Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8rzl6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-05T21:34:22.614Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Study of brownout prediction of helicopters based on the analysis of ground effect flow field eigen quantities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2025

L.Y. Qian
Affiliation:
National Key Laboratory of Helicopter Aeromechanics, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, China
G.H. Xu*
Affiliation:
National Key Laboratory of Helicopter Aeromechanics, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, China
Y.J. Shi
Affiliation:
National Key Laboratory of Helicopter Aeromechanics, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, China
*
Corresponding author: G.H. Xu; Email: ghxu@nuaa.edu.cn
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The ground effect phenomenon caused by helicopters in proximity to the ground results in helicopters experiencing a distinctive phenomenon known as brownout in a multiphase environment. However, the substantial computational volume associated with current numerical simulations conducted using the coupled CFD-DEM method restricts the scope of current studies on brownout to individual cases. Consequently, it is currently not feasible to make realistic predictions regarding the impact of rotor design parameters on brownout. In order to make full use of the conclusions of the existing theoretical studies and, at the same time, to save computational resources as much as possible, this paper proposes a novel approach of brownout prediction based on the analysis of the helicopter ground effect flow field eigen quantities in order to gain insight into the nature of the phenomenon of brownout. Firstly, a new approach for predicting helicopter brownout is constructed for the well-developed late-stage ground effect flow field. This is achieved by analysing the rotor flow field characteristics and combining the Greely-Iversen expression in particle dynamics to extract the eigen quantities of each region of the flow field. Secondly, the results of the flow field calculations at different heights are analysed using the aforementioned approach. The effectiveness of the approach is demonstrated by comparing the results with those of CFD-DEM calculations. Ultimately, the results of the numerical simulation of the flow field, when combined with the established prediction approach, allow for the prediction of the brownout phenomenon generated by multiple blade tip shape rotors with different design parameters. Furthermore, a comparative study of the influence of blade tip vortex strength on the development of brownout is conducted, which demonstrates that the rotors of the backswept blade tip have been observed to exert a certain positive effect on the inhibition of brownout, although this influence is limited. In contrast, the rotors of the anhedral blade tip have been seen to transport smaller but larger sand particles with greater efficiency and to re-enter the brownout cycle with greater directness. The rotors of the forward-swept blade tip have been found to cause larger sand particles to participate in the brownout, while simultaneously weakening the transport capacity, which has been resulted in a reduction in the overall degree of brownout.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society
Figure 0

Figure 1. Mesh system.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Computational domain setup.

Figure 2

Table 1. Rotor parameters

Figure 3

Table 2. Test rotor parameters

Figure 4

Figure 3. Relationship of the normalised radial velocity at r/R=1.29 to the normalised height above the ground z/R.

Figure 5

Figure 4. Relationship of the normalised radial velocity at r/R=1.6 to the normalised height above the ground z/R.

Figure 6

Figure 5. Characteristic regions of the ground effect flow field.

Figure 7

Figure 6. Flow chart of the flow field eigen quantity analysis in region 1 and region 2.

Figure 8

Table 3. Case setup of different hover heights and thrust coefficients

Figure 9

Figure 7. Diagram of ground effect flow field eigen quantity probe distribution.

Figure 10

Figure 8. Eigen quantity distribution in wall jet region in cases of different hover heights: (a) radial velocity; (b) turbulent kinetic energy.

Figure 11

Figure 9. Eigen quantity distribution in winding region in cases of different hover heights: (a) radial velocity; (b) axial velocity.

Figure 12

Table 4. Case setup of different blade tip shapes

Figure 13

Figure 10. Eigen quantity distribution in unsteady turbulence region under the rotor disk in cases of different hover heights: (a) radial velocity; (b) axial velocity.

Figure 14

Figure 11. Eigen quantity distribution in wall jet region of backswept blades: (a) radial velocity; (b) turbulent kinetic energy.

Figure 15

Figure 12. Eigen quantity distribution in wall jet region of anhedral blades: (a) radial velocity; (b) turbulent kinetic energy.

Figure 16

Figure 13. Eigen quantity distribution in wall jet region of forward-swept blades: (a) radial velocity; (b) turbulent kinetic energy.

Figure 17

Figure 14. Eigen quantity distribution in winding region of backswept blades: (a) radial velocity; (b) axial velocity.

Figure 18

Figure 15. Eigen quantity distribution in winding region of anhedral blades: (a) radial velocity; (b) axial velocity.

Figure 19

Figure 16. Eigen quantity distribution in winding region of forward-swept blades: (a) radial velocity; (b) axial velocity.

Figure 20

Figure 17. Eigen quantity distribution in unsteady turbulence region under the rotor disk of backswept blades: (a) radial velocity; (b) axial velocity.

Figure 21

Figure 18. Eigen quantity distribution in unsteady turbulence region under the rotor disk of anhedral blades: (a) radial velocity; (b) axial velocity.

Figure 22

Figure 19. Eigen quantity distribution in unsteady turbulence region under the rotor disk of forward-swept blades: (a) radial velocity; (b) axial velocity.

Figure 23

Figure 20. Aberration and eigen quantity distribution caused by the fusion of the blade tip vortices: (a) radial velocity in region 1; (b) turbulent kinetic energy in region 1; (c) radial velocity in region 2; (d) axial velocity in region 2.

Figure 24

Figure 21. Aberration and eigen quantity distribution caused by the fusion of the blade tip vortices: (a) radial velocity in region 1; (b) turbulent kinetic energy in region 1; (c) radial velocity in region 2; (d) axial velocity in region 2.

Figure 25

Figure 22. Comparison of blade tip vortex strength for different blade tip shapes.