Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Why the forward sweep?

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Why the forward sweep?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 26th March 2006 | 20:35
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
From: Denver, CO and the GOM
Why the forward sweep?


Near as I can figure it is to balance the aerodynamic force across the feathering axis, reducing left pedal effort. (This on a S300 series.)
Flingwing207 is offline  
Old 26th March 2006 | 21:08
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
From: One Mile High
Looks like that arrangement puts the leading edge perpendicular to the flapping axis.

-Stan-
slgrossman is offline  
Old 26th March 2006 | 22:22
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
From: Iceland
This one looks a lot cleaner than on my 300...
Heli-Ice is offline  
Old 26th March 2006 | 23:16
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
From: Denver, CO and the GOM
Originally Posted by slgrossman
Looks like that arrangement puts the leading edge perpendicular to the flapping axis.
-Stan-
That's because of my quick & dirty illustration - I had the Delta-3 hinge backward, it is now corrected.

Last edited by Flingwing207; 26th March 2006 at 23:30.
Flingwing207 is offline  
Old 26th March 2006 | 23:22
  #5 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 376
Likes: 4
From: Durham, NC USA
The Delta angle between the pitch change axis and the flapping axis is called a delta three angle. Doing this creats a blade pitch change with blade flapping. Most teetering tail rotors utilize this type of design. Typically blades are oriented normal to the feathering axis while the pitch change axis is offset. Look at a Bell 206 tail rotor.
Jack Carson is offline  
Old 26th March 2006 | 23:29
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
From: Denver, CO and the GOM
The Delta-3 is known, it is the forward sweep vs feathering axis I am ciphering on. It might also serve to enhance the Delta-3 effect?
Flingwing207 is offline  
Old 27th March 2006 | 00:28
  #7 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 376
Likes: 4
From: Durham, NC USA
It looks to me as if this is a backwards way of achieving Delta - 3. Do you know which if any helicopter tail rotors do it this way? Even though it appears as of the blades are swept forward they are normal to the axis of rotation.
Jack Carson is offline  
Old 27th March 2006 | 02:05
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
From: N2832W8100
Danger

Hmmm, never really thought of this before, so i am going to hazzard a guess here...
The foward sweep can reduce the diameter but gives the same surface area.
May also give extra strength to the cantilever.
This relates to the Delta -3 in that it just provides the right amount of AoA as it passes through the feathering axis.

Last edited by autosync; 27th March 2006 at 02:20.
autosync is offline  
Old 13th April 2006 | 18:21
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
From: Cambridgeshire, UK
Just come across this thread...

Due to the profile drag (surface friction and normal pressure) any high speed rotating blade will also generate a centrifugal component of flow. Sweep forward causes a pressure trying to drive the flow inward. Since tail rotors operate at a fixed RPM it is relatively easy to choose the foward sweep so that the two effects cancel, so you get lower input torque for the same rotor thrust. It also reduces tip noise.

Fans used for cooling in particular are tending towards "sickle" shape fans. Again the forward sweep is to minimise tip outflow.

Mart


Edit: Thanks Vaqueroaero...

Last edited by Graviman; 15th April 2006 at 11:53.
Graviman is offline  
Old 13th April 2006 | 19:48
  #10 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
From: Florida
Due to the parasitic drag (surface friction and normal pressure)
Is it not profile drag rather than parasite?
Since tail rotors operate at a fixed RPM it is relatively easy to choose the foward sweep so that the two effects cancel, so you get lower input torque for the same rotor thrust. It also reduces tip noise.
So is there any reason as to why this doesn't work on the main rotor?
vaqueroaero is offline  
Old 14th April 2006 | 01:15
  #11 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 289
From: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
A wild guess

Here's my guess. The part of the tail rotor inboard of the airfoil part is a tube. It's too big to fit very far back on the skinny airfoil. So, they put it where it would fit, then used the forward sweep to get area ahead of the feathering axis to get the control forces low. They were able to get away with this due to the short, stiff characteristics of the assembly. Why nobody does it on a main rotor is because the aeroelastics of the long, wiggly blade would cause an instability with the tip jacked so far ahead of the feathering axis.

-- IFMU
IFMU is online now  
Old 14th April 2006 | 06:53
  #12 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 10,959
Likes: 1,814
From: EGDC
The forward sweep allows a component of the centrifugal force to counter the drag, reducing the load on the hinge. I believe the R22 main rotor has and element of this in its design and I know that the Lynx MRH has the 4 blades shifted forward slightly for this reason.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 14th April 2006 | 17:23
  #13 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 289
From: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Originally Posted by [email protected]
The forward sweep allows a component of the centrifugal force to counter the drag, reducing the load on the hinge. I believe the R22 main rotor has and element of this in its design and I know that the Lynx MRH has the 4 blades shifted forward slightly for this reason.
If the MR blades are shifted forward, wouldn't that just be pre-lag? Shifting the whole blade, feathering axis and all forward of the hub centerline is a common tactic to reduce stresses with respect to bending in the lag direction. The S300 main rotor has this feature too.

-- IFMU
IFMU is online now  
Old 14th April 2006 | 18:08
  #14 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 10,959
Likes: 1,814
From: EGDC
IFMU - yes you are right but I reckon the forward sweep will achieve much the same and is easier to engineer.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 15th April 2006 | 03:07
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 1
From: USA
Flingwing is right, I think. The arrangement reduces the "propellor moment" which is the resistance to feathering that the blades present to the pilot when he pushes the left pedal.

The forward sweep increases the stress on the blade roots, if the blades were lagged, ("pre-lag") this would reduce the stress, as it would align the blades with the line of force they experience. This leading sweep increases the bending at the blade root.
NickLappos is offline  
Old 15th April 2006 | 12:02
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
From: Cambridgeshire, UK
Originally Posted by Nick Lappos
The arrangement reduces the "propellor moment" which is the resistance to feathering that the blades present to the pilot when he pushes the left pedal.
I was wondering why not just set the whole aerofoil forwards, or even just use an aerofoil with a rearward shifted centre of pressure. Of course this only works for one AOA, so forward sweep neatly covers the problem at all pedal positions. I imagine there must be a few forward offset rearward sweep designs too - this also balances the drag/centrifugal bending moment. Carefull tip design is probably the way to go for noise...

Mart
Graviman is offline  
Old 15th April 2006 | 12:48
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 1
From: USA
Graviman,
Just a guess, but I believe the design shown us is flight test fix for a basic problem found so late in the development cycle that this expediant was the fastest and cheapest way to get the pedal forces down without dedesigning the whole blade (a 2 to 3 year process.)
NickLappos is offline  
Old 16th April 2006 | 11:04
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
From: Cambridgeshire, UK
Hehehe. Nick, is that an admission that even aeronautical engineers/TPs sometimes have to find a quick bodge?

Mart
Graviman is offline  
Old 17th April 2006 | 11:03
  #19 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
From: Denver, CO and the GOM
Originally Posted by Graviman
I was wondering why not just set the whole aerofoil forwards, or even just use an aerofoil with a rearward shifted centre of pressure.
Mart
Probably because as IFMU said earlier, the blade root is just a tube progressively flattened out and bent forward. It forms the leading edge of the blade (with a bit of fiberglass and a stainless-steel skin wrapped around it). If you look at something like the new A109 blades, it seems they've used your ideas.
Flingwing207 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.