The tiltrotor design for urban air mobility (UAM) combines vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) capability with fixed-wing efficiency. However, it confronts challenges posed by downward force due to rotor wake effect. Previous research has employed active flow control, such as blowing air, primarily during forward flight using a single air outlet slot. However, the implications for rotor performance and aero-acoustic characteristics have remained unexplored. The experimental approach in this study involves controlled blowing air with moderate momentum in hover mode, concentrating on rotor performance, download force, noise signature, and the influence of port patterns. It is found that the radial port pattern emerges as pivotal for mitigating downward force and augmenting rotor efficiency. The efficacy of noise reduction hinges on both receiver orientation and port pattern selection. This investigation significantly contributes to understanding the role of blowing effect in optimizing tiltrotor designs, particularly in the context of rotor wake-wing interaction.
BarryFWMagliozziBStandardH (1971) Noise Detectability Prediction Method for Low Tip Speed Propellers. Washington: Report, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
2.
BendatJSPiersolAG (2010) Random Data Analysis and Measurement Procedures. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
3.
ChenMHubnerJP (2021a) Experimental investigation of wing-on-rotor effect at low disk loading and Reynolds number. Journal of Aircraft58(3): 487–496.
4.
ChenMHubnerJP (2021b) Experimental and analytical analysis of rotor-wing interaction in hover for low Reynolds number flow. Journal of Aerospace Engineering34(6): 40021073.
5.
ChenMHubnerJP (2021c) Numerical simulations of single-rotor/wing interaction in hover at low Reynolds number. In: AIAA AVIATION 2021 FORUM, virtual event. Dallas, USA. Reston: American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics, p. 2592.
6.
ChenMCranesDHubnerJP (2019) Experimental investigation of rotor-wing interaction at low disk loading and low Reynolds number. In: AIAA AVIATION 2019 FORUM, Dallas, USA. Reston: American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics, pp. 3034.
7.
ChenMHuaJMaierN, et al. (2023) Acoustic measurements in single-rotor/wing interaction at low disk loading and Reynolds number. International Journal of Aeroacoustics, in press.
8.
ChenMHuaJShenJ, et al. (2024) Tip vortex trajectory and its application in small-rotor/wing interaction. In: AIAA SCITECH 2024 FORUM, Orlando, USA, Reston: American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics, p. 2846.
9.
FelkerFFLightJS (1988) Aerodynamic interactions between a rotor and wing in hover. Journal of the American Helicopter Society33(2): 53–61.
10.
GojonRJardinTParisot-DupuisH (2021) Experimental investigation of low Reynolds number rotor noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America149(6): 3813–3829.
11.
GrifeRDarabaiAWygnanskiI (2002) Download reduction on a three dimensional V-22 model using active flow control. In: 1st AIAA Flow Control Conference, St. Louis, USA, 24–26 June 2002, pp. 3071. Reston: American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics.
12.
GuoZLiuPGuoH (2021) Control effect on deep cavity noise by slanted walls at low Mach numbers. Journal of Vibration and Control27(9–10): 998–1008.
13.
HassanAA (2006) Strategies for tiltrotor airframe download reduction using active flow control. Journal of the American Helicopter Society51(3): 255–265.
14.
JardinTProthinSMaganaCG (2017) Aerodynamic performance of a hovering microrotor in confined environment. Journal of the American Helicopter Society62(2): 1–7.
15.
JohnsonW (2013) Rotorcraft Aeromechanics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
16.
MaierNNarsipurSDetersR (2021) Parametric performance study of the aerodynamics and aeroacoustics of small propellers in static conditions. In: AIAA AVIATION 2021 FORUM, virtual event. Reston: American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics, Vol. 2–6, p. 2223.
17.
MaiselMLaubGMcCroskeyWJ (1986) Aerodynamic Characteristics of Two-Dimensional Wings at Angle of Attack Near-90 Degrees. Washington, DC: Report, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
18.
McCroskeyWJSpalartPHLaubG, et al. (1985) Airloads on Bluff Bodies, with Application to the Rotor-Induced Downloads on Tilt-Rotor Aircraft. Washington, DC: Report, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
19.
McVeighMANagibHWoodT, et al. (2011) Full-Scale flight tests of active flow control to reduce tiltrotor aircraft download. Journal of Aircraft48(3): 786–796.
20.
NardariCCasalinoDPolidoroF, et al. (2019) Numerical and experimental investigation of flow confinement effects on UAV rotor noise. In: 25th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, Delft, The Netherlands, 20–23 May 2019, p. 2497.
21.
RodriguezJEzzineMColletM, et al. (2023) Active noise control with resonant flush-mounted piezoelectric cells in the presence of airflow: wind tunnel experiments. Journal of Vibration and Control online: 1–12.
22.
SilvaGCSilvestreFJDonadonMV, et al. (2018) Active and passive control for acceleration reduction of an aeroelastic typical wing section. Journal of Vibration and Control24(13): 2673–2687.
23.
StalkerACerchieDCullenL, et al. (2004) Using periodic perturbations for download alleviation on tilt-rotor airplane models in hover. In: 2nd AIAA Flow Control Conference. Oregon, USA: Reston: American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics, p. 2515.
24.
StephensonJHWeitsmanDZawodnyNS (2019) Effects of flow recirculation on unmanned aircraft system (UAS) acoustic measurements in closed anechoic chambers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America145(3): 1153–1155.
25.
WelchP (1967) The use of fast Fourier transform for the estimation of power spectra: a method based on time averaging over short, modified periodograms. IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics15(2): 70–73.
26.
WoodTLPeryeaMA (1995) Reduction of tiltrotor download. Journal of the American Helicopter Society40(3): 42–51.
27.
ZhaoGZhaoQLiP, et al. (2021) Numerical investigations for passive and active flow control on tiltrotor-wing aerodynamic interactions. Journal of Aerospace Engineering34(6): 04021094.
