PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Future rotorcraft control systems
View Single Post
Old 27th Jun 2005, 20:52
  #39 (permalink)  
Graviman
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This gets more interesting...

"...ramblings make a bit of sense ... this whole thing could work and be a bennefit."

Right with you MaxTorq, but some concerns to be addressed still.

A better approach would be to cone the existing Lockheed gyro, with one set of weights (or offset pivot). RRPM would be slightly dependant on heli g loading, even though counter spring will be stong. This can be solved by a shaft centre counter weight, being careful not to upset the original gyro aumentation. Also the spring will need to be soft, and pre-stretched, to give the required sensitivity. Even so high pitch will require slightly higher RRPM, or worse autorotation requires slightly lower RRPM.

This last problem really bothers me. The ideal is a mechanism that keeps govenor in exactly the same position (ie fixed RRPM), over a very large range of pitch angles. In steam engines the govenor didn't need to move very much. I can't see any obvious way of solving this without an electric motor, which could well be part of the original "pilot assist" system i was considering (since it would also gently fight too fast collective input for turbines).

A purely mechanical system is always preferable, for safety and reliability reasons. I am willing to accept a hybrid approach for collective, but am not yet convinced that a complex sensor-electric system can outperform simple gyro augmentation of cyclic - Lu's account was very positive, before blade divergence. If pilot over-ride is really required (should the pilot actually be there?) then a motor could "trim" the collective input - probably better to let pilot have direct control, but let system "suggest" corrections...

Another thought is pilot induced oscillation. In hover if a pilot pulled more collective, to correct mild sink, an over-ride system might inadvertantly encourage more input to overcome "that wretched control system" . A correcting force in the collective would simply encourage the pilot to "slow down" his/her responses. A pilot in a panick is likely to fight the control system more, which may make matters much worse - worse case a failing engine with reduced power near to ground...

Mart

Last edited by Graviman; 27th Jun 2005 at 21:27.
Graviman is offline