note that because flapping and
lagging angles are Euler angles, the motion in these two degrees
of freedom is not orthogonal. Therefore, in the lagging equa-
tion the external forces derived in blade span axes must be
resolved into the intermediate plane of lag motion. This is not
true of the flapping degree of freedom. I.E. for the lag
equation.

The derivations of the flapping and lagging equations are

lengthy and are not presented in this report. The final equa-
tions presented (inertia terms) are essentially the same as
those given in Reference 12 and validated in Reference 13. It
should be noted that some small terms have been eliminated. A
software provision to inhibit the lagging degree of freedom has
been incorporated. If the lag motion is inhibited then rotor
torque must be transferred across the hinge as indicated on page
5.1-35 of Volume I.

Shears at the Hinge

The same inertia forces which create moments about the hinges
in the equations discussed above also result in inertia shear 5.1-33
forces acting on the hinge pins. The derivation of the shear
forces is essentially the same as for the moments. The total
shear force at the hinge of each blade is obtained by summing
the inertia forces with the aerodynamic forces.

Total Rotor Forces and Moments

The total rotor forces in the fixed shaft axes system are
obtained by first resolving the three orthogonal components of
blade root shears into these axes and then summing over

24
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

all the blades. Total rotor huh moments are obtained in a 5.1-35
similar manner. The pitch and roll hub moments are made up
(mostly) of shears acting on the hinge pins offset from the
center of rotation. The yawing moment, (the torque connotation
is retained in the equations) is made up mainly of the lag
damper contribution.

An arithmetic manipulation is introduced on the final equations

which allows the simulated number of blades to be different from
the actual number. This artifice is intended for use in piloted
simulation where computer execution time must be minimized. In
applying this artifice, the assumption is that three blades are
sufficient to define the (first harmonic) tip path plane and
that based on disk theory the number of blades can be factored
to obtain the total rotor loads.

With the lagging degree of freedom operating, the major portion 5.1-35
of rotor torque is developed through the lag dampers. There-
fore, if the lagging degree of freedom is inhibited, an alterna-
tive equation containing the aerodynamic moment must be intro-
duced as specified in the equations.

Main Rotor Force and Moment Output Filter

The oscillating nature of the rotor forces and moments make it

expedient to smooth, or average, these outputs under some
k_J
circumstances. These normal harmonic variations are antagonis-
tic to the helicopter simulation trimming process, both in terms
of seeking a solution, and in terms of the tolerance check for
the trimmed solution. This is especially true when the simu-
lated helicopter approaches the boundaries of operation, where
the amplitudes of the oscillations become large. Also, in many
situations, computing efficiency can be improved by increasing
"TIME". This will allow a faster valid trim, but some means of
eliminating the consequence "noise" must be introduced.
Finally, for the purpose of categorizing and comparing trimmed
helicopter conditions (print-out) consistently, it is necessary
to suppress the oscillations. The method used in Gen. Hel. is
to pass the rotor forces and moments through a first order lag 5.1-36
Other more complex techniques can be applied. The first order
lag is used because of it's simplicity and direct application.
This lag must be removed when the simulation is being executed
in the dynamic (compute) mode. The exception to this rule is in
the unique circumstance of a marginal real time simulation,
where the number of blades have been artificially reduced to
minimze computer execution time. Here it may be necessary to
suppress erroneous 'N' per rev. oscillations.

A more detailed discussion of helicopter simulation trimming is

presented in Section 4. of this report.

25
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

kJ Final Rotor Force and Moment Outputs.

The final rotor forces and moments are obtained by transforming 5.1-36
the filtered shaft axes forces and moments into body axes with
the origin at the center of gravity. These final main rotor
module outputs are eventually summed with other module component
outputs to give the total external forces and moments at the
center of gravity.

It is necessary to make provision in these final rotor equations

for the option of selecting to run with the engine module in or
out. If the engine is suppressed, perfect rotor speed governing
is assummed and the shaft torque reaction on the airframe is 5.1-36
assummed equal to rotor required torque. If the engine module
is activated then its output torque is introduced into the
airframe.

The motivation for inhibiting the engine module is to decrease

the bandwidth of the simulation and corresponding computer
requirements. With the rotor degree of freedom being computed
there is an impact on simulation numerical stability and rotor
azimuth update increment_M R. (or "TIME") Therefore, caution
should be exercised in sel_cting to run with or without the
rotor speed degree of freedom. Careful consideration should be
given to the analysis task being undertaken. A different heli-
copter simulation response will be experienced, especially in
yaw, with engine in or out, depending on the maneuver. (Refer-
ence 2) However, this may not be important to the task at hand
and the tradeoff of larger rotor azimuth update magnitudes
(increased "TIME") may be acceptable. Evidently any maneuver
which tends to drive main rotor torque to a negative value will
be erroneous without the engine module, since under these
circumstances, the rotor clutch would have disengaged.

Rotor Wake Skew Angle.

In this simulation the rotor wake skew angle is defined as the 5.1-37
angle that the centerline of the rotor wake makes relative to
the normal to the tip path plane (longitudinally). This para-
meter is used to establish the variation of rotor wash on the
fuselage and empennage as a function of rotor thrust and forward
speed. Basically, rotor wake angle is used to relate the
magnitude of the rotor wash and the geometric proximity of an
aircraft component to the centerline of the wake (See Figure
3.1.7) as implemented in this simulation the rotor wash is
normalized by the downwash at the rotor disk. It is derived
from a Sikorsky off-line computer program (DWSHT) based on
Reference 14.

26
 TECHNOLOG|ES
_ UNITED .
_(_:__ SER-70602

FIGURE 3.1.7 DEFINITION OF ROTOR WAKE SKEW ANGLE

/
/
_,_ _7"_,_ _v',_"

27
 UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
SER-70602

kJ FUSELAGE MODULE

Overview of the Fuselage Module

The fuselage is defined by six component non-linear aerodynamic

characteristics which have been derived from BLACK HAWK Quarter
Scale Wind Tunnel Tests. These data have been extended to high
angles analytically to cover flight at low speed and hover. The
angles of attack and sideslip, used to enter the aerodynamic
maps, are developed from the free stream plus wash effects from
the main rotor. These rotor interference velocity effects are a
function of rotor thrust and forward speed. Care has been taken
to make the longitudinal degrees of freedom representative
throughout the forward flight envelope. The lateral/directional
characteristics are representative for all speeds except side
flight close to zero forward speed. It is not considered within
the scope of this model to define the complex aerodynamic
characteristics at high angle of attack in combination with
large sideslip angles. In any event, in this regime dynamic
pressure is low and flight is dominated by the rotors. Caution
is therefore advised, if this model is used for side flight at
high sideward speed.

3.2.2 Detailed Description of the Fuselage Model

The major elements of the fuselage simulation module are pre-

sented in block diagram form on figure 3.2.]. This module
calculates the aerodynamic forces on the fuselage resulting from
the total velocity vectors at the center of gravity. The model
is essentially the same as would be used for a fixed-wing
aircraft with the notable exception of the rotor wash. The
formulation of the model assumes that the aerodynamic forces and
moments act at a single point, and are functions of angle of
attack and sideslip angle developed at that point, from the
total body axes components of velocity. It is also assumed for
computing expediency that velocities acting at the center of
gravity can be used directly, thus angular rates are ignored.

Rotor Wash on the Fuselage.

The effects of rotor wash on the fuselage have been treated in 5.2-5
average terms. No attempt has been made to determine the local
flow under the rotor disk and apply it to an elemental analysis
of the fuselage. Thus, variations in local velocity have been
ignored and the downwash from the rotor is developed for a
single point and summed with the free stream. This approach
provides the essential effects of more interference velocity
with increased rotor load, and varies as the rotor forward speed
changes. Provision has been made in the model for three compon-
ents of rotor wash on the fuselage. For the BLACK HAWK, input

28
_ UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
ORIGINAL _'/%G__._
OF POOR QUALITY SER-70602

FIGURE 3.2.1 FUSELAGE EQUATION FLOW DIAGRA_I

J,w,vD ,,_x,f.5

r.,-_ Q,p wTb .A - "7- !

I "v4"°_ II If/aF"I
'_',c I
I
• L/_,_J_F

z._,,, .=_.e.,_ /
,,_ll4_ ,I_,,/,_,_T I

29
UNITED
TECHNOLOG|ES
SER-70602

data is only available for the longitudinal and vertical compon-

ents. As previously discussed in Section 3.1.2 the wash compon-
ents are normalized by the downwash in the plane of the main
rotor and are a function of rotor wake skew angle and
longitudinal flapping. The rotor wash data was obtained from 5.2-20
the Sikorsky wake analysis program (DWSHT) based on Reference
14. It should be noted that rotor wash data is not provided to
cover rearward or sideward flight. In the case of rearward
flight the value at/)_= 0 is retained.

Angle of Attack and Sideslip

The angle of attack and sideslip are derived from the body axes
components of velocity. These comprise the components of
flight path velocity, gust components and rotor wash. The
definition of the angles are those used in the wind tunnel.
That is, angle of attack is the geometric pitch angle subtended
by the model relative to tunnel axis at zero yaw angle. It does
not change with yaw angle. Angle of sideslip, equal to minus
yaw, is defined as yaw table angle in the horizontal plane of
the tunnel, irrespective of angle of attack. It should be noted
that these angles are not Euler angles. It should also be noted
that angle of attack and sideslip are only defined in the range
±90 ° . Fuselage aerodynamic data is not available for rearward
flight. However, to avoid discontinuities near hover the
absolute value of Vxb is used. This together with the square
root in the sideslip definition implies that during rearward
flight the aerodynamics of the fuselage are derived from the
corresponding forward flight case. These assumptions are
justified, based on the fact that near hover, fuselage dynamic
pressures are low and the rotors dominate the flight character-
istics. Caution should be exercised if large rearward or
sideward airspeeds are comtemplated.

Fuselage Aerodynamic Loads

The fuselage aerodynamic characteristics used in this module are

specific to the BLACK HAWK helicopter. The six component force 5.2-22
and and moment parameters (ft 2 and ft 3 units respectively) are through
presented in wind axes as a function of angle of attack and wind 5.2-37
tunnel yaw angle (equal to -/ON_. The data has not been gener-
alized in any way and is derived from Quarter Scale Wind Tunnel
Tegts documented in References 15, 16 and 17. Approximately 2.5
ft- of drag was added as a bias to the wind tunnel data to
approximate the measured drag on the aircraft, based on perform-
ance calculations. The data was also faired to smooth out
anomalies, and the side force, rolling moment and yawing moment
were made symmetrical as would be expected with rotors and
empennage off. The small effects of angle of attack on rolling
moment, yawing moment and sideforce have been ignored. Fuselage

30
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

_..j"

angular velocity damping components are provided for. The data

obtained from these wind tunnel tests up to post stall condi-
tions was extended to ±90 ° to cover the low speed flight re-
gimes. Near hover, the most important forces (tail off) are the
vertical drag and side force which can be estimated fairly
accurately. Longitudinal aerodynamic coupling with sideslip is
provided for over a limited range, which covers angles likely to
be experienced at higher speeds and dynamic pressures.

The wind axes normalized force and moment coefficients are 5.2-9
transformed into body axes and transferred from the wind tunnel
model mounting point to the fuselage center of gravity position.
Forces and moments are obtained by multiplying by dynamic
pressure. Because of the definitions of angle of attack and
sideslip the transformation equations give invalid body axes
forces and moments when these angles both approach 90 °. Again
as previously discussed caution must be exercised in extracting
data for side flight if the lateral speed is high.

To avoid problems during pilot-in-the-loop simulation, filters

are presented which fade out the transformation and introduce 5.2-10
fixed body axes parameters, estimated specifically for hover and
low speed flight.

EMPENNAGE MODULE

Overview of the Empennage Model

The aerodynamics of the empennage are treated separately from

the forward airframe. This separate formulation allows good
definition of non-linear tail characteristics that would other-
wise be lost in the simplifications of multivariate total air-
craft maps. With this approach, changes to the empennage can be
made without reloading basic airframe maps. The aerodynamic
characteristics are defined by non-linear lift and drag coeffi-
cients as a function of local angle of attack. These angles of
attack are developed from the free stream velocity, plus rotor
wash and fuselage wash. Dynamic pressure effects from the air-
frame are accounted for by factoring the free stream velocity
components. The interference effects are introduced as non-
linear maps as a function of fuselage angle of attack and side-
slip. All aerodynamic characteristics are analytically extra-
polated to 90 ° angle of attack. The simulation of the empennage
is representative in all flight regimes.

3.3.2 Detailed Description of the Empennage Model

The major elements of the empennage simulation module are pre-

sented in block diagram form on figure 3.3.1. This module cal-
culates the aerodynamic forces on the horizontal and vertical

k_/

31
 TECHNOLOGIES ORIGINAL PP,GT. f3
_ UNITED SER-70602
OF POOR QUALITY

k_1
FIGURE 3.3.1 EMPENNAGE EQUATION FLOW

[_ ,i gJ,=,,,

F-
di,va_f:
1

p,-

32
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

tail surfaces resulting from the local airflow. The component

velocities are derived at, and the aerodynamic forces assumed to
act at the panel center of pressure. The empennage can experi-
ence aerodynamic interference effects from many sources.
Components of flow from the main rotor and fuselage are defined
for this model. Although the calculation of the horizontal and
vertical panel forces are separated in Volume I, the following
paragraphs will discuss them in combination.

Local Velocities at the Empennage

Provision has been made in this model for three components of 5.3-5
rotor wash at the tail. For BLACK HAWK, data is currently 5.3-9
available for only the vertical and longitudinal flow compon- 5.3-24
ents. In addition, the vertical tail is assummed to experience -25
the same interference valocities as the horizontal tail. As in
the case of the fuselage, rotor wash velocity components, nor-
malized by the downwash at the main rotor disk, are developed as
a function of rotor wake skew angle and longitudinal rotor
flapping. This data was derived from Sikorsky's program DWSHT,
based on Reference 14, in a similar manner to that for the
fuselage.

The downwash and sidewash from the fuselage are presented as a

function of fuselage angle of attack and wind tunnel yaw angle
respectively. This data was based on unpowered tail on/tail off
%_._j;

wind tunnel test data, documented in References 15, 16 and 17.

Interference cross flow components were ignored, as in
typical fixed-wing practice. In the calculation of the actual 5.3-6
interference velocities, downwash and sidewash angles are 5.3-I0
assumed to be small. The resulting velocities are delayed to
account for the time taken by the airflow to reach the tail.

The dynamic pressure loss at the tail surfaces, resulting from

fuselage/rotor hub blockage, is derived empirically such that,
wind tunnel data synthesized from the simulation compares to 5.3-7
the original tail on test data. Data is provided as a function 5.3-26
of fuselage angle of attack and wind tunnel yaw angle for the 5.3-33
horizontal and vertical tail respectively.

It is evident that the wash from the tail rotor will have some
interference effect on the empennage. This effect has not been
quantified for the BLACK HAWK and has not been introduced into
the model. It will be noted, however, that the model has been
formulated to allow easy introduction of additional interference
components at a later time.

k.J

33
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

The local velocity components at the tail surfaces are made up

of contributions from the basic body axes translational and
angular velocities, gust effects, rotor wash and fuselage down-
wash and sidewash. The loss of dynamic pressure, due to block-
age by the fuselage/rotor hub, is introduced by factoring the
components of the free stream and fuselage wash terms. Angular
velocity components are assumed to be unaffected by blockage.
The actual local dynamic pressure is calculated from the result-
ant local velocity vectors. This approach allows a more repre-
sentative definition of dynamic pressure at low speeds where
downwash from the rotor predominates the flow at the tail. The
local angle of attack on the horizontal and vertical tail panels
are calculated using the local velocity vectors. The same
definition of angles is used as for the fuselage. In the case
of the vertical tail, angle of attack has the same connotation
as sideslip. The definitions of these angles and tail incidence
angles are illustrated on figure 3.3.2.

Empennage Aerodynamic Loads

The lift and drag characteristics for the tail surfaces are 5.3-29,30
based on isolated tail test data , Reference 15, and Reference 31,32
18. The latter Reference was used to compensate the wind tunnel
isolated tail data for the changes in the size of the horizontal
tail following the wind tunnel tests. The trailing edge of the
k_/ vertical tail was also modified after the tests. Only a small
portion of trailing edge was retained and it's camber was
reduced to 7 degrees. Reference 19 was used to analytically
modify the test data. Tail panel moments about their own axes
are not accounted for. The isolated tail aerodynamics are
analytically extrapolated to ±90 ° angle of attack. As for the
fuselage, in rearward flight, the tail aerodynamic data look-up
will use the corresponding values for forward flight. The lift
and drag forces in local wind axes are resolved into body axes
at the tail. Finally, the component forces at the empennage,
are transferred to the center of gravity together with the
corresponding moments.

TAlL ROTOR MODULE

Overview of the Tail Rotor Module

The BLACK HAWK canted tail rotor is represented in this simula-

tion by the linearized, Bailey theory, closed-form, model.
Terms in tip speed greater than squared have been eliminated.
The local airflow encountered by the tail rotor is developed in
a similar manner to those for the empennage. Corrections for
tail rotor pitch/flap coupling and blockage due to the proximity
of the vertical tail have been introduced into the basic Baily
model. This model does not account for stall effects and there

34
 ORIGINAL PAGE i3
TECHNOLOGIES OF POOR QUALITY
_ UNITED SER-70602

k_/
FIGURE 3.3.2 EMPENNAGE AXES SYSTEM

. __ C_

I ,,_,,_'o,,w",e'l.. ";",._,(..

. k,_.)

|
k._"

35
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

is no treatment of the reverse flow at high speed. Further

assumptions can be found in References 4 and 20. The model
presented calculates thrust which is considered to be the only
significant output from the tail rotor. However, there is an
increasing awareness for the need to introduce a torque calcu-
lation (for power train) and a longitudinal flapping calculation
which would allow tilting of the thrust vector in the drag
direction.

3.4.2 Detailed Description of the Tail Rotor Module

This module calculates the thrust force, generated by a canted

tail rotor, resulting from blade pitch control input and local
airflow. The tail rotor is represented by a simplified, closed
form Bailey solution as developed in Reference 20. The major
elements of this model are presented in block diagram form on
figure 3.4.1. The orientation of the axes system has been de-
fined such that the main rotor blade element analysis may be
inserted as an alternative module, if dictated by the level of
sophistication of the analysis.

Local Velocities at the Tail Rotor

Interference effects at the tail rotor have been defined in a 5.4-4,5

similar manner to those for the vertical tail. The main rotor
wash characteristics are assumed to be equivalent to those for
the horizontal tail. Sidewash and downwash components are those
defined for the vertical and horizontal tail respectively. The
dynamic pressure loss due to the main rotor hub and fuselage are
assumed equal to that for the vertical tail. These approxima-
tions are considered acceptable and provide some simplification
of the simulation.

The airflow, in body axes, impinging on the tail rotor is devel- 5.4-6
oped from the free stream, body angular rate effects, gust
velocities and the previously discussed interference effects.
The three component, summed velocities, are then resolved
through the cant angle into tail rotor shaft axes as defined on
figure 3.4.2. These velocities are normalized by tail rotor tip
speed to make them consistent with the normal Bailey equation
formulation. The Bailey theory equation is normally presented
as the thrust coefficient in terms of the 't' coefficients. It
should be noted that the equations have been manipulated to
obtain an expression for downwash as shown below. This was
found to be necessary to obtain an unconditionally stable solu- 5.4-7
tion. It is important that program flow follows the equation
flow for a stable tail rotor solution.

36
 TECHNOLOGIES ORIGINAL pAGE |S
_ UNITED SER-70602
OF POOR QUALITY

FIGURE 3.4.1 TAIL ROTOR EQUATION FLOW DIAGRAM

('',IY ,',zJ_

I -_,'-qP_ 7"=, [

_,,,¢.,.,..r_ _ ._,,,,,_v.._,/_..i¢ I -

,'t"'='¢_,'_ / "+'=<"'=" I

37
 TECHNOLOGIES ORIGINAL p_,GE 13
_ UNITED OF pOOR QUALITY SER-70602

_J
FIGURE 3.4.2 TAIL ROTOR ,AXES SYSTEM

WLT,_
ZTxy i_

,_S_ _5 I

"
l
11
.kr-_ A
f

_-:_

X_

38
 TECHNOLOGIES ORIGINAL PAGE iS
UNITED SER-70602
OF POOR QUALITY

i' AdT _ . :r'a

d'- _i.

F,,<.l
+) t'9

+ ,,,

Now Dw can be solved based on a last pass value of _ from which

a new value of A can be obtained. Thus

The bailey equations have not been changed but just manipulated
in a manner which allows for a stable sequential computation of
thrust.

Tail Rotor Blade Pftch

5.4-7
In order to obtain the actual tail rotor collective pitch (STR)
for the BLACK HAWK, it is necessary to modify the Bailey equa-
tions to account for blade pitch/flap coupling (_S). This
coupling reduces blade pitch impressed by the controE system.
The Bailey model does not introduce blade flapping and therefore
some artifice must be used to obtain the effects of _3. The
approach taken in this model, is to establish an empzrical,
linear relationship between tail rotor coning and thrust. This
then allows the determination of flapping (and _q effects) from
the instantaneous value of thrust developed _n the rotor.
Linear blade twist effects are accounted for in the basic equa-
tion.

39
TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

Tail Rotor Thrust

The tail rotor thrust equation is developed in a modified form 5.4-8

as a function of d6wnwash. This follows from the previous dis-
cussion of the downwash equation. The thrust equation incor-
porates factors for accounting for changes in rotor shaft speed
and vertical tail proximity blockage. At low forward speed
significant thrust losses due to blockage are experienced, these
effects wash out with increasing forward speed. The blockage
correction model presented is empirically derived and based on
test data. The tail rotor thrust is finally transformed into
body axes and the forces and moments transferred to the center
of gravity of the airframe.

FLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEM MODULE

Overview of Flisht Control System

The flight control system for BLACK HAWK presented in this

module covers the primary Mechanical Control System and the
Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS). The AFCS consists of
three major subsystems; analog stability augmentation system,
digital AFCS, and the stabilator system. These control func-
tions collectively enhance the stability and control character-
istics of the BLACK HAWK and maintain desired attitude, speed
and heading. A detailed description of the AFCS can be found in
Reference 21 and 22.

Flight Control System Description

This description of the BLACK HAWK Flight Control System is

presented to provide background information and aid in the
understanding of the simulation of the control system. Care has
been taken to make the simulation representative, however, some
secondary functional differences may exist.

The flight control system defined in this simulation model is

comprised of the following elements. They are listed in the
order of flow for the simulation.

a) Sensors
b) Stability Augmentation System (SAS)
c) Pitch Bias Actuator (PBA)
d) Flight Path Stabilization (FPS)
e) Mechanical Controls (mixer, actuator, etc.)
f) Stabilator
g) Trim System

The functional relationship of these elements can be identified

on the simplified diagrams presented on figures 3.5.1 and 3.5.2.

40
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602

FIGURE 3.5.1 FLIGHT CONTROLS SIMPLIFIED BLOCK DIAGRAM

COCXPIT PILOT ASSIST

CONTROLS $ERVOS

i I v_
o_o
TRIM i _
J T
0
CYCLIC
R
PITCH
, ROLL

TRIM I MAIN ROTOR

(PRIMARY) SERVOS
"I"_ BOOST _-

MIXER

41
 UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
SER-70602
AO__

FIGURE 3.5.2 AFCS SIMPLIFIED BLOCK DIAGRAM

SAS/FPS
COMPUTER ACTUATORS

CONTROL )
f TRIM
oo...o-,-yp
r!
FLIGHT
PANEL

STABILATOR
t SENSORS
CONTROL
AMPL #2
STABILATOR
ACTUATORS
$TABILATOR
I SENSORS CONTROL
AMPL #1

$AS
AMPLIFIER
I SENSORS I

42
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

A more detailed understanding of the way in which these elements

interact in each individual control channel can be obtained from
figures 3.5.3, 3.5.4, 3.5.5 and 3.5.6 taken from Reference 23.
These figures present diagramatic representations of the col-
lective, pitch, roll, and yaw control channels respectively.

It is appropriate to note at this time those elements which are

not represented in the simulation. The boost servos and primary
servos shown on Figure 3.5.1 are not represented. In the latter
case this is becuase the swashplate transformations are bypassed
for simplification. The servo dynamics are however, included as
shaping of the blade pitch inputs. The trim system function is
important to pilot-in-the-loop simulation, but has no signifi-
cance when the the simulation is being used in an open loop
(analysis) mode. Therefore, it is not defined within the
control system section (5.5) of Volume I, but in the final
section (6.0) of Volume I which specifies the cockpit interface
with the pilot.

3.5.2 Detailed Description of the Flight Control System Module

A detailed description of the Flight Control System and the

corresponding simulation representation is given below.

a) Sensors. These are the helicopter motion transducers which 5.5-6

provide feedback input to the AFCS. They are repre-sented
k_1
in the simulation by high frequency second order transfer
functions which match the manufacturers specification for
the component. Signal conditioning (6-7 hz First Order
Filter) is applied to all sensor outputs.

b) Stability Augmentation System (SAS). This system provides 5.5-7

three-axis rate damping and pseudo attitude retention. It -8
enhances the basic helicopter stability about the pitch, -9
roll and yaw axes using rate and lagged rate feedback. A
7sec and 2sec washout of the ra£e damping signal is incor-
porated in the pitch and yaw channels respectively to pre-
vent saturation during a steady turn. The yaw lagged rate
feedback only functions below 60 knots, so as not to coun-
ter the coordinated turn feature which is active at speeds
greater than 60 knots. The feedbacks applied to the yaw
channel for turn coordination above 60 kts, are roll rate
and lagged lateral acceleration.

The SAS is a dual system with one subsystem controlled by

the analog SAS amplifier and one subsystem controlled by
the digital SAS/FPS computer. (figure 3.5.2) Both SAS
subsystem command signals drive a single SAS actuator in
each axis. During normal operation with both SAS engaged,
each provides one-half of system nominal gain and one-half

43
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602

FIGURE 3.5.3 UH-60A BLACK HAWK COLLECTIVE

FLIGHT CONTROLS BLOCK DIAGRA/_!

2ND STAGE
PRI SERVO
SWASHPLATE

MIXING UNIT

1ST STAGE
COIL BOOST
PRI SERVO
SERVO

COLLECllVE ST1CX

CABLES

2ND STAGE

1ST STAGE

TAIL ROTOR SERVO

44
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602

FIGURE 3.5.4 UH-60A BLACK HAWK PITCH FLIGHT

CONTROLS BLOCK DIAGRAM

PITCH BIAS
ACTUATOR
2ND STAGE
1ST STAGE
-- SPRING

PITCH PITCH
TRIM BOOST
FWD OR AFT
SERVO SERVO
PRISERVO REF

45
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602
_0__

FIGURE 3.5.5 UH-60A BLACK HAWK ROLL FLIGHT

CONTROLS BLOCK DIAGRAm!

SAS
TRIM ACTUATOR 2ND STAGE
SWASHPLATE

r---I

/ " L.__I
CYCUC A MIXING UNIT

• 1ST STAGE

46
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ _[__V
UNITED SER-70602

FIGURE 3.5.6 UH-60A BLACK HA_Z YAW FLIGHT

CONTROLS BLOCK DIAGRAM

2ND STAGE
PR! SERVO
SWASHPLATE

MIXING UNIT
TRIM ACTUATOR

1ST STAGE
YAW BOOST PRI SERVO
SERVO r

CABLES

2ND STAGE

1ST STAGE

TAIL ROTOR SERVO

47
TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

of total system control authority. The control authority

of each is electrically limited to ±5 percent of total
control travel in pitch, roll, and yaw. SAS inputs to the
SAS servo valves are additive to provide a total authority
of I0 percent. The sum is limited to ±I0 percent authority
by mechanical limits of SAS actuator travel. These two
channels can be selected separately on the Automatic Flight
Control Panel, Figure 3.5.7. If one channel is selected
off because of a failure, gain in the 'ON' channel is
doubled but the authority remains at ±5%.

c) Pitch Bias Actuator (PBA). The PBA is an integral part of 5.5-I0

the BLACK HAWK control system. The pilot has no control
switch for this system in the cockpit. The purpose of the
PBA is to improve the apparent static longitudinal sta-
bility for the aircraft through attitude and airspeed
feedback. The PBA is, in effect, a variable length control
rod which changes the relationship between longitudinal
cyclic control and swashplate tilt, as a function of flight
parameters. The attitude feedback covers the entire speed
envelope. The airspeed feedback is only active between 80
and 180 knots. Below 80 knots, the high gain of the
stabilator airspeed feedback, performs the stability
function. In addition to the attitude and airspeed feed-
back, pitch rate feedback is also present. Hence, there is
also position feedback to the longitudinal stick propor-
tional to pitch rate. The authority of the PBA is 15
percent of longitudinal cyclic full throw and is limited by
the computer to a maximum rate of 3 percent per second.

The functional relationship of the PBA relative to the rest

of the control system can be seen on Figures 3.5.1, 3.5.2
and 3.5.4. PBA shaping is derived in the digital computer.

d) Flight path Stabilization (FPS). The FPS system provides 5.5-11

the BLACK HAWK with outer loop stabilization through the -12
pedals and the longitudinal and lateral stick trim actua- -13
tors, as shown on figure 3.5.2. In addition, the FPS con-
tains a coordinated turn feature which complements the SAS
at speeds above 60 knots.

The FPS can drive the cockpit control to any position to

which the pilot/copilot can trim the controls, resulting in
a 100-percent FPS parallel control authority. The AFCS
limits the rate of FPS within the maximum override force
limits stated in the trim system section. Since FPS inputs
drive the cockpit controls through the trim actuators, the
TRIM must be ON in order to have FPS. The attitude hold
function of the FPS is designed to maintain pitch and roll
attitude, plus a desired heading. If TRIM is off the FPS

48
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602

FIGURE 3.5.7 AUTOMATIC FLIGHT CONTROL PANEL

$TABILATOR CONTROLS

MAN SLEW _ AUTO

UP TEST CONTROL

F DN "_

- AUTO FUGHT CONTROL

SAS ! SAS 2 TRIM FPS

BOOST FAILURE RESET

L-POWER ON _ET-I
i i i

49
TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

synchronizers are in a track mode and zero error is output.

Thus, if the pilot wishes to change trim he can establish a
new condition,then disengage TRIM, (which releases the
force) then re-engage to have the new trim condition
maintained by the FPS. At speeds above 30 knots the pitch
axis of the FPS seeks to maintain the airspeed for which
the trim attitude has been established. When the reference
pitch attitude is changed, a time delay in the airspeed
hold function allows time to stabilize at the new trim
airspeed, prior to initiating the airspeed hold function.
During this time the attitude hold function maintains the
pilot-selected pitch attitude.

The FPS presented in the Flight Control module identifies

the FPS switch, the 30 kts speed switch and the turn
switch. These functions are desirable when using the model
in an open loop analysis mode. When the simulation is
developed for pilot-in-the-loop investigation the synchron-
izers must be linked to the trim switch. The FPS is
activated by the pilot through a switch on the AFCS panel.
(figure 3.5.7)

5.5-14
e) Mechanical Controls. The mechanical control system (essen-
-15
tially control mixing) of BLACK KAWK is shown in diagram-
-16
atic form on Figure 3.5.8. It is designed to re duce pilot
-17
work load by mechanically coupling the controls to account
for natural single rotor helicopter coupling responses to
given control inputs. The following control couplings are
incorporated.

I, Collective stick to tail rotor blade pitch - an in-

crease in collective requires an increase in tail
rotor thrust to counter the main rotor torque change.

. Collective stick to longitudinal cyclic - The center

of gravity envelope for the BLACK HAWK lies entirely
aft of the main rotor. Therefore, an increase in main
rotor thrust from a collective stick increase, causes
a nose up pitching moment. In addition, in forward
flight, increasing collective causes a higher blade
loading on the advancing blade relative to the re-
treating blade which causes the rotor to flap rearward
imparting a nose up pitching moment. To compensate
for these nose up pitching moments forward cyclic is
coupled to an increase in collective stick.

. Collective stick to lateral cyclic - The coupling of

the collective stick to the tail rotor which is loca-
ted above the c.g. also causes a right rolling moment.
An increase in collective stick increases the main

50
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602

k_/
FIGURE 3.5.8 UH-60A BLACK HAWK FLIGHT CONTROL
MIXING UNIT SCHEMATIC

PITCH BIAS ACTUATOR

COLLECTIVE
PITCH

ROLL
FWD

PEDAL
AFT

LAT

TAIL ROTOR SERVO

51
TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

rotor coning which gives an effective increase in the

angle-of-attack of the blade over the nose, thus
increasing the blade loading. Since the flapping
reaction occurs approximately 90 degrees of azimuth
later, the rotor flaps to the right causing a right
roll. To compensate for these right rolling moments,
left lateral cyclic is coupled to an increase in
collective stick.

4,
Pedal to longitudinal cyclic - Pedals are coupled to
the longitudinal cyclic to automatically compensate
for the pitching moment caused by the canted tail
rotor when pedal position is varied.

The high level of control mixing, together with the

various control stops, results in irregular limits on
control motion. The control rigging input provided 5.5-20
for the control system in Volume I is linear. It does
not contain any of these irregular "Cut-offs".
Typical BLACK HAWK rigging diagrams are provided on
figures 3.5.9, 3.5.10 and 3.5.11 for longitudinal
cyclic, lateral cyclic, and tail rotor blade pitch,
respectively. It can be seen that corners of the
rigging envelope are clipped by various stops in the
control system. This loss of travel could be impor-
tant to pilot-in-the-loop simulation evaluations. It
should be emphasized that' the rigging diagrams pro-
vided are nominal and may not compare exactly to any
given BLACK HAWK helicopter.

Two approaches are used in representing the actuators

in the Flight Control Module depending on information
available. If the actuator is not rate limited and
experimental data is available then a second order
transfer function is matched to the frequency char-
acteristics. Otherwise, a simplified actuator model
is used as shown on the simulation block diagrams in
Volume I.

f) Stabilator - The BLACK HAWK helicopter has a moving 5.5-18

stabilator, the position of which is dependent on a
number of feedbacks. These include airspeed, collec-
tive, pitch rate and lateral acceleration. The
schedule of these feedbacks was selected to satisfy a
number of requirements. In low speed maneuvers a
stabilator incidence as high as 40 degrees is re-
required to reduce the impact of rotor downwash on the
stabilator with its associated high aircraft nose
attitudes. In the normal speed range from g0 knots to
VH effectively a constant stabilator value of zero

52
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED ORIGINAL PAGE _3 SER-70602
OF POOR QUAL_

FIGURE 3.5.9 LONGITUDINAL CYCLIC RIGGING

_-=_ ,._-_AX_,_- _ N,-=r_ ,,'_._.,4.

i,

53
 O_:_G'NA&O_
pOOR QU'&L_t'_'PA&E
_.3 SER-70602

FIGURE 3.5.10 LATERAL CYCLIC RIGGING

,Z/M/ fEW /.J,_/ rEd

_f_z I

i
! I r

,&cO: ,e'_/._ O._,_

,4.4ri,_,, d)'Cz,'C

54
L__ UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
SER-70602
OF POOF_ _Z/_., _7''.-

FIGURE 3.5.11 TAIL ROTOR CONTROL RIGGING

l-fir 3Z

e%

55
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

degrees provides satisfactory aircraft pitch attitudes

and levels of flapping through the weight - c.g.
envelope. The steep gradient of stabilator incidence
with airspeed from 40 to 80 knot is a necessary
transition slope.

The requirements for the collective feedback are based

on the need to reduce the pitch attitude excursion
with collective inputs in forward flight over that
accomplished by the mechanical coupling previously
discussed. The pitch rate feedback is primarily
effective in improving the BLACK HAWK maneuver stabil-
ity (stick force per g) in turns. As the aircraft
enters higher load factor turns the pitch rate in-
creases driving the stabilator more leading edge up
and therefore the aircraft more nose down. This in
turn requires the pilot to displace the longitudinal
cyclic stick further aft from trim in order to keep
the nose up. Since the force system is effectively a
spring force which is proportional to displacement
from trim, the higher the g level the higher the stick
force. The lateral acceleration feedback'is added to
the stabilator system to counter coupling of pitch
attitude with sideslip.

The stabilator system is composed of two analog amp-

lifiers (see figure 3.5.2) which operate from inde-
pendent input sources and command the position of two
electric jackscrew actuators acting in series. During
normal operation these jackscrews operate in unison,
with each providing one-half of the stabilator posi-
tion input. The system is independent of other
SAS/FPS subsystems although it shares common inputs.
The system is activated from a switch on the AFCS
panel (figure 3.5.7). The pilot can activate a manual
slew at any time.

g) Trim System - As previously discussed the trim system

is not directly applicable to the simulation being
used in an open loop, analysis mode. However, it will
form an integral part of pilot-in-the-loop system.
The validity of the system in the simulation will be
critically dependent on the capability of the simula-
tor cockpit stick force system. The background
information presented here is applicable to Section
6.0 in Volume I.

The trim system provides control centering about a

position selected by the pilot, a spring breakout
force plus gradient, and a pedal damper force. The

kj

56
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

k_1 system is activated by a switch on the AFCS control

panel (figure 3.5.7).

With the trim system selected OFF there is no control

force gradient or control centering in the cyclic
control system or directional control system. Direc-
tional control movements will still be resisted by a
pedal damper. This damping force is continuously
active without regard to TRIM switch position. With
the trim system ON, directional and lateral control
forces are developed in the electromechanical trim
actuators. These actuators incorporate an electric-
ally controlled rotary spring assembly which allows
the pilot to select the zero force control trim posi-
tion. The designed maximum override force for full
opposite control position, is 80 pounds in directional
and 19 pounds in lateral cyclic control. Longitudinal
cyclic control forces are developed in an electro-
hydromechanical pitch trim actuator with a designed
maximum override force of 20 pounds.

With the trim system selected ON and FPS OFF, the

pilot/copilot may change the cyclic trim control
position through two means: a cyclic trim release
switch and cyclic beep trim switch. The beep trim
switch is a four-position switch mounted on the cyclic
k_/ stick grip. Activation of the trim release button
switch releases the force gradient on the longitudinal
and lateral cyclic. The position of the cyclic
control when the trim release switch is opened (re-
leased) becomes the new cyclic trim position. At
airspeeds below 60 kts, when the pedal switches are
closed, the electronic control on the yaw force
gradient spring is repositioned by pedal movement and
resisted only by the pedal rate damper. When the
pilot removes his feet from the pedals which releases
the pedal switches, the electronically controlled
rotary spring reengages, holding the pedals at the new
trim position through the pedal breakout, plus gra-
dient spring. Above 60 kts the pedal switches and the
TRIM REL switch together provide yaw trim release.

ENGINE/FUEL CONTROL MODULE

Engine/Fuel Control System

Prior to presenting a description of the engine/fuel control

simulation a short description of the T700 system is presented.
It should be noted that features in the actual engine described

57
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

k_i
below (for completeness sake), may or may not be represented in
the simulation. The following information is extracted from
Reference 24.

The General Electric T700-GE-700 is a compact, lightweight

turboshaft engine rated at 1543 horsepower. It has a combina-
tion axial/centrifugal compressor, an annular combustor with
central fuel injectors, an air-cooled gas generator turbine, and
a free power turbine with a coaxial drive shaft extending
forward through the gas generator. The forward end of the drive
shaft is connected, via a splined joint, to the engine output
shaft assembly. The compressor has variable stator vanes.
These components are illustrated schematically on figure 3.6.1.
Basic T700 engine data characteristics are given on Table 3.6.1.

The engine control system from the pilots point of view is com-
prised of four primary elements. Power control system; Load
Demand System; Engine Speed Trim Control System and Overspeed
protection. The power control levers in the cockpit (figure
3.6.2) are connected to the power available spindles (PAS) on
each engine's hydromechanical unit (M}fU). Each power control
lever has four detent positions; OFF, IDLE, FLY, and LOCKOUT.
The power lever is advanced to FLY for flight. The PAS setting
represents the highest power that could be supplied if demanded.
Power turbine speed is not governed until the power lever is
advanced from IDLE. The simulation assumes that the PSA is
V
always in the FLY position. This simplifies the engine simula-
tion module with no loss to fidelity for handling qualities
evaluations.

TABLE 3.6.1

Model General Electrical T700-GE-700

Type of Engine Turboshaft

Output Power (intermediate 1543 shp at sea level, standard

rating) static uninstalled conditions

Type of Compressor Combined axial/centrifugal

Number of Compressor Stages 6 stages, 5 axial and 1

centrifugal

Variable Geometry Inlet guide vanes, stage 1 and 2

stator vanes

Type of Combustion Chamber Single annular chamber with

axial flow.

58
 TECHNOLOGIES
OF POOR Q,,_._,,°_:
i
_ UNITED SER-70602

FIGURE 3.6,1 TT00 ENGINE SCHEMATIC

INLET COMPRESSOR COMBUSTION TURBINE EXHAUST

SECTION SECTION SECTION SECTION SECTION

AIRFLOW

COMPRESSORROTOR!:

FUEL NOZZLE IGNITOR TEMP SENSOR

k_1 59
 TECHNOLOGIES ORIGINAL PAC;_."
_.._;_
SER-70602
_UNITED OF POOR Q_.j_l_ _

FIGURE 3.6.2 ENGINE CONTROLS

k_J

TWO WAY STOP (FRONT AND

REAR FOR POWER LEVER
j- N
COLLECTIVE STICK U

[
"_'L J _ N
FLY -
"eLl G
I • ¢OCZOU !
N

__" ( J

/
k.J
QUADRANT TWO WAY
NO. I ENG NO. 2 ENG COVER STOP
FiRE FIRE
"T" HANDLE "T" HANDLE

NO. 1 ENG FUEL NO. 2 ENG FUEL

SELECTOR LEVEL SELECTOR LEVEL

NO. 1 ENG POWER STARTER 2 ENG POWER

CONTROL LEVER BUTTON CONTROL LEVER

6O
TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

TABLE 3.6.1 (Continued)

Gas Generator Turbine

Stages

Power Turbine Stages

Direction of Engine Clockwise

Rotation (from rear,
looking forward)

Engine Weight (dry) 415 Ib

The Load Demand Spindle (LDS) input is a function of the col-

lective pitch. It provides compensation to reduce transient
droop of N o. The spindle, inputs load demand signals directly
into the hgdromechanical unit. A reduction in collective pitch
decreases LDS position, reducing fuel flow and giving immediate
and accurate gas generator response. The new setting is trimmed
by the ECU to satisfy the Np/Nr and load control requirement set
by the Electrical Control Unit (ECU). This function is repre-
sented in the simulation.

The speed control system allows the pilot to adjust Np/Nr

between 96.4% and I00.5_ by activation of the beeper trim
switches on the pilot's collective grip as shown on Figure 3.6.2.
The engine Np/Nr speed reference signal, sets the datum for the
Electrical Control Unit (ECU). An overspeed protection system
protects the power turbine from destructive overspeeds. If a
malfunction should cause Np to reach 106%, the electrical
overspeed system will automatically decrease fuel flow to the
engine as necessary to prevent Np/Nr from exceeding I06%. This
feature is not represented in the simulation. For those area's
of simulation operation where overspeed could be experienced
(Burst from autorotation for example) caution should be exer-
cised during analysis of the results.

The engine control quadrant, figure 3.6.2, centered on the upper

console permits either the pilot or copilot to select engine
speed. The ENG POWER CONT lever positions are marked NUMBER I
ENGINE and NUMBER 2 ENGINE, and identify the OFF, IDLE, FLY and
LOCKOUT positions. They are connected mechanically to each
engine's HMU and are used to govern engine speeds. The HMU
starts to open whenever the power control lever is advanced more
than 2 ° from OFF and increases proportionately with engine speed
to FLY.

61
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

3.6.2 Detailed Description of the Engine/Fuel Control Module

Historically the rotor shaft speed degree of freedom has been

ignored by flight dynamics simulation models. It was expedient
to fix rotor speed at a nominal value and avoid the (computing)
problems associated with releasing the rotor shaft degree of
freedom. Under some circumstances this is still acceptable.
However, there is now increased awareness of the consequences,
as discussed in Reference 2. These include differences in ini-
tial response to control input and interactions with airframe
modes. The former results from the energy initially absorbed by
the shaft degrees of freedom. The latter is due to phase
lags between rotor speed response and torque reaction on the
airframe.

The engine/fuel control module developed for this simulation is

a linearized representation of the T700 system, with coeffi-
cients which vary as a function of engine operating condition.
All the usual restrictions and assumptions of linear simulation
are applicable and should be observed. Maneuvers which result
in large torque changes from trim may result in discrepancies in
the simulation. In the future development of the model, for
pilot-in-the loop simulation, an artifice must be created for
tracking and updating the steady state engine torque levels and
fading them with those generated from the linear model. The
engine is assumed to be operating in a sea level environment.
One engine/fuel control system is represented and the total
torque is obtained by doubling that for a single engine. Torque
balance control is therefore eliminated. The model adequately
provides for closing the rotor shaft speed loop through out the
normal operating envelope of the helicopter. However, it is
emphasized that engine/fuel control systems are highly non-
linear. Therefore, maneuvers which result in significant rotor
speed excursions may result in discrepancies in the simulation.
Typically, the simulation does not represent temper ature or
engine speed limitations and the acceleration schedule is a
fixed value. This module should not be used for engine per-
formance evaluations. More complex engine/fuel control repre-
sentations are available and the modular formulation of the
BLACK HAWK simulation facilitates their introduction, if re-
quired, at a later time.

The basic engine control system operation is through the inter-

action of the Electrical Control Unit (ECU) and Hydromechanical
control unit (}{MU). In general, the HHU provides for gas
generator speed control and rapid response to power demand. The
ECU trims the HMU to satisfy the requirements of the load so as
to maintain constant rotor speed. The Load Demand Spindle (LDS)
is a function of collective pitch setting and provides

k_J

62
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

compensation to reduce rotor transient droop. Any steady state

errors resulting from inconsistent collective positioning are
trimmed by the ECU. In general, isochronous governing of the
rotor speed is maintained by developing an error relative to the
reference speed and commanding more or less power to stabilize
at the required speed. Basically, this process involves the
speed error demanding a change in gas generator speed via the
shaping of the ECU electrical newwork. This signal is summed
with the LDS input in the }{MU, and compared with the actual gas
generator speed. The subsequent error, commands changes in fuel
flow leading to a higher or lower gas turbine speed and changes
in the gas flow. This in turn provides increased or decreased
power at the driveshaft from the power turbine. A detailed
background to the complete T700 engine/fuel control system is
given in References 25 and 26.

Engine/Fuel Control Simulation Representation

The major elements of the simulation of the engine/fuel control

are shown on the simplified block diagram, figure 3.6.3. They
comprise the collective control interface with Gen Hel, fuel
control, gas turbine, power turbine and rotor shaft speed
degree-of-freedom interface with the Gen Hel rotor. In this
model, the simplification of linearization has been retained at
the same time as providing a reasonable envelope of operation,
by allowing the linear coefficients to vary as a function of gas
k_/ generator speed.

Initialization of the engine/fuel control module is accom-plished

by using the steady state engine performance required
to trim the helicopter simulation in free flight. Specifically 5.6-9
engine output torque can be plotted as a function of gas gener-
ator speed. Hence, inverting this relationship, allows the
direct determination of gas generator speed to trim the torque
required by Gen Hel, to maintain reference rotor shaft speed.
(This torque is specified at rotor shaft speed) Now, if the load
demand spindle input from collective was ideally matched to the
operating condition, it would set the }{MU such that the engine
would be in trim. However, differences are usually present
which must be trimmed by the ECU. The balance conditions for
I.C. are forced in the simulation by making the power turbine
speed equal to the reference speed and arranging that the in-
cremental demand on the fuel control, _NGG)REF, is equal to
zero. The error falls out as a trim bias on _hq_e ECU. The IC
flow path is shown as dotted on figure 3.6.4. The other prere-
quisite of trim, is that engine torque supplied must equal that
required by the rotor, such that no accelerating torque exists
on the shaft in the IC mode.

k./

63
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED
SER-70602

_,,._jJ

FIGURE 3.6.3 ENGINE/FUEL CONTROL INTERFACE WITH THE ROTOR

TORQUE

t TURBINE
POWER

FUEL CONTROL 1 J--'---'GAS

N_

/
\
/
/ P--- BODY STATES NG

\ /
PILOT

YAW _. "_CI-L

V ERTICAL LATERAL

64
 UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
ORIGI_'_AL P.'_:¢!_ _,:_
SER-70602
OF PO0_ £,..,.,5_._ =

FIGURE 3.6.4 ELECTRIC CONTROL UNIT (ECU)

,+

k_y

65
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

In the compute mode, any excursions in power turbine speed will

result in outputs from the ECU, which will modulate fuel flow. 5.6-11
If the helicopter is flown from a low power operating condition -12
to a higher level, gross changes in fuel flow are commanded by -,13
the collective compensation. The ECU will adjust to compensate
any mismatch which would lead to power turbine speed (rotor
speed if the clutch is coupled) excursions. The computational
flow for the ECU is given in analog form on figure 3.6.5. There
is essentially a high, or low, gain loop active, depending on
speed error and torque level.

The gas generator speed required to match the torque demand is

set in the }{MU. In the simulation this set signal is a pertur-
bation from trim which is compared with the actual gas genera-
tor change in speed from trim. The error causes an incremental
change in fuel flow which accelerates the gas turbine, as shown
on figure 3.6.4.

In the model, torque output from one engine _Qpt) is derived

from three sources. From direct changes in fuel flow, from 5.6-16
changes in gas generator speed and as a result of changes in
power turbine speed. This latter term is turbine damping. These
increments are summed to obtain a total change in engine torque
from trim, which is subsequently factored by the number Of
operating engines and engine/rotor gearing ratio, to obtain
engine torque output to the rotor shaft. This increment is also
k_J
used to provide the torque reaction on the airframe (which is
incorporated into the main rotor module for computing con-
venience).

Rotor Speed Degree of Freedom

The interface of the engine with the main rotor (it should be
noted that tail rotor torque is not calculated and is accounted
for approximately by factoring main rotor required torque) is
via a free running clutch which will disengaged the rotor from
the engine at a zero torque level. Under these circumstances,
the engine speed feedback to the fuel control will cause the
engine to seek an operating condition dictated by the control.
The clutch will reengage when the rotor speed drops below power
turbine speed as shown on figure 3.6.6. The introduction of a
clutch in the drive system allows autorotation entries and
recoveries to be executed.

The rotor can be visualized in simple terms as a damper res-

ponding to changes in rotor speed. However, the significant
effect of the rotor relates to the changes in torque loading as
a result of control inputs and changing states. Rotor shaft
accelerations result from torque differences in output from the
power turbine and torque required by the rotor. The simulation

66
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED ORIGINAL r_,_r_
,. _._. {3
OF POOR QUALITY SER-70602

FIGLTRE 3.6.5 ENGINE/FUEL CONTROL BLOCK DIAGRAM

67
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602

FIGURE 3.6.6 ROTOR DEGREE OF FREEDOM CLUTCH MODEL

ORIGINAL ___ '_

OF POOR QUALifY

<

-_ = _a'_/_ r

68
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

k_/
is initialized at trim such that the rotor is at the input speed
and torque is in balance. Under normal powered flight condi-
tions the clutch is locked and the difference between engine
torque and rotor required torque must accelerate the total
transmission inertia. (Note this inertia does not include rotor
blades. They are separate bodies, with their own degrees of
freedom) Under these circumstances, power turbine speed and
rotor shaft speed are equal, as shown on the block diagram,
figure 3.6.6. Each program pass, the rotor required torque is
checked to see if it drops below zero. If it does, the clutch
disengages, and a different flow path is executed, in which the
power turbine and rotor shafts accelerate under their own
torques and inertias. Because of the harmonic characteristics
of rotor torque, it is necessary to perform the logic check for
zero torque level on a filtered signal. In coding the clutch
model, care must be taken to ensure that, if a trim in autorota-
tion with split needles is requested, the appropriate flow path
and initialization of shaft speed and rotor speed are executed.
A detailed flow diagram of the clutch model is presented on
Figure 3.6.7(a) and (b).

LANDING INTERFACE MODULE

Overview of Landing Interface Module

This module calculates the forces and moments at the airframe

C.G. resulting from landing gear interaction with the ground
plane. All necessary space/body axes geometry calculations are
incorporated in order to track a free helicopter landing on the
ground. The landing gear is represented by separate non-linear
tire and strut dynamic characteristics as shown in Figure 3.7.1.
Tire in-ground-plane loads are developed as a non-linear func-
tion of the tire deflection and normal load. These forces are
adjusted depending on the friction criteria which determines
tire skid characteristics at the deck surface. Finally, strut
loads are summed with other external forcel and moments at the
helicopter CG.

3.7.2 Detail Description of the Landing Interface Module

Two axes systems are used in this landing interface module as

shown in Figure 3.7.2. All landing gear forces and moments are
formulated in axes parallel to the primary body axes system
passing through the C.G. The space axes system, of which the
ground plane is set at WLFD, is used to determine the landing
gear proximity to the ground. Inplane friction forces are
checked in the space axes system.

k_J

69
 UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
_G_V SER-70602
Of poor Q_

FIGURE 3.6.7(a) ROTOR CLUTCH MODEL - DETAILED PROGRAM FLOW DIAGRAM

I ame'4. -om,_9

_- '

l-l
F,-.xt_..._

k j

. I
I
°"" 7 R-._._._.:.=.J
+
o..-,,=_ I

_ 70
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602

OF POOR QU._L!'_¥

FIGURE 3.6.7(b) ROTOR CLUTCH MODEL - DETAILED PROGRAM FLOW DIAGRAM (Cont'd)

[2"

_,,

t
I

71
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602

FIGURE 3.7.1 LANDING GEAR TIRE AND STRUT REPRESENTATION

OR!GIN_-L p,..:_,e.!S

V:

"_" 72
 TECHNOLOGIES
ORLGI,'qs-%LP;_}_ i3
_ UNITED SER=70602
OF POOR QU._L_J¥

FIGURE 3.7.2 LANDING MODULE AXES SYSTEM

,,j
73
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

Tire Contact Geometry

In the equations defining the geometry of the landing gear, 5.7-9,10,

Figure 3.7.3, it is assumed that the strut moves along the -11,-12
line parallel to the helicopter Z axis. No account is taken of
drag linkage constraints which cause the axle to move in an arc
in the X-Z plane. This geometry, together with the Gen Hel
calculated position of the helicopter C.G. position in space, is
used to establish the location of the tire, axle reference and
gear reference points for each gear in space axes. These
coordinates are used later to determine the proximity of tire
contact and subsequent tire and strut deflections.

The determination of tire contact, for an arbitrary orienta- 5.7-13

tion of the helicopter relies on establishing the length of the
normal from the ground plane to the axle reference position and
the true angle which this line makes with the gear line. The
derivation of these geometric relationships are given in Refer-
ence 27. (ie the true angle between two lines is given by Cos
DTRUE = Cos0_ r cos_2 + Cos_t cos_2 + cos_ cos_ 9 where
_, _] _ are the dlrection cosine angles) For-this case _ _,_o =
90 and _ = 0 for the normal to the ground. Thus, the true -*_ole
is equal to the last term in the helicopter to space transforma-
tion matrix. When the distance along the gear line becomes less 5.7-13,14
than the tire radius, contact of the tire with the ground has
occurred. Subsequently, this difference is defined as radial
k_J
tire deflection. In practice tire contact can occur at any
point on the width of the tire. In the model the contact point
is assumed to be at the center of the tire tread, irrespective
of the distortion resulting from radial or axial loading. The
geometry for tire contact is illustrated on figure 3.7.4.

In order to establish the degree of inplane deflection and

corresponding loading on the tire, it is necessary to track the
intersection of the landing gear line relative to the ground
plane. Using the positions of the axle reference and the gear 5.7-15
reference in space, two equations of the gear line can be
developed, (each projected into a 2D plane) and solved for the
X-Y intersection with the ground plane. When contact for an
individual tire is established, the point of intersection is
retained and on subsequent iterations through the program, tire
deflection is determined by comparing the new and old gear line
intersections. The coordinates of the initial contact are
retained until the tire leaves the deck or are modified by the
tire slipping. If contact is lost, for any given tire then the
initialization is reset to zero. This is necessary, since the
tire/gear can bounce in and out of contact. The re-initializa-
tion for the contact point following tire slipping is discussed
later. Following the transformation of the deflections into
helicopter body axes, the three components of deflection at each 5.7-16

74
 TECHNOLOGIES ORIGINAL PAGE i'3
_ UNITED OF POOR QUALITY SER-70602

FIGURE 3.7.3 LANDING GEAR GEOMETRY

75
 _ UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
_G_V QRIGINAL
.... r_,"-_- _,-,
r-_:¢-_, SER-70602
0_' POOR QUALITY

k_J FIGURE 3.7.4 GEAR/GROUND-PLANE INTERFACE GEOMETRY

',,.i'

76
 UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
SER-70602

% /

tire can be used to determine, from the tire characteristics

data file, the potential three components of tire force.
"Potential" qualifies these loads, because until the tire is
checked for slipping, the actual inplane loads cannot be de-
fined.

Tire Loads

The tire loads are made up of two components - that due to spring
stiffness and that due to damping. The vertical stiffness data
is well defined by the manfacturers load deflection tests and is
used directly in the simulation. However, the inplane loads are
less well defined, and the assumption is made that they can be
treated as separate orthogonal components. Laterally a non-
linear stiffness is extracted from test data as a function of
vertical tire deflection and tire pressure. Longitudinal
stiffness is based on Reference 28. The damping terms are tuned
to a fixed frequency and while the acceptability of this techni-
que is clear for, say ground resonance analysis, it's suitabil-
ity for impact landing is not clear. In any event, it is
necessary to filter the damping terms to effectively smooth the
velocity obtained by numerical differentiation of tire deflec-
tion.

Tire Inplane Friction Load Check

k_J
Following the determination of tire forces from the helicopter 5.7-18
relative motion, a test of the ability of the inplane friction -19
forces to resist the applied forces without slipping, must be
established. The tire forces obtained in helicopter axes must
be transferred to the ground plane for the friction check. In
executing this transformation it should be noted that in order
to retain the X-Y alignment of the forces with body axes when
transformed to the ground plane,_ b must be set to zero in
[AHBS]. Here again it should be noted that no attempt has been
made to treat the friction criteria based on the resultant
inplane force. The method retains orthogonality of the inplane
forces. In practice the resultant force does determine slip
conditions but the model becomes more complex and the simplified
approach facilitates the introduction of brakes. Classical
friction considerations provide for a coefficient of static
friction and a coefficient for sliding friction. In the former
case (when brakes are set), the maximum amount of inplane load
which can be resisted without slipping, is proportional to the
coefficient of friction and the normal loading. When this level
is exceeded, motion will result. Then the force resisting the
motion will depend on a reduced (sliding) coefficient of fric-
tion. In practice, there is a smooth transistion between the
two conditions. However, the model assumes a discrete change.
When the brakes are activated, it is assumed that the wheels are

77
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

k.j
locked. For brakes off, a very low coeffeicient of friction is
introduced into the tire X direction. The wheel degree of
freedom is not currently represented and therefore spin up
inertia loads are not calculated. If slip is not occurring,
calculated tire forces are passed unchanged. If slippage is
occurring, the inplane forces are set to the value for sliding
friction. The final tire loads are transferred to the axial
reference point.

For the conditions where the inplane loads exceed the allowable
static friction level and the tire slips, a re-initialization of
the tire contact point must be undertaken. Under conditions of
no-slip the tire inplane deflection is developed from consecu-
tive calculations of the gear line intersection with the ground
plane. During slip conditions, the contact point for the tire 5.7-21
moves, and the initialization of the gear-line intersection must
be revised to reflect the tire movement and establish a new
value for the contact point to be used on the next pass through
the program, as shown on figure 3.7.5. It is assumed that the
actual tire deflection can be determined from the sliding
friction force and the tire inplane stiffness.

Landing Gear Strut Loads

Under steady conditions, the loads transferred to the airframe 5.7-23

by the strut will be equal to the tire reactions. However,
k_J
under transient conditions, the acceleration of the unsprung
mass can modify the loading. A diagramatic representation of
the strut is shown on figure 3.7.1. Three elements of the strut
are modelled. The preload restraint, the isentropic air spring
and a velocity squared damper. Under light loading condition
(where a significant portion of helicopter weight is reacted by
the rotor), the strut operates in the preload range. Under
these conditions, where tire reaction load is less than the
strut preload setting, tire loads are transferred to the air-
frame with zero strut deflection. Once the preload setting is
exceeded, the strut (unsprung mass) is accelerated depending on
it's own dynamic characteristics, the tire applied loads, and
the unsprung mass. Note that logic precludes the equation flow
reverting back to the preload mode until the natural transient
provides a zero strut deflection condition.

The model for the strut air spring assumes isentropic expansion
of the air as the strut deflects. While this is a reasonable
assumption for large deflections experienced during a landing
transient an adeabatic expansion assumption may be more appro-
priate once the strut has deflected and is moving about some
average deflection point. Strut damping is achieved by forcing
fluid through an orifice and is represented in the model by a
fixed coefficient, velocity squared term. The strut system

78
_ UNliTEb
TECHNOLOGIES
SER-70602
OF pOOD QUAL|'t'_.

FIGURE 3.7.5 REINITIALISATION OF GEAR LINE INTERSECTION POINT

79
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

contains high frequency components and care should be taken in

selecting the integration time interval, if a straight sequen-
cial algorithm is used. A software switch is provided which
allows bypassing the strut calculation, such than tire loads are
transferred directly to the airframe. This will give approxi
mate solutions under some circumstances without loading the
simulation down with the strut calculations. Finally, the strut
loads are transferred to the helicopter C.G. for summation with
other external forces.

This landing interface algorithm and the corresponding input

data has been used by Sikorsky to analyze hard landings and
ground resonance. The results obtained compared acceptably with
test data.

3.8 GROUND EFFECT MODULE

This module simulates the effect of ground proximity on a heli-

copter by modifying the rotor forces and moments through a
manipulation of the inflow equation.

The airflow surrounding a helicopter when it is close to the

ground is highly complex, especially under transient flight
conditions. Most of the experimental data available is for
steady conditions where the flow pattern has stabilized. Any
transient data is highly configuration oriented. It is likely
that recent and on-going research on this subject (Reference 29)
will lead eventually to an empirical model describing the local
rotor inflow velocity due to the hyperbolically shaped ground
vortex and its image that has been shown to exist at low speeds.
Unfortunately, sufficient data for correlation of such a model
has not yet been published.

With these limitations in mind a model was formulated which

accounts for the gross effects of changing inflow through the
rotor when it is operating close to the ground. The algorithm 5.8-3
incorporates an altitude and forward speed effect. The latter
effectively washes out the altitude effect based on the rotor
wake skewing rearwards with increased speed. BLACK HAWK hover
flight test results, Reference 30, were used to develop an
empirical factor with which to force correlation. This ground
effect factor modifies the main rotor calculated downwash when
altitude is less than five times rotor radius. The downwash
change causes a change in rotor loading, especially effecting
rotor thrust.

3.9 GUST MODULE

This module produces local air velocities at all rotor-blade

segment positions and at the fuselage and empennage component

80
TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

aerodynamic centers, caused by various types of gusts. The gust

input may be discrete or continuous having deterministic and
non-deterministic characteristics respectively. The discrete
gust functions which can assume the shape of a step, ramp or
pulse, are explicitly defined as a function of penetration dis-
tance. The continuous gust is represented by the Dryden model. 5.9-12
Conceptually this model is relatively simple. However, the
computer mechanization is somewhat complicated by the need to
store and retrieve gust data for any blade segment, at any blade
azimuth station, at any state of penetration. The blanket
storage of this data is not feasible and a "rotating ring array"
was developed to cope with this problem.

In the computer implementation, large "rotating ring arrays" of

gust data are generated. Specifically vertical and horizontal
gust tables, TABLEV and TABLEH, of size equal to MAXPNT data
points are loaded to represent gust velocities at TABINK dis-
tance apart. Because the "rotating ring array" is, in fact, a
table it should be noted that the first and last table locations
are co-incident on the "ring array". In general the helicopter
can be visualized as wrapping around the ring array as shown in
figure 3.9.1.

Loading the Tables with Gust Velocities

Two gust tables are specified TABLEV vertically and TABLEH

horizontally. For the discrete gust function, lateral com-
ponents of gust result from specifying relative helicopter/wind
headings. For the continuous gust the horizontal gust must be
aligned approximately along the aircraft x axis to be within the
assumptions of the Dryden model. If lateral Dryden gusts are
required the model can be expanded to include this component.

During the IC condition it is necessary to enter sufficient data

into the tables to allow for deviations in helicopter airspeed
after entering the compute mode. At the same time, because the
table is effectively a "ring", data cannot be loaded towards the
end of the table. If this occurred, erroneous gust input would
be experienced on the aft portion rotor disc after entering the
compute mode. This concern is evident from the illustration on
figure 3.9.2. Using this "rotating ring" concept, the helicop-
ter will cover a distance 2(P_ +_FT) on the closed table. As
TABINK (=VFT_*TIME) decreases in valeu, more of the table will
be covered--Sy the aircraft. A logical test must be made to
avoid the aircraft doubling over. An appropriate test is if
(ICUPD + 12) data points are equal to INPPNT the table margin is
insufficient for the operating conditions. This limit is
illustrated on figure 3.9.3. The_kFT defined, (Figure 3.9.1)
also serves the purpose of providing a dead space at the begin-
ning of the table, allowing a short period following entry to

81
UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
ORIGINAL P'_c _
SER-70602
OF POOR QUALITY

FIGURE 3.9.1 DEFINITION OF GUST RING ARRAY

I,_¢P,
DArr

82
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED ORIGINAL PA_q_ _
SER-70602
OF POOR QUALITY

FIGURE 3.9.2 GUST TABLE LOADING RESTRICTIONS

, m
/
J
/
/
!

\
\

r_

83
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UN,'-T_D-- ..... SER-70602

FIGURE 3.9.3 EFFECT OF DECREASING "TABINK" ON TABLE LOADING

84
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

the compute mode before the rotor experiences the gust. Thus,
data is loaded between ICUPD and INPPNT in the I.C. mode. In
the compute mode a data point is placed in the table for each
program pass. It represents the gust velocity at a distance,
TABINK, (=VFLD*TIME) from the previous entry, where V F_ is the
propagation rate of the gust front, (in I.C.). Thus We heli-
copter tends to remain diametrically opposite the table update
point. When TABMAX is reached new data will refresh the data at
the beginning of the table, (hence rotating ring).

Gust Penetration Distance and Table Look-Up

A penetration distance G(ft) is defined as a function of the 5.9-9

propagation velocity, VF.D, which represents the distance that
the aircraft reference _ub centroid has penetrated the gust
front. This reference is used to calculate the penetration of
other points on the rotor, GPRS, (see Figure 3.9.4). These
values are used to set the pointer for the table look-ups.

Initially the helicopter is oriented to place the front of the

rotor tip path plane at the end of each gust table, (ie Go =
-R_) see figure 3.9.2. Now, if in the compute mode the heli-
copter maintains its trim speed a fixed point on the helicopter
will advance through the table at the same rate as the table is
updated. (ie. G increases by TABINK each pass.). However,
deviations in helicopter airspeed, will result in the helicopter
gaining on or slipping relative to the fixed update rate,(which
is determined by the IC value of VFLD).

Penetration of empennage components are determined by delaying 5.9-16

the gust value for the rotor centroid by an appropriate amount.

A simplified flow diagram of the computer implementation is

shown on figure 3.9.5.

3.10 HELICOPTER MOTION MODULE

This module brings together all the forces and moments acting on
the rigid airframe and develops the motion of the helicopter in
the body axes system, illustrated in figure 3.10.1. This module
also is a catch-all for small elements of the simulation which
are not appropriately specified elsewhere.

The external forces and moments in body axes at the airframe 5.10-4
center of gravity, calculated in the various modules, are summed
to form the total external forces and moments used in the
general equations of motion. For convenience the gyroscopic
effects of rotating mass (shafts rotor hub etc.) are introduced
at this point. These gyroscopics are based on fixed (input)
rotational speeds.

85
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED ORIGINAL. PAG_ _,_
SER-70602

OF POOR QUALITY

FIGURE 3.9.4 HELICOPTER PENETRATION OF GUST FRONT

_.J_-.

86
 TECHNOLOGIES ORIGINAL PAGE 15
_ UNITED OF POOR QUALITY
SER-70602

FIGURE 3.9.5 PROGRAM FLOW FOR LOADING GUST TABLES

14C

.r,c _ PD

°< __°
11"_= __+__ I
i,

l
"£as_

II

[
I I
l
"D

87
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ UNITED SER-70602

v FIGURE 3.10.1 BODY AXES SYSTEM

Z&

Xb' Yb" Zb Body Axes System. Origin at the

Center of Gravity. X Axis Parallel
to Aircraft Center Line.

88
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

The general equations of motion are standard and can be found 5.10-6
in Reference I. A comparison will show that some small terms
have been ignored. It should be noted that these equations are
written about the airframe center of gravity. (that is less
rotor blades which are treated as separate bodies). Gross
Weight and C.G. are input to the program and are modified in the
rotor module to provide airframe values as discussed in Section
3.1.2. However, airframe inertia must be provided as input.
The lateral C.G. offset components have been eliminated from the
equations of motion presented, such that the coupling between
degrees of freedom can be reduced. Thus, only PDOT and RDO T
need be solved simultaneously rather than all three angular
degrees of freedom. The impact of the simplification is that
the dynamic effects of lateral C.G. offset are not modelled.
Statically, no accuracy is lost and the simulation can be used
for such analysis. The solution of the acceleration equations
depends on last program pass values of all variables except
translational velocities. Here a half pass predictor is used
to ensure numerical stability. The introduction of these pre-
dictors is based solely on passed experienced. The motion in
space axes is developed using the standard Euler equations for
the angular velocities and a 3 axes transformation in the
sequence _b' 8b' _b for the translational velocities.

The equations for motion at any point on the airframe are writ- 5.10-10,11
ten in terms of accelerations that a pendulum, suspended at any
v-
point on the airframe, would experienced. They are defined in
the opposite sense to normal body axes accelerations. These
terms are used for control system feedbacks and for determining
the accelerations and velocities at any point on the airframe or
pilot's seat for motion system drives. The so called 'g'
vectors are derived from these accelerations.

The remaining equations in this module are either generated 5.10-12,13

specifically for a control system feedback or for output. They
are self explanatory.

Reference to the summation of external force and moment equa- 5.10-4

tions, indicates components (XYZLMS) ANn" These components are
provided such that emperical correc£Td_n terms, which may not
have analytical foundation, can be introduced into the simula
tion. A typical use of these elements is the downwash correc- 5.10-19
tion terms. Here an empirical correction is made to the side-
force, rolling moment and pitching moment due to downwash vari-
ations under conditions of sideslip flight. Information is not
available to develop a more sophisticated model, thus this
empirical fit of wind tunnel test and flight test data has been
introduced at this point.

89
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

4.0 SIMULATION TRIMMING CONCEPTS

Several approaches to trimming the helicopter simulation are

available. These vary from simple single channel loop closures,
to multi-loop, steepest descent methods employing simplified
rotor calculations to initialize the trimming algorithm. The
method recommended for the BLACK HAWK simulation, and presented
below, is based on the integral of the error between the current
state and the commanded state. In most applications the latter
is zero. Conceptually this trimming method is simple and with
appropriately selected gains, very stable.

The general form of the trimming algorithm is:

CONTROLLER=GAINJ(XcuRRENT-XcoMMANDED)dt

where X is most often an acceleration, but can be any other

parameter. The controller for the specified degree of freedom
is adjusted by the integral of the error until balance is
obtained and the integral goes to zero. Using this method all
trimming loops can, and should, be closed simultaneously.

For computing efficiency it is desirable to define the flisht

path in the X-Z plane only. Thus Vxb = 1.69 Vcom. cos(eb-_c)
Vzb = 1.69 Vcom. sin(gb-_c)

where Vxb, Vzb are body axes velocities

Vcom commanded flight path airspeed (knots)
@b pitch attitude
_c climb angle

This approach, which eliminates Vyb, avoids the trimming se-

quence having to operate through a cumbersome three axes velo-
city transformation.

Typically in the Sikorsky implementation, the TRIM is based on a

rate check of the controller motion. The controller is checked
every 20 program passes. If for 5 consecutive checks the
controller has not changed by more than the tolerance, that
degree of freedom is judged to be trimmed. The helicopter is
judged to be trimmed when all of the controllers are within
tolerance. If a controller is out of tolerance, the check is
reset at the new position. Checks of all channels are continued
until the helicopter is trimmed.

90
 UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES
SER-70602

Typical trimming loop closures are given below:

Acceleration Controller Gain Tolerance

For steady level flight

V_b 8b .35 .05

Vpb* #b/Vyb -.35/5.0 .05/.05

V_b XC .07 .01

P XA -1.0 .01

XB 1.0 .01

_- XP -I.0 .01

For climbing flight, change as follows:

V_b ]c -.35 .05

Vc XC -.0002 .01

For autorotation, change as follows:

V_b _'c -.35 .05

QHBMR_ XC -.00001 .01

*Either _b or Vyb may be used to trim V@b. The other must

be specified.

#QHBMR specified equal to zero for autorotation or some

desired value for part power operation. Under normal
unaccelerated flight trim conditions the body angular
rates are set to zero.

91
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

5.0 FUTURE SIMULATION MODEL DEVELOPMENT

The BLACK HAWK mathematical model provided to the Army under

this contract is considered to be a good engineering represent-
ation for Handling Qualities and some Performance analysis. The
level of sophistication was selected to permit analysis within
the band width of the flight control system. Therefore, in the
future development of a real time pilot-in-the-loop model it may
be expedient, and from a computing requirement, a necessity, to
eliminate certain high frequency elements. An example would be
some of the elements in the control system. It should be noted
however that phase characteristics are summed and can have an
impact at relatively low frequencies.

Based on a variety of correlation investigations,covering

several Sikorsky helicopter types, it would be expected that
this engineering simulation would provide good trending data and
representative absolute comparisons in most flight regimes.
However, there are area's in the model that can be improved, but
test data is required to establish that more sophistication is
meritted, and that the corresponding increase in computation
time is justified. The BLACK HAWK flight test program, to be
conducted by the Army, will provide valuable information.

The following is a discussion of area_ in the model where

improvements may be necessary. They have been identified
because of reduced confidence in their representation or because
for simplification purposes, they have been approximated.

Main Rotor

a) Inflow Modelling - New theoretical approaches are avail-

able, but closely controlled test data for an articulated
rotor is still limited.

b) Unsteady Aerodynamics - The trade-off for introducing this

complexity needs evaluating for the band-widths of concern
for Handling Qualities and Control System design.

c) Blade Flexibility - It is known that significant torsional

wind-up occurs with the BLACK HAWK rotor blade. A flexible
blade representation, at least torsionally, might increase
confidence for expanded flight envelope simulation.

Empennage and Tail Rotor

a) Sideslip effects of main rotor wash at the tail are treated

in a gross sense because of lack of experimental data other
than the knowledge, from flight test, that a significant
effect exists.

92
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

b) Tail rotor wash on the vertical tail has been ignored in

the model based on the fact that this is consistent with
the approximations inherent in the rotor downwash in the
vicinity of the empennage. Data is available for improving
the vertical tail blockage of the tail rotor witNout
significantly increasing model complexity.

c) For some analysis tasks a more sophisticated tail rotor

formulation may be necessary which includes torque and tip
path plane tilt.

Aerodynamics of the Airframe at Low Speed

Analysis and validation in rearward and side flight are required

to confirm the assumptions that have been made in the model that
only the rotors are important.

Engine

The limitations of the linear engine model were identified and

discussed in Section 3.6. As the BLACK HAWK simulation activity
matures it may be appropriate to upgrade the engine representa-
tion.

Ground Effects

v
There is interest in the Handling Qualities effects of flying
helicopters close to the ground for certain mission tasks.
Recent experimental data may allow the formulation of an im-
proved generalized model. This area is lacking especially for
transient conditions.

Failure Modes Development

The BLACK HAWK model presented requires development to incorpor-

ate a full failure modes representation.

93
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

6.0 REFERENCES

I. Etkin, B; Dynamics of Flight, John Wiley and Sons Inc. 1959.

o
Kuczynski, W; Cooper, D; Twomey, W., Howlett, J: The Influence
of Engine/Fuel Control Design on Helicopter Dynamics and Hand-
ling Qualities, AHS paper 79-37 Presented at the 35th Annual
National Forum. May 1979.

°
Cooper, D; Howlett, J: Ground Based Helicopter Simulation,
Symposium on the Status of Testing and Modelling Techniques for
V/STOL Aircraft AHS 1972.

°
Gessow and Myers: Aerodynamics of the Helicopter, MacMillen Co.
1952.

.
Ormiston, R:; Peters, D; Hingeless Helicopter Rotor Response
with Non-Uniform Inflow and Elastic Blade Bending, Journal of
Aircraft Oct 1972.

.
Crews, S.; Hohenemser, K: An Unsteady Wake Model for a Hinge-
less Rotor, Journal of Aircraft Dec. 1973.

°
Harris, F.: Articulated Rotor Blade Flapping Motion at Low
Advance Ratios, Journal of the American Helicopter Society, Jan
1972.

.
High Speed Aerodynamics and Jet Propulsion Volume Vlll. Aero-
dynamic Components of Aircraft at High Speed. Princeton Uni-
versity Press.

.
Jepson, W.: Two Dimensional Test of four Airfoil Configurations
with an Aspect Ratio of 7.5 and a 16 inch Chord up to a Mach
Number of I.I SER-50977, April 1977.

I0. Paglino, V.: Yawed Bladed Element Performance Method,

SER-50620, Sept. 1969.

II. Klusman, S.; BLACK HAWK Lag Damper Force/Velocity Characteris-

tics. Sikorsky Internal Memo. TEM-G2-0594 July 1978.

12. Houck, J.; Moore, F.; Howlett, J.; Pollock, K.; Browne, M.:
Rotor Systems Research Aircraft Simulation Model NASA TM-78629,
Nov. 1977.

13. Du Val, R.: Inertial Dynamics of a General Purpose Rotor Model,

NASA TM-78557 March 1979.

94
 TECHNOLOGIES
UNITED SER-70602

14. Heyson, H.: Equations for the Induced Velocities Near a Lifting
Rotor with Non-Uniform Azimuthwise Vorticity Distribution, NASA
TN D-394, 1960.

15. Warner, J.; Flemming, R.: YU}{-60A Quarter Scale Wind Tunnel
Test Report. SER-70531 May 1973.

16. Rorke, J.: YIIH-60A Quarter Scale Drag Reduction Wind Tunnel
Test Report. SER-70097 July 1975.

17. Barnard, R.: YI_-6OA/T700 Engine I.R. Suppressor Test Report.

Appendix III Quarter Scale Infrared Suppressor Wind Tunnel Test.
SER-70094 June 1976.

18. Ellison, D.; Mattham, L.: NSAF Stability and Control Datcom,
McDonnell Douglass Corp., Project No. 8219, Flight Control
Division, Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory, Wright-Patterson
Air Force Base. Sept 1970.

19. Smith, H.; Schaefer, R." Aerodynam_s Characteristics at

Reynolds Numbers of 3 x 105 and 6 x I0 v of Three Airfoil Sec-
tions Formed by Cutting Off Various Amounts From the Rear
Portion of the NACA 0012 Airfoil Section, NACA TN 2074, Feb
1950.

20. Bailey, F.: Simplified Theoretical Method of Determining the

Characteristics of a Lifting Rotor in Forward Flight, NACA
Report 716.

21. BLACK HAWK - Detailed Specification for the Stability Augmen-

tation System and Flight Path Stabilization System Hardware
Production Program. Prepared under Contract DAAJ01-73-C-0006,
SES-701208.

22. BLACK HAWK - Detailed Specification for the Stability Augmen-

tation System and Flight Path Stabilization System Hardware
Production Program. Prepared under Contract DAAJ01-73-C-O006,
SES-701209.

23. BLACK HAWK - MOS 35K Avionics Mechanics Course. Sikorsky

Training Manual Publication.

24. UH-60A. Familiarization Training Course. Sikorsky Product

Support Training Publication.

25. Curran, J.: T700 Fuel and Control System, AHS National Forum
Paper, Preprint No. 771, May 1973.

26. General Electric: TT00 Operation Manual.

95
 TECHNOLOGIES
_ _0__
UNITED SER-70602

27. Apalategeric and Adams. Aircraft Analytical Geometry.

28. Simley and Home: Mechanical Properties of Pneumatic Tires With

Special Reference to Modern Aircraft Tires. NACA TR-R-64.

29. Sheridan and Wiesman: Aerodynamics of Helicopter Flight Near

the Ground. AHS Paper 77.33-04 May 1977.

30. Sikorsky Letter LTC AR Todd to R. Merrit. Free Hover Perform-

ance. 22 Oct. 1976.

96
 I. Report No. 2. Govornrmmt Accmdon No. 3. Recipienz's Catalog No.
NASA CR-166310
4. Title and _itle 5. Repo_ Date

December 1981
UH-60A Black Hawk Engineering Simulation Program: 6. Performing Organizaticm Code
Volume II - Background Report

7. Author(s) 8. Plrformi_ Or_ni_ti_ Report No.

SER 70602
J.J. Howlett
10. Work Unit No.
9. Perfuming _ganiution Name end _dreu
United Technologies
11. Contract or Grant No.
Sikorsky Aircraft
Stratford, Connecticut 06602 NAS2-I0626
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
12. S_nsoring Agency _rne and Addrul
National Aeronautics & Space Administration
Washington, DC 20546 14. s_mra_ A_,cyco_
U.S. Arm y Aviation Research & Development Command
15. _p_ementaw Not_
Technical Monitor: Thomas S. Alderete, Mail Stop 245-5, NASA Ames Reseach
Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035 6415) 965-6171, FTS 448-6171
Volume 1 - Mathematical Model is NASA CR-166309
16. Abstract

A non-linear mathematical model of the UH-60A BLACK HAWK helicopter has been
developed under Contract NAS2-10626. This mathematical model, which is based
on the Sikorsky General Helicopter (Gen Hel) Flight Dynamics Simulation,
provides the NASA with an engineering simulation for Performance and Handling
Qualities evaluations.

This mathematical model is a total systems definition of the BLACK HAWK

helicopter represented at a uniform level of sophistication considered
necessary for Handling Qualities evaluations. The model is a total force,
large angle representation in six rigid body degrees of freedom. Rotor blade
flapping, lagging and hub rotational degrees of freedom are also represented.
In addition to the basic helicopter modules, supportive modules have been
defined for the landing interface, power unit, ground effects and gust
penetration.

Volume I of this report defines the mathematical model using a modular format.
The documentation of each module is self-contained and includes a descriptive,
mathematical definition and input for the BLACK HAWK. Volume II provides
background and descriptive information supportive to an understanding of the
mathematical model.

"17. Key Words (Suggested by Author(s)) 18. Distri_ti_ Statement

UH-60A BLACK HAWK U.S. Government Agencies Only

Math Model
Simulation Subject Category 08

Handling Qualities Point of Contact: Thomas S. Alderete

19. Securi_ Qmif.(of'this _rt) _. SecuHW' Clamif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. _ice"

Unclassified Unclassified 99

Available: NASA Scientific & Technical Information Facility

B.W.I. Airport, MD 21240