Components interaction effect evaluation of a small-capacity five-component internal balance system

Abstract

With the development of small unmanned air vehicles, the urge for building the experimental facilities has emerged for the research on the low Reynolds number aerodynamics. In this paper, a five-component internal sting balance with the capacity of 10 N for forces and of 0.5 N·m for moments, which is to be installed in a close-circuit low Reynolds number wind tunnel for small unmanned air vehicle tests, was verified to investigate the interaction effect of its different components. Experimental setups and a sequence of evaluated procedures were designed to implement the application of different range of loads with pitch and roll angle coupled so as to investigate the interaction effect of different components by covering the full load range of sting balance. The sting balance was successfully verified with the designed experimental setups and procedures. Evaluation results showed that the interaction effect between balance components enhanced the measurement error and deteriorated the measurement precision. Moreover, it was also found that both precision and error depended on the loads. Relative error analysis revealed that the average relative error of all components was less than 2.1%. Hysteresis test showed that all balance component exhibited little hysteresis property except that side force component exhibited a mild hysteresis at lower load range.

Keywords

Multi-component internal sting balance balance evaluation component interaction effect small capacity internal sting balance hysteresis property

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Proceedings of the 3rd US-European Competition and Workshop on Micro Air Vehicle and 7th European Micro Air vehicle conference and Flight competition (MAV07), Toulouse, France, 2007.

Bohorquez F. Rotor hover performance and system design of an efficient coaxial rotarywing micro air vehicle. University of Maryland, USA, 2007.

Pines

Bohorquez

. Challenges facing future micro-air-vehicle development. J Aircraft 2006; 43(2): 290–305.

Grasmeyer JM and Keennon MT. Development of the black widow micro air vehicle. In: 39th aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit, Nevada, 2001, p. 127.

Conn A, Brugess S, Hyde R, et al. From natural flyers to the mechanical realization of a flapping wing micro air vehicle. In: 2006 IEEE international conference on robotics and biomimetics, 2006, pp.439–444. Robio: IEEE Press.

Babinsky H, Cattafesta L and Abate G. Design considerations for micro air vehicle aerodynamic characterization facility at the University of Florida Research and Engineering Education Facility. In: 25th AIAA aerodynamic measurement technology and ground testing conference, San Francisco, 2006, pp.2006–3309.

Thipyopas

Moschetta

. Experimental analysis of fixed-wing VTOL MAV in ground effect. Int J Micro Air Veh 2010; 2(1): 33–53.

Albertani

. Wind-tunnel study of gurney flaps applied to micro aerial vehicle wing. AIAA J 2008; 46(6): 1560–1562.

AIAA/GCTT. Calibration and use of internal strain-gage balances with application to wind tunnel testing, Canada: AIAA Press, 2003, pp. R-091-2003–R-091-2003.

10.

Booth D, King D and San Diego C. Automatic balance calibration system (ABCS) upgrades large (balances) loading rig (LLR) re-commisioning. In: 51st AIAA aerospace sciences meeting including the new horizons form and aerospace exposition, Texas, 2013, p. 0419.

11.

Ewald B and Polanski L. The cryogenic balance design and balance calibration methods. In: AIAA 17th aerospace ground testing conference, Nashville, 1992, p. 4001.

12.

Ewald D and Bernd FR. Theory and praxi of internal strain gage balance calibration for conventional and cryogeni tunnels. In: 18th AIAA aerospace ground testing conference, Colorado Springs, 1994, p. 2584.

13.

Albertani R, Khambatta P, Hart A, et al. Validation of low Reynolds number aerodynamic characterization facility. In: 47th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting including the new horizons forum and aerospace exposition, Florida, 2009, p. 880.

14.

Mastramico

Hubner

. MC.-10-.375 balance evaluation test, Alabama: University of Alabama, 2006.

15.

Thipyopas

Moschetta

. A fixed-wing biplane MAV for low speed missions. Int J Micro Air Veh 2009; 1(1): 13–34.

16.

Thipyopas

. Validation of internal micro force balance for micro air vehicle research, Toulouse: Institut Supérieur de l'Aéronautique et de l'Espace, 2009.

17.

Richard D. Impact of loading selection and sequencing on a force balance calibration. In: 25th AIAA aerodyanmic measurement technology and ground tesing conference, San Francisco, 2006, p. 3436.

18.

Reis

MLCC

Castro

Mello

OAF

. Calibration unvertainty estimation of a strain-gage external balance. Measurement 2013; 46: 24–33.

19.

Kammeyer ME and Rueger ML. Estimation of the uncertainty in internal balance calibration through comprehensive error propagation. In: 26th AIAA aerodynamic measurement technology and ground testing conference, Washington, 2008, p. 4029.

20.

L'Institut Aerotechnique. 10-INF balance and 2-INF balance, Toulouse: L'Institut Aerotechnique, 2009.

21.

National Instruments. SCXI-1520 User Manual, 2009.

22.

Kline

Mcclintock

. Describing uncertainties in single-sample experiments. Mech Eng 1953; 75(1): 3–8.

23.

MathWork Company. Matlab & simulink student version R2006a manual, Natick, MA: MathWork, 2006.