Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T09:47:03.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Wind-tunnel tests of the ERICA tiltrotor optimised air-intake

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2018

G. Gibertini*
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Campus Bovisa, Via La Masa 34, 20156 Milano, Italy
A. Zanotti
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Campus Bovisa, Via La Masa 34, 20156 Milano, Italy
G. Campanardi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Campus Bovisa, Via La Masa 34, 20156 Milano, Italy
F. Auteri
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Campus Bovisa, Via La Masa 34, 20156 Milano, Italy
D. Zagaglia
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Aerospaziali, Politecnico di Milano, Campus Bovisa, Via La Masa 34, 20156 Milano, Italy
G. Crosta
Affiliation:
Leonardo Helicopters, HSD Department, via G.Agusta 520, Cascina Costa di Samarate (VA), Italy
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Wind-tunnel tests were carried out to evaluate the performance of the Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)-based air-intake duct shape optimisation of the European platform tiltrotor ERICA. A 1/2.5 scale model including the nacelle, the external portion of the wing and two interchangeable internal ducts reproducing the baseline and optimised shape were manufactered to be tested in the large wind tunnel of Politecnico di Milano. Moreover, tests were carried out with the model equipped with rotating blade stubs. The comprehensive experimental campaign included tests reproducing different forward flight conditions of the aircraft including cruise and conversion phases. The evaluation of the internal duct performance was carried out by measuring total pressure losses and flow distortion by directional probes at the Aerodynamic Interface Plane (AIP). Additional pressure measurements were carried out on the internal surface of the duct to compare the pressure distributions along the air-intake. The experimental results confirmed that the optimised duct offers significantly improved performance with respect to the baseline configuration not only in cruise, representing the flight condition considered for the CFD optimisation, but also for the conversion condition. In particular, a remarkable reduction of the total pressure drop at the AIP was found with the optimised duct with the only exception for the stubs-on configuration in cruise. Indeed, the present investigation highlighted that the design of the blade stubs, particularly their length, represents a very critical aspect for air-intake performance tests due to significant disturbances that could be induced by the stubs’ wake on the internal duct flow.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2018 
Figure 0

Figure 1. Illustration of the ERICA tiltrotor. (from https://trimis.ec.europa.eu)

Figure 1

Figure 2. Layout of the ERICA air-intake model.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Particular of the rotor hub driving system.

Figure 3

Figure 4. (a) Layout of the baseline internal duct model; (b) comparison of the internal ducts longitudinal center lines.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Particular of the air-movers mounting at the air-intake exhaust.

Figure 5

Figure 6. a) Layout of the directional probes mounting at the AIP; b) measurement points at the AIP.

Figure 6

Table 1 Test set points of the air-intake model

Figure 7

Figure 7. The ERICA air-intake model in clean configuration.

Figure 8

Figure 8. Comparison of the contours of the total pressure coefficient measured at the AIP for stubs-off configuration.

Figure 9

Figure 9. Comparison of the local total pressure, distortion and swirl coefficients distribution along AIP for stubs-off configuration.

Figure 10

Figure 10. The ERICA air-intake model with rotating stubs.

Figure 11

Figure 11. Comparison of the contours of the total pressure coefficient measured at the AIP for stubs-on configuration.

Figure 12

Figure 12. Comparison of the local total pressure, distortion and swirling coefficients distribution along AIP for stubs-on configuration.

Figure 13

Figure 13. Comparison of pressure coefficient distribution measured on the internal ducts surface along the longitudinal central line.