Originally Posted by gevans35
(Post 10325462)
I think so too, powered by a generator run off the main engine(s).
Actually, why not the main rotor too? They do it in ships so why not aircraft? Would take a lot of development though...... Elon Musk? I can see only one thing that speaks for an electric TR and that is that you wouldn't need pitch controlled blades. I'll mention a few things that come to mind that speaks against it, although I'm sure there are many more:
|
Sorry as this seems to have drifted from the main thread.
The advantages of an electric tail rotor is that it can run at speeds independent of the main rotor. This allows the design to not be limited to one compromise. It, importantly, gives greater control over noise. The assumption that a motor would be as heavy as a TGB, IGB, MGB tail pickoff and driveshaft is not one that I would make. |
Great discussion chaps, but don't put your patent applications in just yet, think you've been beaten to it... If I'm not mistaken the team at Leonardo won an award for their work from the RAeS the other evening as well! |
Originally Posted by pba_target
(Post 10325545)
YouTube linky: electric tail rotor
Great discussion chaps, but don't put your patent applications in just yet, think you've been beaten to it... If I'm not mistaken the team at Leonardo won an award for their work from the RAeS the other evening as well! |
Originally Posted by pba_target
(Post 10325545)
YouTube linky: electric tail rotor
Great discussion chaps, but don't put your patent applications in just yet, think you've been beaten to it... If I'm not mistaken the team at Leonardo won an award for their work from the RAeS the other evening as well! |
Most things have already been tried as already mentioned in this thread. What would surprise me is if an electric tail rotor would be competitive when it comes to reliability and efficiency as long as the power plant is a combustion engine.
Here is a paper on the model shown in the youtube clip, although I didn't see much of interest in there: http://www.cleansky.eu/sites/default...3_-_eletad.pdf It's obvious that an electrical TR could be made, it would probably be much cheaper to produce than the current mechanical solutions as well. What I seriously question is whether it would be "competitive" with regards to the criteria that matter, especially when it comes to safety. How would you do a autorotation with an electrical tail rotor? |
Nadar
How would you do a autorotation with an electrical tail rotor? |
Nadar, there are efficiencies to be gained by the ability to vary tail rotor speed. It allows a designer to move the compromise points. Plus as I stated before the ability to tailor the noise footprint.
As to autorotation, how much torque is the tail rotor dealing? |
As to autorotation, how much torque is the tail rotor dealing? Irrespective of how the turning rotor is actually powered, it still needs a blade pitch control system. Varying the speed of rotation isn't the full answer. |
Originally Posted by ShyTorque
(Post 10325613)
That depends on if you want to turn (left or right) and keep the aircraft in balance.
I also wonder why the assumption that an electric tail rotor wouldn't work in autorotation? |
Originally Posted by ShyTorque
(Post 10325613)
Irrespective of how the turning rotor is actually powered, it still needs a blade pitch control system. Varying the speed of rotation isn't the full answer.
|
Originally Posted by dClbydalpha
(Post 10325615)
Accepted, but say as a ROM % of that in powered hover?
I also wonder why the assumption that an electric tail rotor wouldn't work in autorotation? b) Did anyone assume it wouldn't work in autorotation? I certainly didn't. However, the tail rotor would still absorb a lot of energy even in autorotation so presumably its electrical power generator would need to be driven by the main rotor transmission, or a very large capacity battery would be required if engine driven generators no longer provided electrical power. |
Originally Posted by ShyTorque
(Post 10325635)
a) I'm not familiar with the term ROM%
b) Did anyone assume it wouldn't work in autorotation? I certainly didn't. However, the tail rotor would still absorb a lot of energy even in autorotation so presumably its electrical power generator would need to be driven by the main rotor transmission, or a very large capacity battery would be required if engine driven generators no longer provided electrical power. |
Surely you cannot be serious?
|
I would think battery. Battery technology is going forward in leaps and bounds so maybe not so big
|
ShyTorque, my apologies, ROM is Rough Order of Magnitude. I ask because this determines the power demand at a critical phase.
Nadar seems to have implied that auto with an ETR would be different to "conventional". I'm not sure why this would be the case, in auto I would presume a design where the MGB is still driving the generators. Question for my own interest, how many helicopters out there revert to battery when in autorotation and how many retain electrical generation? note: during "conventional" autorotation, the tail rotor is powered by the MGB. |
Originally Posted by ShyTorque
(Post 10325639)
Surely you cannot be serious?
|
OMG there are dozens of chop jocks now, invading this thread!
What happened to the original thread FFS? Electric TR's. Where do these people come from? :sad: |
I had a small RC helicopter with an electric tail rotor once. Worked fine until it sparked a few times and stop dead.
I dont think this helps any. Just thought I would share playing it safe since the mods deleted my last post |
Originally Posted by GrayHorizonsHeli
(Post 10325716)
I had a small RC helicopter with an electric tail rotor once. Worked fine until it sparked a few times and stop dead.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:32. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.