~ AD0428998 Downloaded from Scanned 5/18/2017

~
~

8
ASD-TDR-63-745

~ INVESTIGATION OF STORED ENERGY ROTORS

FOR RECOVERY"

TECHNICAL DOCUMENTARY REPORT No. ASD-TDR-63-745

DECEMBER 1963

FLIGHT DYNA~ ICS LABORATORY

RESEARCH AND TECH TOLOGY DIVISION

AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE; OHIO

Project No. 6065, Task No. 600501

(Prepared under Contract No. AF 33(616)-7544 by

Kaman Aircraft Corporation, Bloomfield, Connecticut)

Confrimed Public via DTIC 5/18/2017

AD0428998 Downloaded from Scanned 5/18/2017

NOTICES

When Government drawings, specifications, or other data are used for any
purpose other than in connection with a definitely related Government procure­
ment operation, the United States Government thereby incurs no responsibility
nor any obligation whatsoever.; and the fact that the Government may have
formulated, furnished, or in any way supplied the said drawings, specifications,
or other data, is not to be regarded by implication or otherwise as in any
manner licensing the holder or any other person or corporation, or conveying
any rights or permission to manufacture, use, or sell any patented invention
that may in any way be related thereto.

Qualified requesters may obtain copies of this report from the Defense
Documentat'ion Center (DDC), (formerly ASTIA), Cameron Station, Bldg. 5,
5010 Duke Street, Alexandria 4. Virginia

This report has been released to the Office of Technical Services, U.S.
Department of C'ommerce. Washington 25. D.d., in stock quantities for sale
to the general public.

Copies of this report should not be returned to the Aeronautical Systems

Division unless return is required by security considerations, contractual
obligations, or notice on a specific, document.

400 - January 1964 - 162 -24-447

Confrimed Public via DTIC 5/18/2017
AD0428998 Downloaded from Scanned 5/18/2017

FOREWORD

This final Technical Documentary Report, Kaman Report

No. R-467, was prepared by Kaman Aircraft Corporation, Bloom­
field, Connecticut, in compliance with requirements of
Contract No. AF33(616)-7544 and Supplemental Agreements 1
through 6. The report covers analytical studies and experimental
tests performed from 13 June 1960 through the completion of the
program.
Work by Kaman Aircraft was conducted under Project No. 6065,
Task 606501, sponsored by the Air Force Flight Dynamics Labora­
tory, Research and Technology Division. Messrs. Robert Tyndall,
Clint Eckstrom, and James H. DeWeese served as the Air Force
Project Officers.
Acknowledgement is made of the technical assistance,
support, and co-operation provided by the personnel at the
Propulsion Wind Tunnel, USAF Arnold Engineering Development
Center, Tullahoma, Tennessee, during the wind tunnel testing
phase, and the USAF 65llth Test Group (Parachutes), El Centro,
California, in performing air drop tests. Messrs. Dean Herron
and Larry Galigher were assigned Project Engineer responsibilities
for the wind tunnel facility. Mr. James Waite was Project
Engineer for the 65llth Test Group.
The program at Kaman Aircraft was under the cognizance of
Mr. D. W. Robinson, Jr., Chief Research Engineer. Messrs.
B. A. Goodale and J. J. Barzda were Project Engineers. Staff
members who contributed significantly to the program included:
Mr. D. Goodridge Avionics Engineer
N.
Mr .. Ham Senior Staff Engineer, Aerodynamics
Mr. R. Hollrock Design Specialist
Mr. D.. LaBarre Avionics Specialist
Mr. R. Mack Chief, Automatic Controls
Mr. H. McIntyre Dynamics Specialist
Mr. E. Schultz Supervisor, Advance Research
Mr. M. Smith Dynamics Analyst
Mr. W. Storer Stress Engineer Specialist

Confrimed Public via DTIC 5/18/2017

ABSTRACT

Analytical studies on the performance, stability, and control

characteristics of rotary-wing decelerators in axial descent, con­
trolled glide flight, and flared landings were performed to investigate
the potential capabilities of stored energy rotor systems for the re­
tardation and controlled recovery of payloads. Rotor parameters such
as diameter, solidity, disc loading, mass, etc., were considerej.
Theoretical predictions are compared with experimental test results.
Wind tunnel tests simulating typical re-entry trajectory altitude
and ~~ic conditions were performed on a rotary-wing decelerator
system, similar in configuration and construction to the free-flight
test rotor system, at speeds from l~ch 0.5 to 3.0 to demonstrate
feasibility of deploying and operating such systems at supersonio
speeds in axial flow and to determine the rotor and governor charac­
teristics for such an operation.
Free-flight drop teats with remotely-controlled rotary-wing
test vehicles launched at subsonic speeds were performed to dem­
onstrate the feasibility of controlled recov9ry, study stability
and response to control, explore the performance potential, and
determine problem areas requir1ne additional research or investi­
gation.
Potential applications for rotary-wing deoelerator systems
were studied. System characteristics are related to mission
requirements.
Conclusions formed on the basis of the analytical studies and
experimental tests are presented and recommendations are made
relative to additional research and applications.

This technical documentary report has been revieued and is

approved.
_/

. >'""A"J7
(... .'.,.1 . . .
'. J_._
. ...,....... _. ",,!
/"
L1
~~
1/'-­
THERON J. BAKER
Vehicle EqUipment Division
AF Flight Dynamics Laboratory

iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE
---
1. INTRODUCTION. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I

2. ANALYTICAL INVESTIGATIONS • • • • • • • • • • • • 5

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 9

A. AERODYNAMIC STUDIES • • • • • • • • • • • • • 11

1. Axial Flight. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 11

2. Glide Flight. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 13

3. Landing............... • • 17

B. STABILITY AND CONTROL • • • • • • • • • • • • 22

I. Subsonic Axial Flight • • • • • • • • • • 22

2. Gliding Flight. • • • • • • • • • • • • • 24

C. RE-ENTRY AND AERODYNAMIC HEATING. • • • • • • 27

1. Trajectories. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 27

2. Unmodulated Entry • • • • • • • • • • • • 29

3. Modulated Entry • • • • • • • • • • • • • 33

3. WIND TUNNEL TESTS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 41

A. INTRODUCTION.. •••• 0 • • • • • • •
• • 41
B. OBJECTIVE................ • • 41

C. CONCLUS IONS • • • • 0
• •
• • • • • • • • • • 41

D. WIND TUNNEL TEST MODEL. • • • • • • • • • • • 42

E. FUNCTIONAL CHECK OF THE MODEL • • • • • • • • 46

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)

PAGE
F. WIND TUNNEL FACILITY. • 48

G. TEST PROCEDURE. .
• 48

H. TEST PROGRAM. • . ·. ..·• 52

I. TEST RESULTS. • ·..........•• 52

J. COMPARISON OF THEORY AND

EXPERIMENTAL DATA • • . . · . . . • 64

4. EXPLORATORY AIR DROP TESTS. ·....• •• 70

A. INTRODUCTION •• ·....• • • 70

B. OBJECTIVE • ·......• • • 70
C. CONCLUSIONS · . . ·.. ·.• 70

D. FLIGHT TEST VEHICLE · • 71

E. FUNCTIONAL TESTS OF THE

FLIGHT TEST VEHICLE . ·..... • , 89

F. TEST FACILITY •• • • • 91

G. TEST PROCEDURE. ·..... • • 92

H. TEST PROGRAM. • · . . . • • • 92

I. AIR DROP TESTS. • · . . · . • • • 94

J. RESULTS . . . . ·.. · . . 117

5. APPLICATION STUDIES ·.. · .120

INTRODUCTION. ·. .120

APPLICATIONS.
.
· . . · · · · · · · · · . . · · • 120

A. RECOVERY APPLICATION.
·····..·· .121

B. DELIVERY APPLICATIONS
· · · · .129

C. RETARDATION
· . . · · · · · · ·
·· .129

D. FUTURE POTENTIAL. · ·· ·· ·· .131

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)

PAGE
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ... • • 132

A. CONCLUSIONS • • . . . . · 132

B. RECOMMENDATIONS 133

REFERENCES .......... 135

APPENDICES I THROUGH V
137
I. ANALYTICAL STUDIES . . . . . . . · 139

II. STABILITY AND CONTROL ANALYSIS . • 177

III. ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT DESIGN 215

IV. RE-ENTRY AND AERODYNAMIC

HEATING STUDIES . . . • . · 239

V. TEST VEHICLE DESIGN INFORMATION . · 255

vi
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

FIGURE PAGE
1 Phases Of Operation During Recovery 4

2 Rotor Drag Coefficient Variation With 6

Advance Ratio
3 Variation Of Rotor Group Weight As A 8
Function Of Rotor Disc Loading And
Solidity
4 Variation Of Blade Inflow As A Function 10
Of Blade Station
5 Required Blade Pitch As A Function Of 12
Inflow
6 Required Thrust Coefficient As A Function 12
Of Inflow
7 Rotor Drag Coefficient Variation With 12
Inflow
8 Variation Of Glide Path Angle With Glide 14
Speed
9 Variation Of Pitch Attitude With Glide 16
Speed
10 Variation Of Required Hub Tilt With Glide 16
Speed
11 Non-Linear Response To A 2~ec Command­ 18
Flare Simulation
12 Trajectory Profile During Flare Maneuver 20
13 Comparison Of Rotor Size And Weight For 21
Vertical And Gliding Autorotative
Descents
14 Stability As A Function Of Rotor Speed 23

15 Analog Flight Simulation Of A ROTOCHUTE 25

(With ASE And No Horizontal Tail)

vii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont'd)

FIGURE PAGE

16 Analog Flight Simulation Of A ROTOCHUTE 26

(With ASE And Horizontal Tail)

17 Variation Of Pitch Attitude With Glide 28

Speed

18 Variation Of Atmospheric Density With 30

Altitude

19 ROTOCHUTE Deceleration At Constant CD 31

Independent Of W/CnA

20 Velocity Boundaries For Modulated Flight 32

21 ROTOCHUTE Trajectory (aE - 90 0 ) 35

22 ROTOCHUTE Trajectory (aE - 10 0 ) 36

23 Drag Coefficient And Coning Angle Versus 37

Time (aE - 90 0 )

24 Drag Coefficient And Coning Angle Versus 38

Time (aE - 100 )

25 Control Of Re-Entry Load Factor With 39

Modulation

26 KRC-6M Model Installation In AEDC Wind 43

Tunnel

27 Internal Details Of The Model 44

28 Ground Test Of KRC-6M Model 47

29 Rotor Test Data 49

30 Model Wind Tunnel Test Drag Force Data 53

31 Variation Of Drag-Force Coefficient With 54

Trajectory Mach Numbers

32 Variation Of Drag-Force Coefficient With 56

Advance Ratio

viii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont'd)

FIGURE PAGE
33 Variation Of Blade Coning Angle With 57
Fc/lt'Ab Ratio
34 Variation Of CDR' Cy , And Cn With Yaw Angle 58

35 Variation Of Governor Spring Force With 60

Advance Ratio
36 Effect Of Dynamic Pressure On Governor 61
Spring Force
37 Effect Of Rotor Solidity On Drag Coefficient 62
38 Model Tare Drag Coefficients 62
39 Time History: Rapid Deployment At M 1.38, 63
93,000 Ft.
40 Time History: Rapid Deployment At M 3.0, 63
118,000 Ft.
41 Comparison Of Theoretical And Experimental 65
CDR At Various Mach Numbers
42 Comparison Of Theoretical And Experimental 66
CDR At Various Tip Speeds And Mach Numbers
43 Comparison Of Theoretical And Experimental 67
Governing Characters
44 Comparison Of Theoretical And Experimental 68
Moment Coefficients
45 KRC-6 Test Vehicle (Original Configuration) 72
46 KRC-6 Rotor Assembly (Deployed) 74
47 KRC-6 Rotor Assembly (Pre-Deployment) 75
48 KRC-6 Body Unit 76
49 KRC-6 Rotor Control System 78
50 KRC-6 Rotor Control Servo Installation 79
51 KRC-6 Body Units 80

ix
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont'd)

FIGURE PAGE

52 Stages Of Fin Deployment 81

53 Ground Control Unit 84

54 Ground Station Transmitter And Power Supply 85

55 Ground Station Receiver And Coder-Decoder 86

Unit

56 Ground Test Rig (Truck Mounted) 90

57 Test Flight Profile 93

58 KRC-G With Modified Nose Cone 97

59 Launcher Device 98

60 No. 5 Test Vehicle After Touchdown 101

61 Helicopter Launching Position 103

62 KRC-G With Horizontal Tail 106

63 Time History Test No. 11 108

64 KRC-G Test Vehicle (Final Configuration) 110

G5 Ground Control Unit (Final Configuration) III

66 Ground Flight Path, Test No. 13 113

67 Time History Test No. 13 114

68 Variation Of Velocities During Cyclic 115

Flare

69 Rotor Performance During Collective Flare llG

(Truck Test Data)

70 Representative Recoverable Systems 122

x
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont'd)

FIGURE P~E

71 ROTOCHUTE Installation For An Atlas-Type 124

Booster

72 ROTOCHUTE Installation For A Mercury-Type 126

Capsule

73 ROTOCHUTE Installation For A Data Capsule 128

74 Telescoping And Flexible Blades 130

75 Blade Parameters 139

76 ROTOCHUTE Parameters 152

77 ROTOCHUTE Velocities 157

78 Velocity Resolutions 158

79 Blade Forces And Velocities 159

80 ROTOCHUTE (With Tail) In Flight, Showing 170

Angle Relationships

81 Variation Of Pitch Attitude With Glide Speed 175

82 Schematic View Of ROTOCHUTE Axis System 17f

83 Diagram Of Autopilot System 190

84 Effect Of Varying Autopilot Gains 194

85 Effect Of Varying Autopilot Gains 195

86 Response To A One-Degree Attitude Command

(~ = .15) 197

87 Response To A One-Degree Roll Command 198

(~ = .15)

88 Response To A One-Degree Attitude Command 199

(~ = 010)

xi
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont'd)

FIGURE PAGE

89 Response To A One-Degree Roll Command 200

(II ... 10)

90 Response To A One-Degree Attitude Command 201

(J! . . . 05)

91 Response To A One-Degree Roll Command 202

(J! = .05)

92 Response To A One-Degree Attitude Command 206

Semi-Rigid Rotor

93 Non-Linear Response To A 23-Degree Attitude 207

Command-Flare Simulation

94 Trajectory Profile During Flare Maneuver 208

95 Non-Linear Response To A 23-Degree Roll 210

Command

96 Comparison Between Response Of ROTOCHUTE 212

With Semi-Rigid Rotor And Free-Flapping

Rotor

97 Autopilot Control System Block Diagram 216

98 Pitch Attitude Block Diagram 218

99 Pitch Channel Autopilot 222

100 Servo System Transfer Function 225

101 Pitch Channel Transfer Functions 226

102 Airborne Rotor Speed Amplifier And Shaper 229

103 Ground Station Rotor Speed Amplifier 230

And Shaper

104 Rotor Speed Readout 231

105 Power, Logic, And Collective Flare 233

Circuitry (Bomb Rack Installation)

106 Power, Logic, And Collective Flare 234

Circuitry (Helicopter Installation)

xii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont'd)

FIGURE PAGE

107 Airspeed Readout Circuit 236

108 Re-Entry Parametric Relationships 244

109 Re-Entry Blade Flow 246

110 Total Heat Input During Re-Entry 250

111 Re-Entry Velocity-Altitude Relationship 254

112 KRC-6 ROTOCIruTE Dimensions (Original 256

Conf igurat ions)

113 KRC-6 ROTOCIruTE Dimensions (Final 257

Configuration)

114 KRC-6 ROTOCIruTE Test Vehicle 258

xiii
LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NUMBER PAGE

1 Summary Of Test Conditions, 50

Transonic Series

2 Summary Of Test Conditions, 51

Supersonic Tunnel Tests

3 Telemetry Data Provisions 88

4 Summary Of Air Drop Tests 95

5 Stability Derivatives For KRC-6 186

6 Trim Conditions For The KRC-6 With 188

Free-Flapping Rotor

7 KRC-6 Physical Parameters 189

8 Autopilot Coupling Derivatives 192

And Optimum Gains

9 Comparison Of Control Required 209

10 Electronic Equipment Gains 215

xiv
LIST OF SYMBOLS

Coefficients in lift and torque force ex­

pressions; suffixed 1, 2, and 3 is an
integrated variation of these coefficients
A Rotor disc area, drag area; sq ft
-A Surface area, sq ft
Lateral tilt of no-feather axis with respect
to the X-Z plane, positive tilted right;
radians or degrees
a Acceleration or deceleration, ft/sec 2
a' Angle between the projection of the rotor
force vector in the plane of symmetry and
the no-feather axis, positive force vector
tilted back; radians or degrees
b Number of blades
b' Angle between the projection of the rotor
force vector on the Y-Z plane and the no­
feather axis, positive vector tilted rightj
radians or degrees
Lateral tilt of tip path plane with respect
to no-feather axis, positive rotor tilted to
right; radians or degrees
Longitudinal tilt of [Link] axis with
respect to the Y-Z plane, positive tilted
forward; radians or degrees
c Blade chord
CD Total drag-force coefficient

CDR Rotor thrust or drag-force coefficient

Cf Skin friction coefficient
CL Lift-force coefficient
~ Blade section normal-force coefficient

xv
LIST OF SYMBOLS (Cont'd)

~o Constant portion of ON
Cn Rotor yawing-moment coefficient
CT Rotor thrust-force coefficient, T/~{nR)2VR2

~ Rotor side-force coefficient

C/C c Critical damping ratio
0 Orag force

Of Parasite drag of non-rotor components

e Blade flapping hinge offset, ft; natural
logarithm

~ 1/2 (e b Sb 0 2 )
F Skin friction parameter
f Equivalent flat plate area, ft 2
Fc Blade centrifugal force, lbs
Fs Governor spring force, lbs
G, g Gravitational acceleration
H Component of R perpendicular to the no­
feather axis along the X-axis, positive
lateral force at hub right; lbs
•
H Energy/area/time
H
• Heat transfer per unit area
h Heat transfer coefficient; distance be­
ween center·of gravity and hub; ft
Energy/area/length distance along trajectory
Rotor polar moment of inertia, slug-ft 2

xvi
LIST OF SYMBOLS (Cont'd)

Ix,Iy,I z Moment of inertia about the X, Y, and Z

axes respectively, slug-ft 2

Kinetic energy

Lift force

1 Rotor blade span; distance between center

of gravity and body aerodynamic center; ft

Rotor blade length behind shock wave, ft

M Mach number; rotor figure of merit

m Mass, slug-ft 2

Rotor total blade mass, slug-ft 2

Aerodynamic pitching moment of fuselage

about the center of gravity, positive nose­

up; ft-Ibs
Longitudinal moment at rotor hub, positive
nose-up moment; ft-Ibs
Lateral moment at rotor hub, positive clock­
wise moment about X-axis; ft-lbs
Moment about X-axis, ft-Ibs
N,n Load factor, T/l'{
n Vehicle motion perpendicular
Initial load factor
Nitrogen molecule
Oxygen molecule
Rotor power, lIP
PNF Plane of no-feathering
p,q,r Incremental change in angular velocities
around X, Y, and Z axes respectively, posi­
tive according to right-hand rule;
radians/second

xvii
LIST OF SYMBOLS (Cont'd)

Q Over-all heat transfer J BTU's; torque at

rotor shaft; ft-Ibs
R Blade radius; resultant rotor force; lbs
RPM Rotor speed J revolutions/minute
rJ rn Radiusj blade span station; ft
r Non-dimensional radius J recovery factor

~ Glide rotor radius J ft

~ Vertical descent rotor radius J ft

Sb Blade area J ft 2

St Tail distance from body center of gravitYJ

horizontal; ft
T Rotor thrust J lbs; temperature; component
of R parallel to the no-feather aXis; lbs
t Time J seconds; blade airfoil thickness J ft

Taw Adiabatic wall temperature

tf Time required for flare J seconds

~ Surface wall temperature

U Total airspeed J ft/sec or mph
uJvJw Component of total airspeed along the XJ
YJ and Z axes J respectively; ft/sec

Up Velocity perpendicular to PNF

Ut Velocity in PNF
V Velocity

VE Re~entry velocity
VO Free-stream velocity

xviii
LIST OF SYMBOLS (Cont'd)

Rotational component of velocity

Vertical rate of descent I ft/sec
W Weight, lbs
W
b Total blade weight l lbs
W
bG Total blade weight l glide descent rotor
W Total blade weight, vertical descent rotor
bV
lV Total blade weight, glide descent rotor
Ra
W
RV Total blade weight, vertical descent rotor
X, Y,Z Principal body axes, a right-handed or­
thogonal axes system with the X, Y, and Z
axes aligned with the body principal axes.
The origin of the axes frame is the center
of gravity of the ROTOCHUTE. The X-axis
is positive forward, the Y-axis is positive
to the right, and the Z-axis is positive
downward. Forces directed along the XI Y,
and Z axes are considered positive. Moments
are positive clockwise about the X, Y, and
Z axes when viewed along the positive di­
rection of the aXis.
Distance from blade hinge to point of action
of resultant blade axial force
Distance from blade hinge to blade center
of gravity
Y Altitude, ft
Re-entry altitude, ft

a Angle between free stream velocity vector

and rotor tip path plane
Fuselage angle of attack, angle between the
projection of the relative wind on the
plane of symmetry and the ROTOCHUTE X-axis,
positive nose-up; radians or degrees

xix
LIST OF SYMBOLS (Cont'd)

Rotor angle of attack J angle between the

flight path and the plane perpendicular

to axis of no-feathering J positive no­

feather axis tilted back; radians or

degrees

Pitch angle J positive nose-uPJ radians

Roll angle J positive blade tip down J radians
Blade flapping or coning angle J angle be­

tween blade and plane perpendicular to

rotor axis of rotation; density-altitude

relation constant

Fuselage angle of sideslipJ angle between

the relative wind and the X-Z plane J posi­
tive nose left J radians or degrees
Flight path angle from horizon;
Ratio of specific heats for air J cp/c v
Tail angle of attack J radians
Non-dimensional offset
Fuselage attitude angle J angle between the
X-axis and the horizontal plane J positive
nose-up; radians or degrees
9 Collective pitch J constant term in Fourier
series expressing blade pitch angle; radians
or degrees
Re-entry angle between flight path and
horizon; degrees
Blade local inflow angle J Up
Axial descent advance ratio J (U/OR)
Glide advance ratio J (U cos a/OR)
Standard air densitYJ slugs/ft 2
a Rotor soliditYJ ratio of blade area to
rotor disc area

xx
LIST OF SYMBOLS (Cont'd)

Differentiation lag constant

Selectric actuator lag

Fuselage roll angle, angle between the

Y-axis and the horizontal line, the Y-Z

plane, positive right roll; radians or

degrees

Inflow angle at blade element in plane per­

pendicular blade span axis, radians
t Rotor blade azimuth angle, zero aft
n,w Rotor rotational speed, radians/sec
Vehicle motion about rotor blade direction

SUBSCRIPTS
b Blade

c Servo-command signal

e Servo error signal

f Fuselage; final condition

L Response with first-order time lag

t Vertical tail

o Steady-state or initial condition

r Rotor

xxi
1. INTRODUCTION

Accomplishments in aerospace endeavors within the past

few years have made possible launchings of manned and in­
strumented aerospace vehicles to high altitudes and earth
orbits. Interplanetary exploration and travel is imminent.
Accurate control, staging, and guidance is possible through­
out the launch, ascent, and orbiting phase of the mission.
Re-entry may be initiated at any desired point in space.
From then on, however, limitations of present-day recovery
systems preclude precise flight path control of the returning
aerospace vehicle during re-entry and at touchdown.
To achieve the desired degree of control over re-entry
sequences and guidance during the terminal phase of space
missions, much interest and effort is being expended in in­
vestigating and developing recovery systems that will provide
safer, more precise and more economical recovery.
Preliminary evaluation of rotary-wing decelerator and
recovery systems reveals potential characteristics and per­
formance capabilities very appropriate for the recovery
function. The stored energy rotor recovery system combines
in one unit the features for initial retardation and stabili­
zation, drag modulation, useful LID glide, maneuverability,
and terminal flare for near-zero velocity touchdown.
Recognizing the importance of this potential, the Aero­
nautical Systems Division established and sponsored the
research program documented herein to demonstrate the feasi­
bility of using stored energy rotor systems for the retarda­
tion and recovery of payloads and investigate capabilities.
The program compared analytically derived performance with
experimental test results.
The experimental test phases of the program involved
extensive use of Kaman Aircraft's demonstrated and proven
ROTOCHUTE* concept, one of the more successful rotary-wing

* Registered Trade Mark

Manuscript released by the author 22 July 1963 for publication

as an ASD Technical Documentary Report

1
decelerator systems. The ROTOCHUTE is a multi-bladed heli­
copter type rotor system providing controlled aerodynamic
retardation in autorotative descent.
Development of the system for aerial delivery of supply
containers from aircraft flying at high speeds and low alti­
tudes began in late 1952 under Office of Naval Research
Contract NOnr 901(00). The result was the ROTOCHUTE decelera­
tor system incorporating a governing mechanism which precludes
rotor overspeed throughout deployment~ retardation, and
descent. With governing, a lightweight rotor system provides
retardation and stable descent over a wide spectrum of opera­
tional speeds.
Numerous configurations involving fixed and telescoping
span blades have since been demonstrated for other applica­
tions. Rotor diameters have ranged from 1 foot to 24 feet,
payloads from 6 pounds to 900 pounds. Prior to the ASD pro­
gram, deployment had been performed from aircraft at speeds
up to 545 knots and 1100 feet altitude, at Mach 0.98 from a
missile, and at Mach 1.2 on a 6"-47 caliber, cannon-fired
flare shell.
Under U.S. Navy sponsorship, Kaman Aircraft also developed
remote control systems for flying unmanned drone helicopters,
and in 1952 successfully demonstrated the feasibility of con­
trolling a helicopter by radio commands from a remote control
station. Further effort, sponsored by Bureau of Naval Weapons,
improved system performance, accuracy~ reliability, and ease
of control.
Capabilities in the above technological areas provided
the natural combination of knowledge and skills required to
develop the remotely-controlled flight test vehicle for the
ASD program experimental tests.
Section 2 of this report summarizes the analytical in­
vestigations performed during the program. The analyses
were directed toward establishing design criteria to derive
optimum performance from a stored energy rotor recovery sys­
tem and to provide guidance in the design of the test systems.
The effects of rotor diameter, solidity, disc loading, and
other parameters on performance, stability~ and control were
investigated. Glide flight studies were limited to subsonic
speeds. Axial flow operation at supersonic speeds was studied
and early results were encouraging enough to initiate the
wind tunnel tests.

Section 3 covers the program wind tunnel test phase. The

wind tunnel test objectives are delineated and the KRC-6M test
rotor system and pre-tunnel test checkout are described o Test
procedures, data, and results from the runs in the Transonic
Circuit (Mach 0 05 to Mach 1 05) and Supersonic Circuit (Mach 1 0 6
to Mach 3.0) ill Arnold Engineering Development Center's Propul­
sion Wind Tunnel Facility, Tullahoma, Tennessee, are presented.
Test data are compared with performance predicted analytically.
Section 4 deals with the free-flight air drops conducted
at the U.S. Air Force 65llth Test Group (Parachutes) Facility
at El Centro, Californiao The KRC-6 test vehicle and pre­
flight ground testing are described. The individual drops are
discussed and results analyzed.
Preliminary design considerations, requirements, and capa­
bilities of rotary-wing decelerator systems relative to potential
applications in various types of recovery missions are discussed
in Section 50
Conclusions based on the analytical investigations and ex­
perimental test results are presented in Section 6. Also
included ill the section are recommendations for follow-on re­
search alld development to realize the full potential of stored
energy rotor systems for recoveryo

',,"" . _'"..,;}'".. ~=' __~A.."".dM>~'"-.'d1-I\\ii\!i!;\"f"~..:mm:tIl:~¥¥'[Link]·Ynrt''j'¥ft*'i&&2&lr·:tf1tltfr"'"· ' cJTW

9¥'*fi&5W¥4iif7¥nWitHf'16ft5ntf:'i:"~wW?tl'mMer =rna z

POTENTIAL IffPERSONIC DEPLOYMENT

( POTENTIAL DRAg & LID MODULATION REGIME

... ~
~ ~LOW SUPERSONIC DEPLOYMENT

--::::::r, AXIAL DECELERATION

::;;:>
REGIME

BEGIN STALLED GLIDE

/'1
/ I
~
/ I
// I
,. I f BEGIN UNSTALLED GLIDE

I
t CYCLIC FLARE
G1.1 DE Mil.Y PHOCIi:ED
IN illN DIRECTION

INITIATE COLLECTIVE FLAnE ____

PH1'1.8B3 OF OP~RATION DURING RECOVERY

FIGUIlE 1

.. __ __ d E .& 2 L & 2 t I! £ a 1 II. .1111 a • J alf 51. r

2. ANALYTICAL INVESTIGATIONS

Application of rotary-wing decelerators to the recovery of

space vehicles involves consideration of a variety of flight con­
ditions and design compromises. A typical recovery flight profile
is presented in Figure 1. Two possible initial conditions are
indicated. One involves deployment at hypersonic speeds shortly
after re-entry into the earth's atmosphere, and subsequent varia­
tion of the rotor drag and LID ratio to achieve an optimum
trajectory with respect to deceleration, heating, and guidance.
More detailed studies are needed to accurately estimate the
aerodynamics and heat protection requirements of such a rotor.
Recovery for immediate applications is based on deployment at
supersonic speeds involving limited heating.

Deployment of a ROTOCHUTE system is initiated by applying

coning, pitch, and sweep to the rotor blades by means of the
deployment mechanism to generate an acceleration torque about the
rotor axis of rotation. Deployment time is a function of the
above parameters.

The phase following deployment involves axial deceleration

of the vehicle until it assumes a near-vertical attitude descent.
During this time, the rotor accelerates to the equilibrium rota­
tional speed prescribed by the governor. Rotational speed control
is obtained by varying blade pitch angle to maintain equilibrium
autorotational torque for any flight condition.

At high inflow velocities, the rotor blades are completely

stalled over the entire span and act as drag plates. In this
condition, the rotor drag or retardation force is largely de­
pendent on the rotor blade area. Limited glide during this phase
may be initiated by tilting the rotor disc relative to the ve­
hicle to generate a horizontal component of the rotor drag force.
A terminal glide condition at a given altitude results when a
balance is attained between the vehicle vertical aerodynamic
forces and vehicle weight, and between the vehicle horizontal
rotor forces and vehicle drag. Gliding velocities are largely
dependent upon the vehicle system equivalent flat plate drai area
and rotor disc loading.

BLADE PARTIAL STALL REGIME

1.3
I I

----
BLADE FULL STALL REGIME
-,
I
,J. ~\ : . - - --- . - -_._-- - ------- _. - -- "---
1.4 - -_._._-,.~

"--"--"--~--

p:;

~
If I~ \ VALID TO MACH NO. 0.75
1.2
I --- - -

E-4
;
I
~ I
1-4
C)

1-4

1.0 --- - - _.. _-- - - - -

----+---- - - - - - - - - - - '------- -- -

en r=.c
r=.c
~
a
<;)
.u :~~--\ ..... - -- - -- ---- --- ----- - - -
C) I
a- - • 20
d I:- .a::_.""" ,~
I

<:
r~
Q
.0
:~ !\\~ ----

............ Vir a--. 10

!r
8 -
8 - ~0
0
C
0

~a
/
,1

"~"----
~
.II
• x

I-f
I
l
~

.2

o
I
0.5
......

-- 1.0
/
I

1.5
-

2.0
I

i
- --

2.5
-.
II
l-
--
3.0
-- --- --""'I

3.5 4.0

ADVANCE RATIO, Ad AXIAL FLIGIIT SPEED

ROTOn TIP SPEED
ROTOR DRAG COEFFICIENT VARIATION WITH ADVANCE RATIO

FIGURE 2
Rotor blades become "unstalled" over the major portion of
the span when the inflow velocity becomes low relative to blade
tip speed. The altitude at which this transition occurs is
influenced by the rotor blade loading and tip speed o A much
shallower glide is now possible from this altitude down to the
landing area o The rotor is operating in a condition comparable
to that of a helicopter with power off.

For landing, the horizontal velocity of the vehicle may be

reduced to near-zero by tilting the rotor disc aft relative to
its equilibrium glide attitude by a specified amount and at a
specified rate o This maneuver is called the "cyclic flare".
The vehicle will now be sinking at a rate dependent upon the
rotor disc loading.

The final flight phase prior to ground contact uses the

rotational energy of the rotor to decelerate the vehicle to
near-zero impact velocityo "Collective flare" is performed by
rapidly increasing blade pitch collectively to near-stall values
to generate maximum lift. The rotor RPM will drop off during
the "flare". The amouut of rotor rotational energy is a func­
tion of the sinking speed subsequent to the cyclic flare.

Typical ROTOCHUTE drag characteristics in axial flight are

shown in Figure 2 as a function of the advance ratio (Ad), the
ratio of axial descent speed to rotor tip speed. For a selected
rotor tip speed, the maximum drag coefficient is realized at
lower descent speeds with lower rotor solidities o At higher
axial descent speeds, the drag coefficient increases with the
rotor solidity. Therefore, a compromise is required in the
choice of blade solidity for a particular application, including
the consideration that blade weight generally increases with
increasing solidity. Coning of the blades, dependent upon blade
inertia characteristics and tip speed, influences the resultant
drag at high advance ratios.

Terminal descent velocity of a ROTOCHUTE may be expressed

by:
W/A

For sea level conditions and CDR = 1.4

Vv = 25 vi W/A

"m.... '-""~"""""""'=. ~'IoI<lW~....,~~l~"""+'\l ... ..il~~~'[Link];:"W~!SOl>~S-f!lj;j1iL\

'·"JW,;;,;;;;F·~~~,,'·¥:JiW'F--·1:iWfItf?!!J'JllIlilI~A''iI:iI g'eVWl!!'ilil:',lI!c M ~'U\!14 n ''i''

16
t=-
St:
~
r:1e,:, 14
""
'\ ,"'-. <Y = : .15
~ r-(J =
~1-4
r:1 ~ .10
~~ 12 ....... .05
V~
0-­
00 000
ex:rIJ

e,:,g
ex:e,:,

~~
10
"
""'­ ~
..............
~ t-......
---....... 1//
/
-
0­
8
J
ex:

o 2 4 G 8 10
DISC LOADING, W/A - LBS/[Link].

yARIATION OF ROTOR GROup WEIGHT AS A FUNCTION O~

ROTOR DISC LOADING & SOLIDITY
FIGURE 3

,..iJ....ihli. .J6!@U lUlU llJ@m niiaa. U% 2M! t, .4£&

Choice of the rotor disc loading is, therefore, determined
by the desired descent velocity, rotor size consideration, and
weight limitation.

Approximate rotor group weight variation with disc loading

and rotor solidity is presented in Figure 3 for gross weights
in the 6,000- to 12,OOO-pound range. The curves were determined
from the helicopter weight formula of Reference 1, reduced by
20 per cent to account for advances in the state-of-the-art and
the fact that a ROTOCHUTE rotor is not shaft-driven. The approxi­
mation includes the weight of rotor blades, retention fittings,
hub assembly, and control linkages.

The successful operation of the rotarY-Wing decelerator is

predicated OIl its ability to operate in new environments and
high velocity inflow. The following paragraphs discuss the
analytical studies perforrraed to determine the aerodynamic per­
formance and stability of rotary-wing decelerators in the
various flight modes.

SUMMARY O~' ANALYSES

The analyses indicated that controlled recovery of payloads

with rotary-wing decelerators is feasible. No basic technical
problem areas were encountered.

The analyses indicate that rigid blade rotors, at least,

may be deployed and operated at snpersonic speeds early in the
re-entry for retardation and stabilization. As an example, a
rotor for a Mercury-·type capsule would develop up to 10,000
pounds drag force at Mach Z.O speed and 100,000 feet altitude.
The drag force could ~e modulated to lower values for trajectory
coutrol by controlling rotor tip speeds which, in turn, con­
trol blade coning. For example, coning the blades to 45 0 would
change the drag force to approximately 5,000 pounds.

Rotor systems alone have potential glide LID ratios of

five or better, depending on the blade profile and rotor system
parasite drag characteristics. The addition of a payload body
decreases the glide capability, but glides at LID ratios 2.5
to 3.0 are very feasible. Glide at LID ratio of 3.0 from 25,000
feet altitude would provide apprOXimately 15 miles range in
still air.

""2&~Wt"tn*f~t¥&·\-ttR'¥52itfiffl"'~4~**~tt';;12W~~4'''*Mf&V~'!eWMi'fw~.;trtil6Wf.'t"riif'¥'l&rwifffijjMt?tftwrtW1trititffltit1l1ft%ti¥t~"':ftnttrt1stHtft'tn;ftiegret_neff? iN" ""'nw' tX":'l TTrEnT?; wrrmr-r·rnnr 'Tt' fMt' rrtr n .,.. ~. !'rarGr?

.12
AA = .177

.10

i"( • 0('
u
I
~ ..
~.-
­
S
....
0
z~
I-t
.00 ------­ .. I _ _ - - - - - . -·1-­
------­

r.,
6,-'
~ .0"1
P-1

.02

o .2 • J'l .0 .8 LO
BLADE 3TATION/~PiI.N - ria
ViHUATION OF BLADE IHl"LOW liS Ii FUNCTION OF BLADE SThTION

l~IGunE 4
Although rotor systems may not always be inherently stable,
they are controllable manually or with automatic stabilization
systems. Guidance control may be manual or remote. Programming
a mission is feasible. Additional studies for a better under­
standing of inherent stability and parametric effects are required.
Although it is best to design for rates of descent approxi­
mately 50 to GO feet per second from the rotor size and weight
consideration, lower descent rates are possible with larger
diameter rotors.
Impact velocities, in the order of five feet per second or
less, are feasible through cyclic and collective flare retardation.
It is recognized that pilot proficiency is an important factor
during the maneuver; but control requirement characteristics for
the maneuver may be determined through tests and used for pro­
grammed automatic landings.
A. AERODYNAMIC STUDIES
I. Axial Flight Model
a. Unstalled Regime
In this regime, near-terminal or steady-state descent, only
the inboard portion of rotor blades is stalled. In the usual
helicopter notation, this mode of operation borders the windmill
brake and vortex ring states. Induced velocity in this regime
is greater than or equal to half the descent velocity.
The lack of uniform inflow along the rotor blade span pre­
cludes the use of standard helicopter theOry in predicting the
rotor performance. Instead, a "strip analysis" must be performed.
A number of stations along the blade span are analyzed.
Since the net shaft torque in Rutorotation is zero, inflow at
the various stations may be determined by iteration for particu­
lar value of axial flow velocity and assumed blade pitch. Then,
rotor thrust may be calculated. Details regarding the t~trip
analysis" and analytical steps are presented in Appendix 1.
Results of analyses for the KRC-6 rotor system have been
plotted. Figure 4 indicates the variation of inflow along the
blade span for various advance ratios. Lack of uniformity of
the inflow is very evident for all advance ratios studied.
Figures 5 and 6 show the near-linear variation of blade pitch
and thrust with descent velocity. Blade pitch is thus a suitable
parameter for positive governing in axial flight. Figure 7 pre­
sents the calculated drag-force coefficient at various descent
velocities in the tlunstalled" regime under study.

11
l~~
6 i
,1
ri1
~ ./ !
~ 4 /"
r:.::
t:;l
I:Ll
Q ./
V .
2

~
""
0 I
.10 .12 .10:;, .16 .1 o
'-'

FIGm~E 5

. 1 ...
f)

.10

.00
.10 .12 .1,< .1& .18

l' IGlJi~:3 C

1. ·15

-'--'1
i
I
I I:
i -l--t--Tl
'If"
1 .-.).)
t--1--r----- ---r­ r
:
i

I
I
_.. i
i
,

1.30
r•
.10 .12 • 1,:1: • l v .1[;

[Link],\NCE l~LTIO - Aq

FIGtreE '7

12
b. Stalled Regime
At higher advance ratios and inflow, the rotor blades be­
come completely stalled. A different analytical approach is
used for this regime. Blade section characteristics, expressed
as a function of local angle of attack, are used. The analysis,
discussed in detail in Appendix 1, covers operation of a rotor
with offset flapping hinges from subsonic to hypersonic speeds.
Governor operation and requirements for rotor rotational equi­
librium are included.
In the stalled regime, rotor drag is more a variable of
blade frontal area, i.e. solidity and coning, rather than rotor
rotational speed.
Caclulated performance is presented and compared with ex­
perimental test results in Section 3, Wind Tunnel Tests.
2. Glide Flight
a. Low Subsonic Speed Glide
Analytical studies of glide were restricted to glide at low
advance ratios because the regime represented the program's
prime area of interest. The performance and trim calculations
for glide at low advance ratios are based on conventional equa­
tions of equilibrium and data from Reference 2. Details of
the analysis are found in Appendix 1.
Because the charts in Reference 2 did not yield desired
accuracy for the range of parameters investigated, the relevant
equations were programmed on an IBM digital computer and new
charts were developed. The equilibrium equations were written
with three degrees of freedom, with and without the effects of
a horizontal trim surface.
Trim data was calculated for various equivalent flat plate
areas for eight-foot and ten-foot diameter rotors.
Vehicle glide path angle (~ ) variation is shown in
Figure 8. It will be noted that the glide path angle with re­
spect to the horizon is better with the larger rotor. The glide
angle is also affected by the vehicle equivalent flat plate
area. The glide becomes steeper with increasing equivalent flat
plate area. For a given rotor, optimum glide occurs at lower
advance ratios with increasing flat plate area.

13

~~~~~~T"~~~v'~~,.·mz'~ :

2
8 ft , f= 5 ft ..-- D = 10 f t, f = 5 f t 2
8 f= 7.5 / - D ;;; 10 f = 7.5
= 8 f= 10 / ~D = 10 f = 10
\ \ \
z
0
N
I-l
p:: 20
g
:=l
0
p::

IZ4

tIJ
I':J:l 25
rz1

.......
p::
~
rz:l
~
I

>­. 30 I ".r
71 " "
77 ::::;;;;00/--- --.=-.......
~
~
<x:
~
I-l
35
..:l .10 .15 .20 • 2t;v .30
t.:)

ADVANCE RATIO (GLIDE) - ~

VARIATION OF GLIDE PATH ANGLE WITH GLIDE

SPEED Fon 8 & 10 FOOT DIAMETER ROTons liND
VARIOUS EQUIVALENT FLAT PLATE AREAS, f
FIGURE 8
Figure 9 presents the test vehicle pitch attitude variation
with advance ratios. An almost linear variation is noted at
advance ratios greater than 0.15 and is significant from a sta­
bility viewpoint. Its relevance is discussed under Stability
and Control.
Rotor hub tilt requirements are indicated in Figure 10.
In general, the control requirement is less with the larger
rotor or at higher body drag for the flight test vehicle con­
figuration studied.
b. Supersonic Glide Flight
The capability for supersonic glide is a desirable means of
extending the glide range of rotary-wing recovery systems. If
feasible, supersonic glide could be initiated at high altitude
during a re-entry trajectory. A typical glide trajectory could
be characterized by three flight regimes.
I. High supersonic glide where the rotational tip

speeds are small compared to flight speeds.

~-
2. Transonic glide where the rotational tip speeds
and flight speeds are approximately of the same
order. Flow conditions in this regime are com­
plex.
3. Subsonic glide where rotational tip speeds are

high compared with the flight speeds. Flow con­

ditions generally are subsonic or near subsonic.

A rotor designed for optimum operation in Condition HI"

must also operate efficiently in Condition "3", and be capable
of at least passing through the transient Condition "2".
The supersonic analysis performed during the present in­
vestigation has concentrated on the axial flight condition,
with the glide maneuver being treated in a qualitative manner.
Certain general conclusions have been formed relative to
supersonic glide. First, from an aerodynamic heating standpoint,
the supersonic gliding rotor is more critical than the rotor
operating at the same stagnation temperature in axial flow.
In axial flow, the free stream is approaching the blade in a
nearly perpendicular direction, and the blade is equivalent to

15

2 2

D=8 ft, f=5 ft ---. 1=5 ft

D=8 f=7.5 f=7.5

(,') D=8 £=10 f=10

r:1
~
........
,
c.=l 0
ril
Q

~
§ -10
E-l
1-4
E-l
E-l
~

:r:
C,) -20
E-l
1-4
Q.r

Ei0
P:l -30 --­
.10 .15 .20 .25 .30

ADVANCE HATIO (GLIDE) -).I

FIGURE 9

D=u0 f....L f 5 ft 2 D= 10 ft , f =5 f t
2
t 10 ~\\
, ~

D=8 f:7.5 r-D=10

\
f=7.5 t 10
\
\

t1

2
- ::-­ -­
~
\\
~
~
\

-t-­
--­ . -

'~ -=:::::::--:::::::::::: -
~104
o I
-
.10 .15 .20 .25 .30
[Link] Hfl'I'IO (GLIDZ) - A
:FIGURj~ 10

16

a very blunt body. The boundary layer velocity gradient near

the blunt body is low, hence heat transfer is low. Also, there

is considerable material to conduct and distribute the heat.

These beneficial considerations are lost in the gliding rotor.

In the gliding rotor, the stagnation point is located on the

relatively sharp leading and trailing edges. For extended glide,

it is estimated that the blade skin temperature would approach

85-88 per cent of the stagnation temperature.

Second, the use of higher harmonic cyclic pitch control

appears to have considerable merit. At high supersonic speeds,
the retreating blade is in a completely reversed flow field.
Second harmonic cyclic control can be phased to result in nega­
tive blade pitch angles on the retreating blade at an azimuth
angle of 270 degrees. Hence, the retreating blade can be used
to generate lift in the reversed flow region. With second har­
monic control, means must be provided for removing the higher
harmonic control for advance ratios less than one.
Four-bladed rotors would have to be used to minimize "two­
per-rev" vertical vibration. The vibration generated with
two-bladed rotors would most likely be unacceptable.
Third, during the experimental wind tunnel program, the
8-foot rotor was tested at Mach numbers of from 0.5 to 3.0.
During this program, the rotor angle of attack was varied up to
9.5 degrees from pure axial flight. Side forces were measured
at the supersonic speeds which corresponded to low LID glide.
At Mach numbers up to 3.0, there was no indication of any prob­
lems with low LID glide. However, it should be emphasized that
the variation in rotor angle of attack was very restricted and
results should not be generalized.
3. Landing
The stored energy of the ROTOCHUTE is composed of the po­
tential energy due to altitude and the kinetic energy due to
velocity of the mass, plus the rotational energy in the rotor.
Use can be made of this energy in arresting the horizontal and
vertical velocity just prior to touchdown. The kinetic energy
of translation is used for the cyclic flare, while the rotational
energy in the rotor is the energy source for the collective flare.

17

it
fi­ sec
::t:=:-------------------.::::-_-_-_
e - rad. ::: ~
0.2
I

o -I....L _

Ooll ~
op:P~ -~-
-0.1
. . .

0.2

<P- racl. 0 ~ .~--=~~--~==--------~--

-0.2 ...;

0.2

f~IZ - rad. 0.1

0.3

'6 - rad. 0 ~
.r-------­
-0.3
0.2
J
Sf - rad. 0

-0.2
j ----,..----,--,----'---,--T----' --Y-I- - - r - - j

o 12 -1 0 8 10
TIME IN SECONDS

NON-LINEAR RESPONSE TO 11 23° Be COMMflND-l"LilRE SIMULATION

FIGURE 11

18
a. Cyclic Flare
The glide regime analysis was extended to a "cyclic flare"
maneuver. It was deemed best to study the maneuver by simulation
on a PACE Analog Computer. During the non-linear cyclic flare
simulation of the ROTOCHUTE, derivatives varying significantly
with advance ratio were programmed on function multipliers. The
servo-motors associated with the function multipliers were
driven by the advance ratio (~) voltage. With this setup, it
was possible to simulate cyclic flare maneuvers where large speed
variations were encountered.
Figure 11 presents a simulated cyclic flare maneuver. The
initial trim forward speed was 76 feet per second (~ = 0.16).
The technique used in performing the flare was to command a 23­
degree nose-up pitch attitude command. Following this command,
the forward speed dropped off in a linear manner. At a forward
speed of about 8 feet per second, the attitude command was re­
moved. At this point,collective pitch was increased prior to
touchdown. The complete maneuver was performed in about 9 sec­
onds. The lateral ASF. appeared capable of satisfactorily con­
trolling roll attitude and heading during this maneuver. Lateral
commands could be applied, if desired, to further reduce the
roll excursion.
Figure 12 presents a plot of the trajectory profile during
the flare maneuver. The divergence in flight path angle is
apparent for t >6 seconds. The flare maneuver was initiated at
an altitude of 85 feet and required a ground distance of 330
feet to arrest forward speed. The attitude command was for a
23-degree nose-up pitch attitude.
b. Collective Flare
The "collective flare" maneuver may be employed to retard
the vertical rate of descent. Stored rotational energy of the
rotor is used to generate increased rotor drag or lift just prior
to impact by powering the rotor momentarily with the blades set
at an optimum high pitch.
If the maneuver is performed after glide and cyclic flare,
the vertical descent will already have been partially retarded,
leaving less work to be performed by the rotor. However,
"collective flare" from vertical axial descent may be desirable
in certain applications. Comparative studies of the two modes,
presented in Appendix I, were performed. Results indicate that,

19

10

c,~
,....
sec
E-i 1. 0 sec 2.0 3.0

~
r~
4.0

~
G

z
H ~ 5.0
~
0
:::>
Ll ~ G.O
---

~
E-i
t-)
H
0 E-i
,-1 2
<t:
---
~ 9.0
0
I
0 L;O no 120 lGO 200 2"40 280 320

HOllIZONTAL DL>TAHCE IN FEET

[Link] PI~OFILE [Link] FLf..RZ wunmVEn

FIGUTIE 12
2. 0

1-­ .-- f-­

E-4
Z
GRC SS WE IGHT 10-10c o LB~
r:1 E-4 1. 0

-
U Z
CIJ r:1
r:1 U
0 CIJ
: - - I--­
;
...:l ~
~
u
1-1 ~ 1. '"
,.

LB~ .----­
°(...--­
E-4
p::: ...:l GRC SS Wl IGHT 10,OC (...--- """"'"
r:1
>
p:::
"p::: f----­ ~
~
0
~
~
. ~
~ 1. A ~~
~ ;; ~

""
1-1
1-1 r:1 ~
~
r:1 ~
~
I

S ~
E-4 0 .,.
g I:::: 1.
90( FPS (Limi t)
--_. ::: INC REASI NG TI P SPE ED
;::; -­
"" I
1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0

HOTOR DIAMETER FOR VERTICAL DESCENT

ROTOR DIAMETER FOR GLIDE DESCENT

COMPARISON OF REQUIRED ROTOR SIZE AND WEIGHT

FOR VERTICAL AND GLIDING AUTOROTATIVE DESCENTS

FIGURE 13

21

if collective flare is performed after a vertical descent,

rather than after glide and cyclic flare, the rotor must
be larger and heavier than a gliding rotor.
The results of the analyses are plotted in Figure 13.
For gross weights up to 1000 pounds, a rotor to be flared
from vertical descent will be at least 1.2 larger in
diameter and 1.73 times heavier than a rotor flared from
glide. For the 10,000-pound range, the vertical descent
rotor will be approximately 1.08 larger and 1.38 heavier.
If the diameters are reduced, tip speeds increase above
the 900 feet per second limit.
The use of auxiliary rotor power devices would improve
the comparison considerably at the expense of increased
complexity and probably some penalty in rotor weight and/or
size.
B. STABILITY AND CONTROL
1. Subsonic Axial Flight
Actual tests have shown that flight instabilities of
ROTOCHUTES in axial flight may be of two modes: "spiral mode",
corresponding to the phugoid (long-period, lightly damped)
mode in conventional aircraft terminology, in which the
flight path is a helix and the body axes remain essentially
aligned; and a nwobble mode" in which the body axes wobble
but the flight path is linear. It is, of course, possible
for both types of instability to occur simultaneously.
Analytical methods have now been developed which
identify these modes for a particular configuration. These
methods were used to produce Figure 14 which indicates
stability trends for the test vehicle with an 8-foot diameter
rotor.
Each curve of the figure represents the variation of
a root of the perturbation characteristic equation. If any­
one of these roots indicates a negative damping ratio, an
instability is indicated. If the root frequency is high,
the instability is a wobble mode; if low, it is a spiral mode.

22

D = 8 Ft.
W = 280 Lbs.
I y = 52 Slug-Ft.

1. 0 r----=t::.:~;;;;;;;;;;;;;o--tT-e---t_---~~-____j

- WOBBLE MODE

• 8 1-------+-------1------+--------1---------i

.6
u~
0
SPIRAL MODE
1-4
E-4
.4
~
d
;z; (+)
1-4

~
<: .2
t:l

O'--- --lo _----L-

..... ...l­ ---J

700 900 1100

(-) ROTOR SPEED - RPM

STABILITY AS A FlrnCTION OF ROTOR SPEED

FIGURE 14

23

Figure 14 indicates that, between 800 and 1100 RPM,

the ROTOCHUTE will be free from both spiral and wobble in­
stability. Above 1100 RPM, a tendency toward spiral is
indicated by the lower curve which is approaching the nega­
tive region. It is not yet clearly understood to what extent
each parameter affects stability, and additional study effort
in this area is required. During the experimental tests, it
was demonstrated that an unstable configuration can be sta­
bilized with automatic stabilization equipment. Also, con­
figurations have been built which are inherently stable.
Analytical methods used for determining axial flight
stability are presented in detail in Appendix I. Standard
helicopter procedure is not applicable because of lack of
uniform inflow to the rotor. The analysis uses the "Strip
Analysis" previously discussed.
2. Gliding Flight
Since inflow in forward flight beyond a certain minimum
advance ratio may be considered uniform, standard heliocpter
theory is applied. Such an application has been used in
Appendix II, where the force and moment derivatives required
in the equations of motion are listed in terms of flapping
derivatives. Appendix II also includes the equations of
motion based on the Automatic Stabilization Equipment (ASE)
used in the flight test vehicle. Trimmed perturbation equa­
tions and the ASE equations were programmed onto the computer.
Flight was simulated by giving the vehicle an initial
(trim) value of glide velocity (~) and then a command atti­
tude signal (9) through the ASE. The ASE then commands the
hub tilt angle (BIZ) necessary for stable flight. Investi­
gations were performed for a vehicle with and without a
horizontal trim tail surface.
The results are shown in Figures 15 and 16 and indicate
that, with and without a horizontal tail, the ROTOCHUTE is
stable in axial flight with ASE. In this flight mode, the
pilot command (9) and BIZ are zero when there is no tail~
With a tail, the ABE automatically sets BIZ at a negative
value to counteract the tail effect.

24

I
B1
Z
, i\
- -­ I
I I
I
I
I

I
I <9 c
,
I
- I
I

-
I V '-. e I
I I

w
i SPEED
1---r----..--n~CREAS-I-N-G-·~

DYNAMI CJ\LLY

STABL'

I START I u

ANALOG FLIGHT SIMULATION OF A ROTOCHUTE

(WITH A.S.E. AND NO HORIZONTAL TAIL)

FIGURE 15

25
w

t- D~A._M_I_C_A_LL_Y_ . 1 ", SPEED ~ .­

. STABLE INCREASING

~; ~~~~l:-:::::::~------'l
1

1--:"'-: ,..-==::::ST:::::A=:RT:::::_::::::__ u

I
ANALOG FLIGHT SIMULATION OF A [Link]
(WITH A.S.E. AND HORIZONTAL TAIL)

FIGURE 16

26

After a short period in axial flight, the system was

put into forward flight by a pilot command (9), the minimum
necessary. Although the total BIZ is approximately the
same for both cases because of the initial negative BIZ re­
quired with a tail, the net forward BIZ required is less
than that without a tail. Both with and without the tail,
the velocities (u and w), and the advance ratio, ~, increase
continuously, but do not oscillate. The lack of oscillation
indicates stability, but the continuous velocity increase
indicates a static speed unbalance.

3. ASE Feedback

Of special interest is the fact that pitch attitude is

used as a feedback signal to the ASE. Plotted as a function
of advanced ratio (~), the pitch attitude, (9), is shown
in Figure 17 for configurations with and without a tail.
Between ~l and ~2, pitch attitude is not a good indication
of speed. At these moderate values of advance ratio, the
system, controlled by an ASE which has this unstable atti­
tude signal for feedback, will be speed unstable. The
unstable range of ~ is approximately from 0.025 to 0.15 for
both configurations.

It was pointed out in the glide flight discussion that

above ~ - 0.15, the pitch attitude is a single-value func­
tion of ~~ Thus the system will be speed stable for ~ >0.15.

c. RE-ENTRY AND AEROD~~AMIC HEATING

1. Trajectories

The re-entry phase was investigated as a prelude to the

study of aerodynamic heating that a rotor would be subjected
to in such a mode of operation. The rotor was used in axial
flight as a constant and variable area drag device to re­
tard a re-entry vehicle until a relatively low speed is
reached and glide operation may begin.

Two distinctive types of entry were considered: the

modulated and the non-modulated type entry. In the case of
the non-modulated entry, the rotor was held fully open for
the duration ~f the entry. This is equivalent to a constant
area drag dev1ce. At high supersonic speed the drag co­
efficient remains essentially constant, the~efore, the system
has a constant equivalent flat plate drag area, CnA.

27

I I '" r I

WITH TAIL
WITHOUT TAIL
&i +8
~

~
I +4

<D
.I .. ;"
(
» IL-----<" "\ I I

~~
.. .< ..
.. 0 I .. I I
V I
-< :
! -4 I
:, 4i:
, '>J
::r: __ __
--~-==t
ex,)
u
t-t ~
E-i
Po. -8 I
--=t
.05 .10 .... 5

o
ADVANCE RATIO (GLIDE) - u

VARIATION OF PITCH ATTITUDE WITH GLIDE SPEED

FIGURE 17
For the modulated entry, the rotor area was varied by
coning the blades back so as to control the deceleration o
The vehicle was permitted to enter the atmosphere with the
rotor fully open until a predetermined deceleration was
reached. At that point, the rotor was coned in a manner to
produce constant deceleration o
The altitude-time, velocity-time and deceleration data
was calculated using the motion analysis of Reference 3,
The assumptions are that (1) the force of gravity and cen­
trifugal acceleration are negligible as compared to the
aerodynamic drag force, and therefore the trajectory is
assumed to be a straight line; and that (2) the atmospheric
air density varies exponentially with altitude. For assump­
tion (1) to hold, the entry angle has to be greater than SO
(Reference 4).
The air density was assumed to vary exponentially with
altitude. The relationship is given in Reference 3 as:

e= Q 0 e
-~y
:: .0034 e "
'z'[Link]

Figure 18 shows density versus altitude for the above

equation. The air density of the ARDC model atmosphere is
shown for comparison.
All trajectory calculations assume that the earth's
atmosphere ends at 250,000 feet altitude, i.e o air density
above that altitude is negligible o Consequently, the initial
entry condttions are established at this altitude o
2. Unmodulated Entry
The pertinent equations for unmodulated entry are given
in Reference 3 and presented in Appendix IV. The following
expression for deceleration in unmodulated entry is the
final derivation o

n
=
~g ( Vi
V )2. V
lnVi
The equation shows that for unmodulated entry the de­
celeration is a function only of speed and flight path angle o
Figure 19 shows the results of solving the equation for

29

r - - - - , - - - y - - - r - - - - - - r - - - - - - -.......--, 100

r - - - - - --_.... - - - ­ -+------.­ - - - _ . - .. _---~

- PI - .QQMfL--22oooJ 60
---=-=-=.j - I

1956 -A!RDC-MOD /
_ _---.--_~A""T_*'M
....Q sEHE.U
50
40
30
I
- - 1 - - - - - - - - ; - ; r - - - - - - - t-
1
-==----1-­
6
20
x '10 I
! I
10 r------+---------'\T----;---------+I-------I 10
-----tI -"-' ---------;,----rr-i-~·-----+----
6
5 --·---in--------+---~-_+J_-_-
__ ==_=~+-----l g
' -----+--1
4 f---------t--------'--­ . I 4
3 -----t­ 3
2 ..-,---------+-----'---!. -----t-------- ", 2
CV') : I ,
I I I
Eo« , ' I
~ i I
........
1.0 1----"r---+------t------+--~_>,,___t---____1, 1.0
l:IJ

CJ
~
~
•6
.5
I---~t---___l--------=~l-- --i .6 CD
o
..
Ii) .5
CV')
..
.4
.3
.4
.3
0
r-l
.2
~
(V

~
..
.1 .1
Eo«
H

l:IJ
.06
S
Q
.05
.04
.03
.02

.01
0 50 100 150 200

ALTITUDE, Y x 10- 3

VARIATION OF ATMOSPHERIC DENSITY WITH ALTITUDE

FIGURE 18

30
1 0
~ ~ 1-- -- 1--~--'
0

i I 1
~
__, I -
-J-- I -r­
_I

-+--­
_~
08 f- I' - , - .-
1
·_--t---l--- , L _
___ __
--1 -
I
-~-
!!
1

o 6 J-- ! I I , --+--- I +----~----- ------~----

V
VE

04 I I- I I .
!
.--.-1.1
I I I I -- I. :Jr~ -- -t-
w
~

02 :L
~1J2I I-r--
i

,--1-+-­
I
I-
I

i I
1
.
I

:
i
i
i

o I' j : I i i I I I ! I

40 80 120 160 200 240

-n 9
v
E
2 sin e x 10
I

ROTOCHUTE DECELERATION AT CONSTAN 'I' Cn INDEPENDENT OF W/CnA

FIGURE 19

. "__,.• "_W'.~_' __""_"__ .. <.' __ "'M'~~ .'. '~"'"""'~'--""·"_"'·_:"~"'~''''-'''''''''·'~''''''N•.""",,,,!=,,,, ",,,,,,,~,,·_,,,~,,·,,-,-_·,,,":"lO',,,,,~e""~'<~:"''-''"':T,'!.fJ:.''''r,,!i'-':'::,,·~:J""'~_"'.\;:'P':~;l:\-'!.''ff''''~!?''~·:~,1,.',:,:!_'D09'''''''~_'!;>m';;.W'', ~,,,!.··~1";'-:"C,~~,,'/""-"··~:-:"';;'f"·,"11i""'-"'1l;\'V"'-''!:-'"'·''"·_'''''·;Y'~·'~:·':;!':!'I!""I':'J"··1", ...~, ...",. .;·,~~~"."""·;,,,t.·"'''''''''''·''''"'''1-~''',,:!,,,:,l'''::¢,''''''''-'''-.··:'l"'i'.;~·~:~~,''''''·II'Ol
.~ r---
! '

r--- IINITI~L V:E LOCI'!

--- ~~
_. ~

~ -....
·8

-_.-_.
'"'"\'
I
i
)
: /
V
I
t
y
I
I
I

/
V I ,,

I
I
,: Ii ~
!
I FI~AL VFLOCIB/l !
I :
~:
I
Ii . . ! i I I! I
i ,,
, I I
!
o 20 40 60 80 100

PER CENT MODULATION

VELOCITY BOUNDARIES FOR MODULATED FLIGHT

FIGURE 20

32
various V!VE ratios o The plot shows that the maximum decel­
eration is -n!VE2 sin eE - 0259 x 10- 6 and that it occurs at
V!VE - .606.
3. Modulated Entry
The initial phase of this entry is identical to the un­
modulated case up to the point where a desired maximum de­
celeration is reached. The velocity where this occurs is
defined by Figure 19.
In the modulated phase of flight, the rotor disc area,
A, is varied so as to yield constant deceleration at an ar­
bitrarily chosen value o Initially, the disc area is de­
creased as the dynamic pressure increases with density until
maximum dynamic pressure is reached. From there on, the
disc area is increased until the rotor is fully opened. At
this point, the vehicle continues along an unmodulated tra­
jectory, decelerating at levels below maximum.
Figure 20 shows initial and final velocities of modu­
lated flight in terms of per cent modulation where per cent
modulation is defined as the ratio of constant deceleration
of modulated flight to the maximum deceleration of non­
modulated flight for the same vehicles:
n
VE2 sine E
% modulation ­
.259 x 10- 6
The modulation of deceleration is achieved by changing
the drag of the system. As the rotor blades are coned back,
the equivalent flat plate drag area of the rotor disc, Cn A,
is reduced,thereby reducing drag and deceleration. Cn
is the total drag coefficient of the body and the ROTOCHUTE,
referred to the fully-opened rotor disc area. From this
definition it follows that Co remains constant for the un­
modulated entry, while for the modulated case, CD entry is
started at its maximum value and varied as a function of dy­
namic pressure once the maximum desired deceleration is
reached o The modulation capability is limited only by the
body drag itself, ioe o the COA of the body with the rotor
fully coned back o Greater percentages of modulation may be
achieved with streamlined bodies o Therefore, the Cn may be
reduced by factors of anywhere from 2:1 for Mercury type
capsule to 4:1 for Eggers body capsules o

33
4. Typical Trajectories
Sample trajectories for modulated and unmodulated
flight were calculated for axial flight entries o For all
cases, the ballistic parameter W/CnA was chosen for a
reasonable configuration o If a reasonable disc loading
W/A is taken as 5 pounds per square foot, and rotor solidity
~ - .18, then for a CN - 1.84 (Reference 5), CD - (1.84) x
(018) - 0333 and W/CnA - 5/.333 - 15 for a fully-opened
rotor o This value falls in the mid-range of presently con­
sidered ROTOCHUTE applications o
Figures 21 and 22 show trajectories for two combinations
of entrance velocity and entrance angle. The entrance
angles 90 0 and 100 represent the extremes for flight path
angles for which the developed equations are applicable o
The trajectories are shown for the unmodulated flight and
flight-modulated for maximum deceleration equal to 25, 50,
and 75 per cent of the unmodulated peak deceleration. In
both cases, calculations were based on assumptions and equa­
tions as discussed previously.
Figures 23 and 24 show the required CD and variation
of coning angle with time to provide modulation for the
previous sample cases. The previously assumed W/A - 5
pounds per square foot was used o The coning angles were
calculated with the assumption that total body CD equals the
rotor CDR. In effect, the body drag was considered negligible
as compared to the rotor drag o CN and ~ values of 1.84 and
018 respectively were used o These values give negligible
coning for unmodulated flight.
Figure 25 demonstrates the use of rotor coning angle to
limit the peak deceleration during a typical re-entryo The
peak deceleration is independent of the ballistic coefficient,
as long as the ballistic coefficient remains constant o
However, the magnitude of the ballistic coefficient may be
varied within certain limits by controlling the rotor b).ade
coning angle. With the rotor deployed, the initial decelera­
tion occurs at a higher altitude than for the capsule alone.
This allows a longer deceleration period during re-entry
before ground impact o The load factor limit during the modu­
lated re-entry must be sufficiently high to insure desired
terminal velocity at ground contact.

34

£Ve1f>Cit Y
I ,

24 ---
"\i\(Al ~ ~itud e
.......... !

:i "- ,
i

--1------
I'
i
20 '\ I
\ I\.
..........

",
1\ ~, " ' ...
,'\
i'
"\
, ......

I " 1',
16 f--------

"" " "' \I i~~"

i
r-- ,
'\

\
.....

_.-
,

M~

"",
I I
0012 !
"""
~~ \ \
~~ \
x X
>>t - LEkEND: I
---r----·--t ------ ... _- _ .. _--_. __..- - \

t- ~ON-M ~:>DULA rED R~- ENTRY

~ == N == .---
______ ~a~ f-- -1~2)
~,
~~~
--- Ifax n == .75 N I "\ '\ ',- ~
~

~
_-_ -
... ..

1-- ~ax n == .5 :> N

~--- fax n = .2 5 N
" "-
~
4 -- ..-'
I
I
__.__ ).._-J____ --,_.~

I !
I I
, I
I I II
o I

2 4 6 8 10

TIME J t, SECONDS

ROTOCHUTE TRAJECTORY, 9 E - 90°

W/CDA = 15 (Min) VE == 25 J OOO FPS

8E = 90° YE = 250 J OOO FT
FIGURE 21
35
24

20

16

12

-----1-1----­
i
I
I
o
20 40 60 80

TIME, t~SECONDS

ROTOCIiLJ'I'l~ TRAJECTORY, 9 E '" 10°

W/CDA = 15 Olin.) VE = 25,000 FPS

eF. 10° YE 250,000 Ft
FIGURE 22

36
.4 I I -" i ---T~--T------ ------­ ' - - -----------~-------

n-l ---t+H---+-Ul L
r-i-+=----+---l=
f-
------e------- ---­

.3 60 rI.l

' / V- B_ ,-I ~
~

Ir--r--t-++~/+--Ll-
GDR ~

.2
\
~- I -
"" ---
-- ---
--r---+------.J 40
Q

co
too)
~
..
;' \~. \ ~
.1
i "___ ~vJ 20 :a
~
z
1-'1
I \
~
I- I
I
t.>

o
o 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
TIME, t, SECONDS
DRAG COEFFICIENT AND CONING ANGLE VERSUS TIME, g e - 90°
WI A = 5 PSF eli! = 90° VE = 25000 FPS YE = 250000 Ft

FIGURE 23
"'~M·m,. ",m~iii:II'~r'f'1" Itrz
J

"SWttyt'"X2W"'·mwrwrtnee"!ft"tN ·'CrWffl.l!tfiillrt¥fW't r it'im'liltt1%'tnW&fM'tt'[Link] U1'titWnWWWS[mTzrn m =

.4,-T-!;--j-,--r-'i--'----,-' - - ; - 1- - - , ­

I I I
__ -_.. _. ~ I I
.3 Mo 1ation - -+-----1-­
---- 0
rn
1>;1
1>;1
IX:

CDR
.21--- __ 40 ~I

i
J-- I I _____ 'i en
w
~
(X)

to'
.1 t----I-----.J20 ~

~_
_____
I ~to'
O __ -'-_~~-J.J~~--L--;~--l--.l~_.l--::~-l_Jl
10
__l_Jo ~
20 30 40 50 60 70
TIME" t,SECONDS
0
DRAG COEFFICIENT AND CONING ANGLE VERSUS TIME, 9£ - 10

W/A = 5 PSF 9E = 10 0 V = 25000 FPS

E
Y
E
= 250000 FT.

FIGURE 24

-,-----------1---:-1-­
hi - -
\
-+---li ! -+---+----+---+--------+--­
I

\, 'I i -----I'---t----+----t------j

~ DEPLOYED ROTOR ­
.w _ BLADES STALLED I 1_ _ -1

--+------,~---II----;---I-- ­
BALLISTIC RE-ENTRY-/\
----'-~~~~-----+----r-NOROTOR ~

! I
---;--t---=-t-..r..:.:----1--------,-----+--- i­ 1

DRAG
MODULATION II I --II
MAXIMUM RETARDATION ---~---~
BLADE UNSTALLED I

t- \-­

INCREASING LOAD FACTOR

CONTROL OF RE-ENTRY LOAD FACTOR BY

MEANS OF DRAG MODULATION
FIGURE 25

39
50 Aerodynamic Heating
The thermal effects involved in the descent of a rotor
configuration along "re-entry" trajectories were studied on
a limited basis. Specifically, for such configurations, the
temperature distribution on the blade surface, the heat
transfer rate to which the blade is exposed, necessary cool­
ing schemes, and weight penalties are pertinent areas of
inquiry.
The discussion in Appendix IV is concerned with pre­
liminary evaluation of the thermal problem in order to in­
dicate appropriate parameters, assumptions, relation to
re-entry dynamics, and some limitations.
In summary, the energy exchange represents the change
in kinetic energy of the vehicle from entry to impact. Peak
heating occurs at high altitudes in the disassociated gas
region. Heat protection appears more favorable for a rotor
in axial flow operation. Stagnation occurs against the
broad surface of the rotor blade, presenting a larger effec­
tive "nose" radius and more exposed surface to transfer
the heat for ablation or conductance o

40

3. WIND TUNNEL TESTS

A. IN TRODUCT I ON

Wind tunnel investigations with the KRC-6M model of the

ROTOCHUTE rotor system were performed in the Transonic and Super­
sonic Circuits of the 16-Foot Propulsion Wind Tunnel Facility
at Arnold Engineering Development Center, Tullahoma, Tennessee.
Arrangements for testing at the Government-furnished facility
were made by the Aeronautical Systems Division, Wright-Patterson
Air Force Base, Ohio.

Tests from Mach 0.5 through Mach 1.5 were performed in

the Transonic Circuit. Runs up to Mach 3.0 were completed in
the Supersonic Circuit. Successful deployment, governing, and
operation of the nOTOCHUTE were achieved throughout the regimes
investigated. Experimental results correlated closely with pre­
dicted theoretical performance. Details of this phase of the
program are presented in this section.

B. OBJEC'rIVE

Prime objective of the testing was to determine the feasi­

bility of employing rotary-wing systems for aerodynamic de­
celeration at supersonic free-stream velocities. Deployment,
retardation, and over-all operation of the rotor system in axial
flow stream were to be investigated and performance character­
istics determined. Yawed operation was to be investigated within
the limits permitted by the tunnel mounting provisions.

c. CONCLUSIONS

As a result of successful deployment, governing, and opera­

tion of the KRC-6M rotor system at speeds up to Mach 3.0
(tunnel limit) and evaluation of test data, it is concluded that:

1. The feasibility of aerodynamic deceleration with a

rotary-wing system in axial flow at speeds up to Mach 3.0 was
demonstrated.

2. Deployment, governing, and operation in axial flow

at speeds up to Mach 3.0 presented no problem.

3. Drag modulation or control of the retardation force

during re-entry is feasible with control of rotor coning angle
through control of rotor tip speed.

41
4. Agreement between theoretical performance and experi­
mental results is excellent, excepting the Mach 1.0 regime,
where prediction becomes complicated as a result of unpredict­
able flows.
5. The rotor governing action was positive at all test
conditions. No tendency for the rotor to overspeed or to os­
cillate about the governed speed was noted.
6. At constant Mach number, a large change in dynamic
pressure is required to change rotational speed a significant
amount.
7. The drag-force coefficient is proportional to rotor
solidity in the blade fully-stalled regime.
o
8. Angle of attack up to 9 yaw had little effect on the
model drag-force coefficient.
9. The side-force and yawing-moment coefficients at angle
of attack up to 90 were small.
D. WIND TUNNEL TEST MODEL
The KRC-6M wind tunnel model installation in the Transonic
Circuit is shown in Figure 26. Internal details of the model
are presented in Figure 27. The tunnel model rotor system basic
configuration (4-bladed, 8-foot diameter) was very similar to
the original rotor system of the flight test vehicle. Blade
rotation was counterclockwise, looking upstream.
Basic elements of the rotor system are the rotor blades,
hub assembly, governor mechanism, synchronizer system, and de­
ployment or release pin. The rotor assembly was attached to a
steel rotating shaft mounted on the steel stationary shaft
through a set of ball bearings. The stationary shaft mounted to
the tunnel sting support through the 2.5-inch diameter balance
system which measured the rotor moments, drag, and side forces.
A multi-channel slip ring served as the rotary electrical con­
nector between the rotating and stationary elements of the rotor
assembly for the model data sensor signals.

42

43

I . 6 iD. I

c
I ::::::I

0.720 in. ­
(40-percent Chord Point)
Blade section - NACA 0012-64
Retention Ring
Jack Position Potentiometer
Non-Rotating Portion of Model Body
Governor
~ Biade Release
~

Magnetic RPM

Blade (Folded

Hydraulic Jack (for Applying Spring Force)

Internal Details of the Model

FIGURE 27

.... _'_'.•'"",.__'. .."__."_."_..__...._ _.. .".=«".(.".,='".. '.'r~'. '~"''''',.;-,~.,..,_~ ....""",~r*,'_"' ..,"_.. '.l'ii..'!,}..WI'!I'i:'1i!(;.';'I!':f'>'.<.4·." ~l'\·$:;:;";;'4.""',.,',,, ....q,W'-'...1":»,.:/~·""""·'.;.~,w.J_"',~.:J:;<,: ,;~~_.,.'.~-'''\.r;\'','~X'~'''i-2'':,''".~,··(j;;-::·!'!-;''\it".'.~· ~ ..."""}~I;N~W'f<":(i;>"'""",·'.~,,·;"'~.·f-~.o;7 ..·.y·"t;~'t/:::'~·i'·"~(:,·_~,·,-t,-"~"''',,·'·~ ....•...,,:e?!''-,~·0·~.'_'\:~_'''''· .... ~
Rotor blades were lightweight and of simple construction.
Aluminum alloy spars, skins, and inboard grip fitting were
bonded together with an epoxy resin o The two-point blade
attachment to the cast steel hub permitted flapping and pitch
freedom o The blade could flap or cone from 50 in the direction
of flight to 90 0 aft (blade stowed position - parallel to
axis of rotation). The blade pitch was -10 0 to +12 0 (at 0 0
coning). The forward attachment to the hub was through a
self-aligning spherical-type bearing. The rear attachment
picked up the governor mechanism crank.
All blades were positioned at uniform coning or flapping
by the synchroni~er system. Synchronizer rods, attached at
the blade inboard area, picked up the synchronizer slide,
which traversed along the rotating shaft as blades coned in
unison o
The governor mechanism controlled rotor RPM through
collective pitch change of the blades in response to blade
centrifugal forces. Selected governed speed was established
by preloading the governing spring to balance the sensed
blade centrifugal force at the rotor equilibrium blade pitch
setting. Increasing the preload increased governed RPM. On
the model, spring preload was controlled by compressing the
downstream end of the spring with a sliding pressure member
actuated by the two hydraulic jacks. The two rod members
connecting the jacks to the slide were strain-gaged to measure
the compressive load. When the hydraulic pressure on the
jacks was relieved, the spring resumed essentially a tlno-load"
position for minimum RPM. Jack positioning was sensed with
a coupled potentiometer.
Two tloverspeedtt accelerometers, installed on the model
in parallel circuits, sensed centrifugal forces to limit the
rotor speed to 1250 RPM. maximum, a limit dictated by the
tunnel facility safety factor requirements. Either accelerometer
could signal the rtreflief tl of the jack hydraulic pressure.
Once governed speed was selected, rotor speeds higher
than that selected would produce higher centrifugal forces.
The governor spring in turn would, through the linkage, be
compressed to a higher balancing load. During the balancing
process, the blades were controlled collectively to a pitch
setting greater than that for equilibrium, thus slowing the
rotor. If rotor RPM had dropped below the selected speed,
blade pitch would have been reduced and rotor speed would in­
crease o A magnetic pick-up sensor provided rotor RPM data.

45

Prior to deployment, the spring housing was positioned

such that the blades folded parallel to the axis of rotation.
The housing was retained in this position and the rotor was re­
strained from turning by the internal deployment pin mechanism.
When the pin was pulled by nitrogen gas pressure to disengage
from the housing and rotating shaft, the rotor deployment cycle
was initiated. The rotor assembly became free to rotate and the
housing was forced against the hub by the spring pressure and
positioned the blade attachment points through the governor
mechanism such that blades were positioned in a ttpreconetl and
"pl'esweep" attitude. In essence, the blades were forced into
the air stream. Resulting forces generated a torque about the
rotor axis of rotation and induced rotor rotation. As RPM in­
creased, centrifugal forces on the blades opened the blade to an
equilibrium operattng cone position where the centrifugal force
moments about the blade flapping axis were balanced by thrust
load moments.
A conical shape was selected for the model nose for ease in
predicting flow properties about it. The cone structure was
molded fiberglass.
During the interval between testing in the Transonic and
Supersonic Circuits, a rotor brake and a conical device to re­
strain blades in the folded position were added to the model to
minimize potential problems during changes in operating conditions.
Transient shock waves were expected during the change. Both the
brake and cone were actuated hydraulically. Potentiometers for
sensing the spring housing position (to determine blade pitch in
a more direct manner) and blade flapping or coning were also added.
E. FUNCTIONAL CHECK OF THE MODEL
Prior to wind tunnel testing, the KRC-6M rotor system tunnel
model was mounted on a truck as shown in Figure 28. Runs at
speeds up to 55 miles per hour were made along a taxi strip at a
local airport to perform functional checks of the model systems,
calibrate and check the overspeed cut-out, and obtain performance
and governing characteristics data at speeds simulating the
terminal descent regime.
Instrumentation measured airspeed, rotor RPM spring de­
flection, and spring preload. The data obtained, more a qualita­
tive measurement, were sufficiently accurate to determine proper
functioning of the model and establish initial operational
governor preload settings.

46

47
The low speed drag force data as determined by these truck
runs are presented in Figure 29 for relative airspeeds up to
70 feet per second.
F. WIND TUNNEL FACILITY
The Transonic and Supersonic Circuits of the AEDC Propulsion
Wind Tunnel are closed, single-return tunnels with 16-foot square
test sections. Tunnel conditions are controlled by a water ex­
change air cooler and a scavenging and make-up air system. Sub­
sonic Mach numbers are generated in the Transonic Circuit with a
sonic nozzle contour and compressor stator blade control. Super­
sonic Mach numbers are generated by contouring the nozzle to­
gether with stator blade adjustment. Detailed descriptions of
the circuits, operating characteristics, and related equipment
will be found in Reference 6 0
G. TEST PROCEDURE
Data were taken for two types of model operation. The first
was a slow, controlled rotor deployment, and the second was a
rapid rotor deployment.
In the first case, the rotor was permitted to reach its
equilibrium speed without any preload on the governor spring.
When tunnel test conditions had stabilized, data were recorded
at this equilibrium speed. The governor spring preload was then
applied and increased until the next desired test rotational
speed was reached. Data were taken at each stabilized test rota­
tional speed until the desired range of tip speeds was investi­
gated. The spring preload was then reduced to zero, the tunnel
operation changed to the next test condition, and the procedure
repeated. Tunnel operating temperatures were limited to 220 0 F
maximum.
In rapid deployments, simulating flight deployment, the
blades were folded and the deployment pin was in "lock" position.
The governor spring was preloaded. After the desired tunnel
test operating conditions were established, the deployment pin
was pulled, and the rotor deployed. The transient and steady-state
data were recorded.

48

600

/
500
/
DRAG /
400
/
I /
~7
t:IJ
~
~ !
~
I
~

~
0
300

7' /
.JI J
"
V
~
0
E-i
g 200 I / DIA~ ~TER

RP M
==
==
=
10 "t.
013
8H>

! /
100
/
1/
I
I

o I o
30 40 50 60 70

INFLOW VELOCITY, V - FT/SEC

ROTOR TEST DATA

FIGURE 29

49
TABU 1

SlIIIIIAIIY OF TEST CONDITION8

TIUJlBOIi Ie nJNIjBL TESTS

ClltO FIGURAT lOll

SPRIIlG RATll
LBS/IN II

ALTlTUD&
I'BST " 10- 3

".
DB:lRDII
IlR
1'T/811C
P.
P8FA
T.
OF
VARIABLE
ITO VALUE 'pART NUIlBER

4 Blades. 8-Ft Rotor 500

0.50 :14.0 0 Variable 200.5 91
IlR 360~ 439, 523
001

M.O 3
450
200.5 91
-- DOl

62.2 0 Variable 135.4 92 nR 170, 255. 350. 420

002

0.75

0.75
73.0

17.1

17 ••
! !
3

0
440

Variable
80.6

66.0

65.9
88

60

60

~
--
139, 294, 347, 408

141, 250, 350, 438

003

004

005

1.00 8:1.0 «.8 15

IlR 160, 264, 353, 436
007

1.00 8:1.0 3
428
44.8 15
-- 008

1.22 88.11 0 Variable 37.6 -10 ilK 168. 282. 351. 4:16 009

1.22 89.3 3
458
36.8 -12 -- OlD

1.43 92.4 0 Variable 31.9 -49 IlR 172, 237, 349, 426
011

1.42 92.0 3
428
32.6 -47 -- 012

1.38 93.7 0 Variable 30.1 -42 IlR Fast Deploy_nt 0-252

013

1000
0.50 49.4 0 Variable 249.8 70
IlR 152. 255. 352. 457. 822
014

54.1 199.4 84
144, 248. 351. 449. 526
015

til
o
j 601.6 119.8 85
125, 254. 3:12. 445. 452

499

016

1250
49.4 249.8 70
142, 250, 349, 452, 527
017

54.1 199.4 8:1 124, 254, 351, 448, 483

018

601.6 120.1 88
149, 2:13. 350. 4:15. 478
019

0.51 M.l Variable 448

198.9 62
. 5. 7.7 020

0.76 17.3 446

65.4 41
5. 7.7 021

j
1.01 85.1 447
44.7 9
:I, 7.7 022
1.20 88.8 448
37.8 -13 5, 7.7 023
1.42 91.7 449
:13.1 -47 :I. 7.7 024
2 Blades, 8-F't Hator 0.50 39.6 Variable 450
398.9 89
0, 3, 5
025. 026

I
0.75 62.7 448
132.1 57
0. 3, 5
025. 027
1.01 70.7 [Link] 89.:1 19
O. 3, 5
025. 028

j 1.26

1.50
75.7

79.7 5

447

448

70.4

58.0
-18

-60 --
O~ 3. 5
025. 029

025
.. Blades, [Link] Rotor 0.50 54.1 0 Variable 199.4 75
nR 122, 262. 354. 451
030

~ 1.46 88.8 0 Variable 37.7 -56 nR 157, 254, 354, 449

031
Bladef:. Re':>\'ed --- 0.50 4.5 [Link] --- 159.7 92
.. 0, 3, 5, 7.6 033
0.75 33.8 528.8 61
0, 3, 5, 7,6 034
1.00 41.9 359.4 23
0, 3, 5, 7.7 035
1.25 46.6 284.6 -16 0, 3, 5, 7.7 036

·,..,,.,. . . ,.".~. 1.50 50.9 232.7 -58 0, 3, 5, 7.7 037

J
TABU 2

5111lllARY OF TEST COMDITIOIlS

SUPllRSONIC TUNNEL TESTS

Pt:I;,G .l.'lTE ALTlTUD!3 «, OR P, T V:rI.'.BLE

CO~"} IGm~.:.TJOX ill.:'/U; ~ FAT x 10 DEGREES FT/SEC PSPA "F ITEJt!. V_"WES *PAIlT If1JlIBIlII
4 bJ "d.e~. o-t t. Rutor ~30 1.8;,) 89.1 0 Variable 37.70 174 iJR 211,255,2% ,348 ,413 ,448. 033
497

1.8ti 69.1 5 [Link] 37.70 175 OR 212,4·16 034

1.88 1:)9.1 9.5 Variable 37.70 175 ::::R 213,340 034

2.13 9u.0 0 Variable 27 .... 5 124 .:p 201,250,297,355,400,450, 031

5(1)

2.13 9a.0 5 Vl'lriable 27.50 126 ..-:R 207 ,451 032

2.13 96.0 9.5 Variable 27.64 126 foR 208,452 032

2.55 100.0 0 V:"Irlable 23.24 174 nR 239,302.350,401,462 .494. 005

2.55 100.0 5 [Link] 23.24 174 nR 238,297,349,400,450,504 008

2.55 100.0 9.5 Variable 23.14 178 >JR 234,451 007

2.58 104.6 0 Variable 18.90 185 OR 217,352,453,502 00&

2.91 118.0 0 Variable 10.65 166 OR 205.304.350,399,451,500 009

2.91 118.0 5 [Link] 10.65 163 (R 209,451 010

2.91 IHi.O 9.5 Variable 10.65 163 OR 208,420 010

1500 2. u~ IltL8 0 Ynrlable 10.33 180 nR 194.,441 023

ClI 1500 :i::.b9 us.s 5 Variable 10.30 179 n' 195.452 023
.... 1500 ~ • ..;9 118.8 ~.5 Vnriable 10.30 175 ioR 193 .~52 023
1500 2.b9 111.5 0 Variable 14.01 177 OR 233,252,304,355,400,455, 024
500

1500 2.92 105.4 0 Variable 18.25 180 OR 246,267 ,302 ,353 ,403 ,455, 025
£04
:2 L~~~rl.e.s, S-Ft. }~01.::>r 930 1. i,; ...; 89.2 0 Variable 37.80 171 Or. 216,253,321,347,419,446, 037
502

I
-:I r31aCles. 7-Ft. l:otOl"
J30

1500

~30
".L

2.51

l.b~
9G.3

99.2

89.9 0
0

0
Variable

Variable

Variable
27.30

23.97

37.90
182.2

196

174
OR

OR

OR
208,252,287,345,390,423,
452,496

240,248,305.354 ,40G ,449,

497

194 ,253,296,345,400,
448
039

027

060

930 2.15 97 .1 0 Variable 26.30 158 nR UM,249.309,352,397 , 057

451
930 2.15 89.1 0 Variable 37.90 172 OR 224,253,300 ,360,395, 059
452
2.51 99.2 0 Variable 24.10 191 OR 211,244 ,299,347 ,396,452 045
2.89 118.3 0 Variable 10.55 183 OR 161,194 ,246 ,301,348 ,405 ,453 050
2.89 116.4 0 Variable 11.40 172 OR 172,195,254 ,310 ,352 ,400 .448 047
2.89 110.8 0 Variable 14.42 186 OR 187.246,306,357,412 ,450 052
2.91 106.4 0 Variable 17.80 188 OR 206,254.300 ,355 ,401,"52 054

D.i;\t(H,_ i ~'IJIoyel. 1.83 89.2 Variable 38.00

-~--- 178 g 0,5,9.5 043
2.12 95.9 Veriable ----­ 27.80 172 g 0,5,9.5 042
2.55 99.9 Variable ----­ 23.10 187 g 0,5,9.5 014
J • 2.92 118.3 Variable ----­ 10.88 159 g 0,3,9.5 018

• 'j..!~" .. :"Tell.:.:e Number

H. TEST PROGRAM
The test program was established to investigate operation
of the rotor system in axial flow for the range of speeds attained
in the Transonic and Supersonic Circuits; namely, Mach 0.5 to
Mach 3.0. Test conditions simulated a typical re-entry flight
trajectory.
The following rotor configurations were tested to determine
the effects of rotor geometry on the performance. The 4-bladed,
8-foot diameter rotor was the basic configuration and most
similar to the flight test rotor system.
Number of Blades Rotor Diameter
4 8 Feet .159
2 8 Feet .079
4 7 Feet .182
To determine the effect of governor spring rate upon govern­
ing characteristics, investigations were performed with governor
springs having 500, 930, 1000, and 1250 pounds per inch spring
rate.
Although the investigations were primarily for axial flow
operation, the tunnel model support system permitted yawing the
rotor axis up to 9.5 0 with respect to the air stream. Runs were
made at various small yaw angles up to the limit permitted.
The test conditions and variables for the Transonic and
Supersonic Circuits are summarized in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.
I. TEST RESULTS
The variation of rotor drag and drag-force coefficient (CDR)
with Mach number at various rotor tip speeds is presented in
Figures 30 and 31. The rotor axial drag force varies with the air
flow dynamic pressure when blades are stalled. At constant values
of Mach number, the drag-force coefficient (CDR) is shown to de­
crease with lower rotor tip speeds, indicating that the drag-force
coefficient is a function of the blade coning angle, or, in turn,
the blade projected flat plate area. The feasibility of using a
ROTOCHUTE for drag modulation or control of the retardation force
is thus confirmed from this plot. In this particular ROTOCHUTE
system, the limitations of the governing mechanism linkage, not

52

1600
~--j;- ~--T~ ~ ~ I:!~r
•

I: 1-:
1000
< ...
-~-~i :1:.
:
:.. ~
l;--~---
! !

'I I
t
~- -------g-­ -­~--___t-- ---g---~----t--~~-+----g-r-- ·I~.:-
~
~i.
-1
100
.l . l!:s.0_.
I
l>
..
---.---~-r-----+c::'
~
I
10
0
I ~I
00
r-t 120
~
C1
rIl
•
•
...........
I 'I 1 II I
I n. I rIl
, - ,
! : ! ; i·
,.
I ; [>
~
CIJ
• I I

1--1
I ; t ;

!--j :
t
i-if
i ---+---------11

I lj
--:-1:1 I
~
...:I

-----,-­
i
--I-l·t-I
0'
800 ---~: 80 ..
~
U
I
! · ~
rx;
t1I
e",
l:l::
0
~
I ::J
rIl
rIl
~
~ l:l::
<: /:1c
e:t:: 400
Q U
I-f
l:l:: o :II
0
~
[Link] ! i------­ ~ I . . , igg i-I
<
~
0 I­ I I I, I! - q - 1/2 't PaM"­ I0
o .5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
MACH NUMBER - M

MODEL WIND TUNNEL TEST Dr~G FORCE DATA

FIGURE 30
'=_~~J~~it'.B'&.~:iL.'l'- fl't'1'lf1W- 'nXfW" 'Wffili''U'ili'i''etRiI5¥r·''·~wr'j@jcEftrtt'1f''[Link]''''''fj'Wi1ietr"·-rtwe.,!'--,tiW'i'm-''''m,rt1.,..;rZf2W'' we- g

0.41 I I I 1---~~1 - i-I ! [

-=r=----
~__j ~_J
I

i ! I I
Q=
C,)
, I I I I ' ! ! 1
E-4 0.3 - -~ ..~:- -t-- n -:
u
I I
f
~
fi! I- :I II
~
C,)

E I
I
; !

en
~
8
~
0.2 -:1
I ----1--­
I i , ;
j i I

~
"J

~
C)
-+---+----t---+--r I
I'
SYtIDOL
!
•
.
l---;~
I
I '
- Ff/SEd---­
,
.
I
:
~ o. 1 ! - I -t- ---25P ---i---­
Q I ! '/}. : I 359 I
II!:
I
V ~~-+-~
, I I

!
1 - - ' '
o '
.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

MACH NUMBER - M

VARIATION OF DRAG-FORCE COEFFICIENT WITH TRAJECTORY MACH NUMBERS

FIGURE 31
designed specifically for the drag modulation function, limited
governing the rotor speed below 200 feet per second. The drag­
force coefficient could be modulated to lower values by designing
the governing linkage system to govern to lower rotor speeds.
CDR as a function of the tip velocity ratio is plotted in
Figure 32. The data for each Mach number at the highest ratio
of V/nR were taken at the rotational speed that the rotor reached
without any governor spring preload. Data for the three alti­
tudes at Mach 0.5 show the small effect of altitude on CDR.
The model blade coning as a function of blade centrifugal
force to blade axial force is plotted in Figure 33. Theoretical
coning, derived from the simple relationship 8 - arc cot (Fc/FAb)'
closely approximates the measured data and indicates that the
resultant blade axial force acts at or near the blade center of
gravity. By assuming the blade is an element of a right circular
cone, a simple analysis of the coning angle is made by summing
the moments about the flapping hinge due to blade centrifugal and
axial forces.

Fc " Xcg sin 8 = FA Xb"cOS 8

b
8 = arc cot ~.~

Xb F
Ab

When the ratio (Xcg/Xb) approaches a value equal to one, in­

dicating that the axial-force action is near or through the blade
center of gravity station, the relation becomes similar to the
one plotted.
Figure 34 indicates the effect of small angles of attack on
aerodynamic force coefficients. Angle of attack affects the
drag-force coefficient little or none. The side force and yawing
moment data show some scatter from inaccuracy in measuring the
very small quantities. An instrumentation shift, occurring at' 0 0
and 3 0 angle. of attack, caused the shift in measured data. No
appreciable effect of Mach number on the side-force and yawing­
moment coefficients is indicated.

55

SYMBOL
0
-M-
.50
ALTITUDE - FT
54,000
SYMBOL
b.
--
1.43
• ALTITUDE - FT
92,000

•••
.0 .50 62,000 1.88 89,000
..j) .50 73,000 2.13 96,000
0 .75 77,000 2.55 100,000
<>
-A
1.00
1.22
85,000
88,900 • 2.88 118,000

0.3 --.­
----r
I

- -

~--.

-------l
;
I

C1I
en 0.2 - -- --- -J
i

CnR --I I

0.1

- - +---- ­ - --
- ---- - - - ,
i

I
i

o I

2 4 6 8 10 12

ADVANCE RATIO, Ad

VARIATION OF DRAG-FORCE COEFFICIENT WITH ADVANCE RATIO

FIGURE 32

o r---r'---T---­ ! I
I~
1

! 1 ! '" R 0
()

-r-~~ d'T;6~~-- ,~ I i
4 ~~-Br+II-""'7'4---l--+---+--T---+-'
1 - - - 4 - - - + ­ ... --~

~
'

iP :. i I
~ +--+---;-----j---l----.~--+__-__+_-____j
8 - - - - + - -... i i i

A I I ~
»
~ ~----- ...
'r.n I
.
_-+-I-r~&k_! 5:~;.f---I!--.:.:A~~~:-+-:m~O~O~E=-J
---+-1
:

-
~ 12 -.----. --,-.- ·--li---
I I 0
I I. 50 :
U
62 000
--I--;5-U"---l-----'7-r3-+"VOW:WUU'~
j

~ I 0 I .75 i 77 100
i <> i 1.00 : 85 000
---I-n-!---ir;n1--+--oQQ-o~::7:i\A1V"V~

~ 16
~
i ~ Iii: ~~ I
1 - - - - 1 + - - - - 1 - - - + - - - +- - . . ,.....+---+-<.1
. ~~.-'J.~~l-----+---e
:: ~gg
::7,ra-+'o,-AAvV',~v

~
~ ~
'I.~ '12.55
1

2.91
100 000
118 000
z ._-~-

~
CJ
~ !
! I
r:l 20 i
!­
I
j I
~
•II -1---+---+-1- - - 1 - - - - + - - - - 4 - - - + - - - 1 - - - - 1
1

'
j
24 ...-.-+--+--__+_--l-----~-! ..- - - + _ - _ _ + - - + - - _ + - - - ­
i
1
I
--+----1----+---+---- : I

I ! I
28 '--_......._ - - I ._ _. l - _......._ - - i .i_ _.L-_...L.._.....l._ _..1...-_ _

o 8 16 24 32 40

RATIO: BLADE CENTRIFUGAL FORCE Fe

BLADE AXIAL FORCE ' F Ab

VARIATION OF BLADE CONING ANGLE WITH Fe/FAb RATIO

FIGURE 33
57
SYMBOL M ALTITUDE
V 1.88 89~000
A 2.13 96~000
0 2.55 100~000
t> 2.91 118~000
DRAG-FORCE COEFFICIENT
.3

.2 ' - - - _ . . . . L - _ - - ' - _ - - - - I ._ _. l - - _ . . . . I . . . - _ - - ' - _ - - - - I ._ _.l--_....I...-_......I

SIDE-FORCE COEFFICIENT

C ,O:r ] [ I I
y I I I I II

YAWING-MOMENT COEFFICIENT
~7
o
-
A

YI

-.01
o 2 4 6 8 10

YAW ANGLE - DEGREES

VARIATION OF Cna ~ Cy, AND Cn WITH YAW ANGLE

FIGURE 34

58
One of the test objectives was to determine governor spring
preload for desired rotor speeds. The spring load variation with
Ad for trajectory conditions is shown in Figure 35. Since the
spring reacts a portion of the centrifugal force through the
governor linkage, the spring preload increases with rotational
speeds. The spring preload to maintain a constant rotor speed
along the trajectory is indicated by the dotted lines.
The effect of free-stream dynamic pressure on the spring
load for constant tip velocity is presented in Figure 36. The
spring force decreases slightly as the dynamic pressure increases,
because aerodynamic moments, aiding spring-load moments to bal­
ance constant centrifugal moments at constant tip speed, are
increased o However, if the spring preload is held constant, a
large change in dynamic pressure is required to change rotational
speed by a significant amount.
To evaluate the effect of rotor solidity on the drag-force
coefficient, data were obtained with the 2-bladed, 8-foot diameter
rotor and the 4-bladed, 7-foot diameter configuration o Figure 37
shows the effect of solidity on the drag-force coefficient for
the Mach number range tested o CDR has been divided by rotor
solidity. In essence, the coefficient is proportional to the
solidity for the configurations tested. An increase of CDn/cr
for the smaller drag-force rotors is noted at supersonic Mach
numbers. Part of the increase is attributed to the fact that
the model tare drag becomes a greater percentage of the drag
force for these configurations at supersonic speeds o Drag-force
tares presented in Figure 38 were obtained with blades removed
and the model shaft stationary.
Tunnel blockage effects may be considered negligible since
the drag coefficients for rotors of widely varying solidity
correlated to a very close degree o
The time history of axial force, spring load, and rotor tip
velocity during a rapid deployment of the basic configuration
at Mach 1 375 and 3.0 are presented in Figures 39 and 40. At
0

Mach 1 375, the rotor reached equilibrium rotational speed, ana

0

axial drag force in approximately 2.5 seconds after blade release.

Inflection points on the tip velocity and drag-force curves are
noted at approximately 1.5 seconds as the governing action begins.
Governing action during deployment was very smooth, and no ten­
dency for the rotor to overspeed or oscillate about the governed

59

3000
, I i __
SYMBOL
i
l!- I~
I
o.50! 54,000 I
Ii

; IIJ 1 . 75 I 77,100 ;

I-----t-.:::~. .-'-..'---:-~_._--O-----l •.Ql_·t, -[Link]--~

-. !~~SOO
! ~ ~
*
1.22 i 88,900 '

1.43 i 92,400
~ ~.88 89,000
.. 2.13 96,000
• ~.55 i 100,000 I

. . . ~._---R. 91 ,1lSrOOO.---l
i 1- ~ ; I

CI1
l:Q
ii • I!
...:l !

en "'+-~:-\-.-\t---;-H--\-~'---'r---r--- ---t---r--'--"':
~
i
I
I
i
'"
~~::l
U
p::
0
~

d 1000 . . -+---- . .-\-l--~~'\-=--~~r:--\--+---'~-j---r------

z
I-C
r::::
Po.
rn
r::::
0
'7'

~
~
>
0
d

o
2 4 6
ADV~~CE RATIO, Ad
VARIATION OF GOVERNOR SPRING FORCE WITH ADVANCE RATIO

FIGURE 35

60
SYMBOL SPRING RATE, LBS/INCH
o 500
o 1000
<> 1250
~ 930

3000
• 1500
I

I
fIJ Q In
~
2000
~
~ ....a.
L..Jl-- I---- t-OR - 45C FPS
~
~
t--- "'--. ~ ~
r: t---

en
..
r:l 0~ L.n
U A.
Ir OR - 35< FPS
I-' P::
~ 1000
~o o:-r u ~

0
Z
~
-
()
1.-".0
~ r--4"l. .6- r OR -
"
25<
•
FPS
?

fIJ
--.:::J" II

J
... -
0
20 40 60 80 100 120

FREE STREAM DYNAMIC PRESSURE, q - LBS/[Link].

EFFECT OF DYNAMIC PRESSURE ON GOVERNOR SPRING FORCE

(FOR CONSTANT TIP VELOCITY)
FIGURE 36

__ ".'_"""."'.v•• __ ,_ ',,' _, ••,...... ~" •._~,'o •. _~,-=.V...""_"'"._~,,,.,~_~- •.,...;..,·~ "·.-'_~,."e·,,,,,,,,,,,,,.'''., ...;o;;,,·'",,...,.,-t,..'l:'..'"';:""""~'''';%''''''~''~'\'';''''''''''~''''''O<:'~'''''~;''''''''''',"~,,; ~!'!"''''-')':''~'~''!''~',~'_'''''''''''''V.4'~'~''''''»;''t''''''''-''1"''"'~!'-':'~ml'
, ,.,~.,,,,,,'''''''''''~,,",'',''.,,,.~,,~~.,'', "".~_,~",,,,,.":,,,,,,,,,,,""."'·~<!-.'0_""!i.,,,,,,,j,v,,,o~,,,.,,,>_·,"~"'~H:X>':""p<t';},', ~'"'.'·""·",~f<";!:\:._,.. ,_.,.}"",,1",~~" :·'~'·.-i7·~,-l'O-""_-"-"""~~fr.""'-"""''''~'''·''''·.~~''''''''.".·~.).
SYMBOL CONFlGURATION
o 4 Blade, 8-Foot Dia. Rotor
o 2 Blade, 8-Foot Dia. Rotor
~ 4 Blade, 7-Foot Dia. Rotor

2.0
!

I 0
:

I r:l n ,
I
[J
b
I' ~
i
4 ~
........ \
I .

' ; A
! ,4:)
....­
! ~V
!
I

i
,
i
:
v
-no • ,
;
~
!
,I
i
I
i I

.5 3.0
MACH NUMBER - II
EFFECT OF ROTOR SOLIDITY ON DRAG COEFFICIENT
(OR - 450 FPS)
FIGURE 37

o Based On 8-Ft. Diameter Rotor Disc Area

o Based On 7-Ft. Diameter Rotor Disc Area
.04 "
i
I
iI
I I

I n.

I .~n.....
I
!
...... I
-.;, i

tf~ .02
I
.r1

""" I
-
rfl ,(.)
I .:.. i
r~ ~ !
". ~

,
o i

.5

MACH NUMBER - II

MODEL TARE DRAG COEFFICIENTS

FIGURE 38
62
GOO
400 -513

DRAG
200
./
... V ---­
(LBS)
GOO
SPRING LOAD . 539
400 ~
~LH:S)

300
I ?OO - - . 252

TIP SPEED
(FT/SEC) 0
100

--- -----­ 1 •0
.....

SECONDS AFTER DEPLOYMENT

2 •0 3 •0 4 .0

TIME HISTORY: RAPID DEPLOYMENT AT M 1.38, 93000 FT.

FIGURE 39

- ~QOO
- ~

·850
500 /

---------
--
./
DRAG ~- . .-. -- .. ..-.. '. -~ ~~---~ f-~
~[Link]~)
'0 --- - --- -
,,_.-
.
.4.80
------
~50-- f----~

~
~

I-----~--

CONING =~~~~--~
~- -
(DEG)
2000
SPRING IAOAD
(LBS) t - -100l1
-1598
- - I---~-- - f---
t-----~ - ---

.' . .
GOO
-, .. _---.'--~ ._--
400 - 440
200 .-- ~

TIP SPEED L---

-
(FT/SEC) 0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4. o
SECONDS AFTER DEPLOYMENT
TIME HISTORY: RAPID DEPLOYMENT AT M - 3.0, 118000 FT.
FIGURE 40
63
value was noted. The stable operation on reaching equilibrium
was typica~ of the ROTOCHUTE operation at all test conditions.
At Mach 3.0 1 equilibrium thrust or drag was developed in approxi­
mately 1.5 seconds l and the force build-up is related to coning.
Rotor blade failure occurred during a shutdown from Mach
2.93 operation. During the shutdown phase l shock waves travel
upstream through the tunnel test section. NormallYI the rotor
was braked to a standstill for operation when the shock waves
passed through. In this instance l however I the rotor was opera­
ting at an RPM .~ceeding the rotor brake stopping capability.
The governor spring preload system had jammed l and the spring
load could not be relieved. The shock wave pressures were severe
enough to cause blade failure.
The model and installation sustained little damage. The
preload system was modified l a new set of blades installed l and
the system was put into operation again with minimum delay. No
further trouble was experienced.
J. COMPARISON OF THEORY AND EXPERIMENTAL DATA
Figures 41 and 42 compare calculated axial-force coefficients
with corresponding experimental results for the basic rotor con­
figuration. Agreement between theoretical and experimental
data is close at the subsonic Mach numbers. A discrepancy be­
tween predicted and experimental values is noted at the Mach
1 0 regime l but becomes smaller and more negligible as the Mach
0

number increases. The discrepancy is attributed to interference

between the nose cone shock wave and the rotor l an effect not
included in theoretical predictions.
Rotational speed of the rotor as a function of governor
spring preload is presented in Figure 43. The minimal scatter of
data for the test range of Mach numbers l dynamic pressures I and
governor spring rates indicates that the effect of these parameters
on governing characteristics is negligible.
Rotor moments and lateral forces at the small rotor axis
angles of yaw (limited by the tunnel support system) were gener­
ally too low in magnitude with respect to the balance sensitivity
to permit accurate measurements.

64

._- .._ .... __ .

.4

r_+---l-· ---~
II . I I
II
I I , .... - -
..

~
i
~
: ,

/~.'"
C) ,I
.3
/ r- THEOI ETICi L
~
E-t
A-- ~-~
I~ t----
I I
!
~ I-A-. A

t-4
C) f--A....... . ?/ L'-TES'!
~
- ~

t-4
~

~
-N I DATi
r:a::l .2

Q')
o
C)
I I
C1I
r:a::l I
~ II
o
~ i!
I i
.1

~
! j
I
I ! i
I
I (OR i... 35( Ft/Sec)
I
IX:

~
!
I i
i

o I I I :

.6 1.0 1.4 1.8 2.2 2.6 3.0

MACH NUMBER - M

COMPARISON OF THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL CDR AT VARIOUS MACH NUMBERS

FIGURE 41

. . •__• ,.... K_".~~""."o,"~"""_""_'"'-='--'._."K"'_'""'"'." __",,,,,,~,_ ...._ .~.",.?""".,_._c~"' ...."_'_,.,."i_>-".,•.;"".. _-".'' ' ' '..,.N__.,.,.:r,'t'lO'-"",i~"."""'<"''''''''~'''*,'·,*",,,i"1-'''''''''''~''h''_1!-·''''''j'''''''''''''''_'.~i".~,
,:·~_",w."'!''''''''''''''':,*~~~_'''''~~''''''W~~~~''M'''1',''''''''='''''.':~'!l'_'
~'''''''''~'_''"''''''F";\>!_,:,,,''''·~''''-''''
•••-';~_·~,",~"'I'''''.\·0·''''",.~,,~.:~"_"'!'l')":'''7>''''''''''"''''··'-·-''''if~~·1'7'·--''''''''-''!·~}·~
ih
!
- -
VJoJ-'V

~
-­ v..J
~

M­ 0.5
~

o ~~
---- THEORETICAL
o TEST DATA

~ 0 0
~
I
/ M­ 1.5
---J I
I

~ ':"

~
M - 2.91

o
o 100 200 300 400 500

ROTOR TIP SPEED - FT!SEC

COMPARISON OF THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL CDft
AT VARIOUS TIP SPEEDS AND MACH NUMBERS

FIGURE 42

66
1200 I - - - - - - - - - - l - - - - - - + - - - - - l - - - - - - - l - - . . . " . " . : . . - - - - - , d

~
G 'Y
t;
0
f
j
i
1000 ~'

[
~
~

::II
tEl
~ 800
.
e
r.z1
W
1'"
~~
l:1c SYMBOL M ALTITUDE )i:

~.,
rI)
:;~
IX: 0 .50 54,000
0 !
Eo! 600 •
0
IX: <>A 1.00
1.22
85,000
88,900

.~--
..
A
~ 1.43
1.88
2.13
92,450
89,000
96,000
;;­
f'
i1
~
if
400
~
[;] • 2.91 118,000

200'--....._ _-"" "-- ....... _

o 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

GOVERNOR SPRING FORCEI FS - LBS

COMPARISON OF THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL

GOVERNING CHARACTERISTICS

FIGURE 43

67

!---i- .--­ - _. - - - i--- -r=r:r:-r----­ _._- -,.

~
U
d

~..
r:I:1:
.008 .----- .--~--

.006
I : -+-1
I i : _ _ 0 I TES'Ii
I'
I
I i i
I -iTBE nl~L]]
.-;;; -S
DC -: 7:7°
I , I ~ TEST .oc--i 9.5"1 I I
r>:t . . I
fz1 I I !
o i i !
U I -!
E-4 oc. =; 7. 7°1
~ .004 i
::s
en ~ . i
ClO __ ~ I -............J: oc~·
Ii 9 SO
CJ
Z 1
1-1
i:c
~ .002 - - L'--0-)_
,-----­ i
I _ , ! I •
I __ I I
I
i i '
_ I ~_.
-------- -----+---.-­ I
I
o
.6 1.0 1.4 1.8 2.2 2.6 3.0

MACH NUMBER - M
COMPARISON
, OF THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL YAWING-MOMENT COEFFICIENTS

FIGURE 44
Yawing-moment coefficients for various yaw angles are pre­
sented in Figure 44 at various test Mach numbers. Agreement
between theoretical and experimental results is reasonable in
view of the insensitive measurements of the small forces in­
volved. Discrepancies are believed due, in part, to insuffi­
cient data on blade section characteristics at high angles of
attack, as discussed previously; and at lower Mach numbers, to
the inadequate expression of the blade section normal force
coefficient characteristic by its equation at advance ratios
approaching unity.
Agreement Lmproves with increasing Mach number, as might
be expected, for the following reason. Reference 7 indicates
that, theoretically, CN -- CN [Link].x as M-- 0:>, that is,
CNo-' O. Hence, the expression for the blade normal force
coefficient becomes an increasingly better representation as
Mach number increases. Data at the higher Mach numbers con­
firm this prediction. Accurate calculation of rotor moments
and lateral forces may have to be performed by numerical inte­
gration, using accurate, yet to be obtained, blade section
data at high angles of attack.

69

4. EXPLORATORY AIR DROP TESTS

A. INTRODUCTION

Exploratory air drop tests were conducted with remotely­

controlled KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE flight test vehicles at the Joint
Navy-Air Force Parachute Test Facility, El Centro, California.
The U. S. Air Force 6511th Test Group (Parachute) provided the
drop aircraft and other necessary support services. Testing
at the Government-furnished facility was arranged by the Aero­
nautical Systems Division.
The air drop tests demonstrated the capabilities and per­
formance potential of the ROTOCHUTE-type decelerator concept
and defined areas wherein additional research and experimenting
would prove valuable in realizing the full potential of rotary­
wing decelerators. Details and results pertaining to the air
drop tests are presented in this section.
B. OBJECTIVE
The prime objective of the exploratory air drop testing
was to demonstrate the feasibility of utilizing a rotary-wing
decelerator for retardation at subsonic speed, controlled glide
descent, and near-zero velocity landing. The tests were de­
fined to explore the test vehicle glide capability, maneuver­
ability, response to control, and touchdown performance.
C. CONCLUSIONS
As a result of successfully deploying the rotor system,
gliding, and maneuvering the KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE during descent,
demonstrating the "flared" landing functions, and evaluating
test results and data, it is concluded that:
1. It is feasible to retard and recover payloads
with remotely-controlled, rotary-wing decelerator
systems.
2. The behavior and performance in flight can be
reasonably predicted.
3. Transition into glide from axial descent is

smooth and stable.

4. Rotary-wing decelerator systems will provide

useful glide LID ratios for many applications.

70
5. Parasite drag of the recoverable unit has an
important effect on the glide ratio. The higher
the drag J the steeper the descent.
6. Horizontal and vertical touchdown velocities can
be substantially reduced by means of the "cyclic"
and "collective" flare maneuver.
7. Spiral instability of the ROTOCHUTE induced by
operation of the rotor at RPM's above the stable
range can be controlled and eliminated by auto­
matic stabilization.
8. The horizontal stabilizer is not an essential
element to the concept for trim if sufficient
trim control is provided in the rotor system de­
sign.
9. The collective pitch should be controllable for
co-ordination with cyclic control during the
landing flare maneuver.
10. More effective lateral control is required during
cyclic flare to prevent ~oll and eventual spiral.
11. Rotor forces J performance J aerodynamic and sta­
bility characteristics of a recoverable unit
as an entity should be determined as accurately
as possible in wind tunnel and other tests to
provide the data and knowledge for more accurate
analytical prediction of the behavior and per­
formance and a minimum development period.
12. Additional study and flight testing of the
cyclic and collective flare landing maneuver is
required for a better demonstration of the per­
formance potential in this regime.
D. FLIGHT TEST VEHICLE
To demonstrate feasibility of controlled recovery and pro­
vide experimental flight test data on rotary-wing decelerator
system performance and behavior during controlled glide descent
and maneuvers J a remotely-controlled KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE flight test
vehicle was designed and fabricated. Existing available hard­
ware and components were used to the maximum extent possible.
Systems were incorporated for rotor deployment J remote control

71

FIGURE 45 KRC-6 TEST VEHICLE (Original Configuration)

72
and guidance, stabilization, telemetry and flare functions.
Instrumentation was provided to record vehicle attitude and be­
havior, rotor system data, and flight performance. The original
configuration, prior to modifications during tests, is shown
in Figure 45.
The KRC-6 rotor system was adapted from the proven KRC-4
ROTOCHUTE rotor system. The four-bladed rotor was initially
eight feet in diameter. Basic elements of the rotor system are
essentially those described for the wind tunnel model in
Section 3. However, the synchronizer system was modified and a
collective "flare" control system was added. Also, the rotor
hub was cast of aluminum alloy for weight reduction. Figure 46
and Figure 47 show the rotor system (final configuration) in
the deployed and stowed state respectively.
Rotor deployment is initiated at launch or release when
the firing pin of the T-33 Delay Initiator (a U.S. Army Ordnance
unit used extensively in aircraft ejection seat installations)
is pulled by a static line attached to the launch aircraft. A
short delay ensues (2 and 3 second delays were used) before the
main charge is fired to generate the gas pressure pulling for the
rotor deployment pin. A short length of high temperature hy­
draulic hose transmits the gas pressure from the initiator unit
mounted on the body to the deployment pin chamber o
The synchronizer system was modified to permit limited
differential flapping of blades, thus reducing rotor aft pitching
moments, hence servo control loads, during glide. The synchronizer
rods, instead of attaching directly to the synchronizing slide
element, couple to the slide through limited-travel cranks which
allow approximately +10 0 blade flapping from nominal operation
coning position.
The "one-shot" collective flare system [Link] all blades
at a selected "high" pitch or angle of attack simultaneously on
a command signal o The electrical signal ignites the Tl4E2 Ignition
Element of the MIAI Thruster Actuator mounted within the upper
section of the rotor assembly. The two pyrotechnic units are
UoS. Army Ordnance Frankford Arsenal items. The ignition element
fires the thruster. Generated internal gas pressure powers the
thruster piston which, through connecting linkage, pulls "up" on
the governor housing to compress the governor spring. This up­
ward motion of the housing positions the blades at the selected
pitch setting through the governor mechanism linkage. The "flare"
pitch setting is established by adjustment of the collective
flare rod assembly length. The shorter the length, the higher
the pitch. During normal governing action, relative motion between

73
74

FIGURE 47 KRC-6 ROTOR ASSEMBLY (Pre-Deployment)

75
FIGURE 48 KRC-6 BODY UNIT

76

the "flare" rod assemblies and actuating cross arm (attached

to the thruster piston output terminal) is allowed by slots in
the rod assembly upper terminal fitting.
A multiple-channel slip ring serves as the electrical
coupling between the stationary and rotating portions of the
rotor assembly for the rotor instrumentation sensor and collec­
tive "flare" signals. Rotor parameters such as housing
position l blade coning l and blade bending stresses (flatwise
and chordwise) and rotor rpm may be recorded. RPM signals from
the magnetic pic~up do not pass through the slip ring l since
the pickup is mounted on the stationary control spider.
The stationary shaft supporting the rotor assembly picks
up the control spider l which is mounted atop the body unit
through an automotive-type universal assembly. The universal
allows tilt freedom of the rotor assembly in all directions with
respect to the body. The pitch and roll control rods pick up
the control spider and position the rotor as commanded.
The body unit l Figure 48 1 houses the remote control and
guidance l stabilization l and telemetry systems. The body
(hexagonal in cross-section l 16 inches across the flats) is
fabricated of aluminum alloy skins l bulkheads l and appropriate
stringers. Two hinged doors with quick-release fasteners pro­
vide access to the lower compartment wherein the avionics and
telemetry components are installed. The rotor attachment-servo
pedestal and electromechanical control servos are located in the
upper compartment. The upper bulkhead l pedestal l servos and
spider assemble as a removable unit l Figure 49 and Figure 50.
A hand-hole in the side of the body provides limited access to
the servos. Standard lugs on 14-inch centers are provided for
aircraft bomb rack support and launch. Figure 51 shows the major
body assembly units.
Fins at the aft end of the body stabilize the vehicle longi­
tudinally during the launch phase prior to rotor deployment. The
stabilizing fins are mounted on retractable"legs or tubes held
against the body by solenoid-operated locking pins. After rotor
deployment l as the test vehicle approaches vertical descent l
the legs are deployed. Shock chords pull the leg struts past
track latches to lock the legs in a plane perpendicular to the
body longitudinal axis. The two forward fins are free to swivel
and weathercock during the glide for minimum drag. The aft fin
is fixed on its leg and acts as a directional fin in glide to
establish body heading. At touchdown l the tripod leg system was
to serve as a rudimentary alighting gear. Figure 52 shows the
legs in various stages of deployment.

77
FIGURE 49 KRC-6 ROTOR CONTROL SYSTEM
78
FIGURE 50 KRC-6 ROTOR CONTROL SERVO INSTALLATION

79
FIGURE 51 KRC-6 BODY UNITS

80

81

The primary electrical power system, wet-cell batteries

supplying up to 30 amperes, 24-volt DC current, is housed in the
nose cone, a molded re-inforced fiberglass sheIla This forward
location of batteries is favorable for locating the vehicle
center of gravity as far forward as possible and attenuating im­
pact shock forces a 'l'he airborne receiving and transmitting
antennae are mounted on the forward end of the cone o
The KRC-6 avionic system, consisting of the ground station
and airborne installation, was designed to provide the following
capabilities:
1. Programming and initiation of [Link] and

flight functions.

2. Remote cOlltrol during descent o

3. Automatic stabilization during descent.
4 0 Telemetry of vehicle test data.
The remote control is a compass-oriented system, ioe. the
vehicle will fly in the heading in which the operator positions
the control stick, regardless of the instantaneous body heading o
Vehicle control is effected by pitch and/or lateral tilt of the
rotor with respect to the body. The vehicle will glide in the
direction of rotor tilt o Body heading is controlled by the fixed
directional fin which weathercocks the body in the flight direc­
tion during glide o The vertical gyro provides spatial reference
for automatic stabilization of the pitch and roll attitUde. This
reference can be biased by control commands to establish and
maintain body tilt up to 45 0 from the vertical.
Six remote control channels for ground-to-air control are
provided o Two al'e proportional control channels for transmitting
North-South, East-West components of heading commands. The re­
maining channels are "on-off" switching conunands. Two switching
channels are used to "arm" and "fire" the collective flare
thruster a The third switching channel initiates the telemetry
calibration sequencing. The fourth channel is a spare.
The air-to-ground telemetry system provides fourteen pro­
portional channels for transmitting test data or information.
Present test vehicles are instrumented to include body heading
and attitude information, control response, accelerations, and
rotor data o

82

The ground station includes the operator's control console

with the control stick and the ground portion of the communica­
tions system.

The control console, Figure 53, tripod-mounted for operator

convenience, incorporates the push-button switches for sWitching
command signals to initiate flight functions; read-out instru­
ments for rotor RPM, body attitude, and airspeeds; and the con­
trol stick. The stick is gimbal-mounted to swivel approximately
30 0 from the vertical in all directions and generates proportional
North-South and East-West command signals as a function of its
tilt by means of potentiometers attached at the base of the
stick. A centering spring positions the stick in "neutral",
hands-off.

Control commands and data telemetry signals are transmitted

on FM telemetry bands by a two-way radio link, shown in Figure
54. Ground-to-air commands are broadcast on a carrier frequency
of 410 mc., with a Babcock T-450 transmitter. Its rated maxi­
mum output power is 35 watts. The airborne receiver is an R.S.
Electronics Model 2611 unit. Air-to-ground telemetry informa­
tion is relayed on an FM carrier frequency of 232.9 mc. The
airborne transmitter, a Tele-Dynamics Model 1001A unit, rated
at 3.5 to 4.5 watts output, feeds a gamma-matched halo antenna
mounted on the vehicle nose cone. The ground station receiver
is a Nems-Clark Model 1673 receiver. It is shown in Figure 55
as an asembly with the coder-decoder unit.

Transmission of multiple channels of ground-to-air command

signals and air-to-ground telemetry data information is achieved
by the use of a t}Vo-way multiplexing or "time sharing" coding­
decoding system manufactured by Sierra Research Corporation.
This two-way data link, Model DLlOl, provides two time-divided
composite signals consisting of the two proportional four "on­
off" channels in the ground-to-air link and the fourteen propor­
tional telemetry channels in the air-to-ground link.

The composite pulse train output of the ground 7 to-air coder

amplitude modulates a 20 KC subcarrier which frequency modulates
the 410 mc transmitter. The output of the air-to-ground coder
is similarly used with a 70 KC subcarrier modulator to modulate
the 232.9 mc airborne transmitter. The receiver output signal
of each link is demodulated and applied to a decoder input which
separates the composite signal into the original number of in­
dividual channels. The discrete samples of information thus
entering each output channel are stored in an emitter follower
to provide an essentially continuous output.

83
FIGURE 53 GROUND CONTROL UNIT

84
85

FIGURE 55 GROUND STATION RECEIVER AND CODER-DECODER UNIT

86
Due to the finite speed of R.F. energy propagation, the
above system is limited to a range of approximately 30 miles
(unless modified). All radio frequency modulators and demodula­
tors used in the system were manufactured by Kaman ~ircraft
Corporation.
The fourteen proportional telemetry channels designed to
transmit direct current signals have a cut-off frequency of ap­
proximately 20 cps; consequently, all 400 cps data signals must
be demodulated prior to data system processing. Table 3 presents
a summary of telemetry data provided in the ROTOCHUTE air drop
tests. The telemetered data carrier signal is decoded by a
Sierra decoder unit into channel signals appropriate for recording
by oscillograph for permanent synchronized record of command
control signals and telemetered information.
The airborne system comprises the airborne units of the
communications link, attitude sensors, switching and sequencing
circuits, control servos, and data sensors.
The command carrier signal from the g~ound station is de­
tected by the airborne command receiver, and decoded by a Sierra
Research CD-IOI decoder unit into proper proportional control
signals and switching outputs.
The proportional control signals are channeled to the com­
mand modulator which generates outputs, as a function of the
control signals, for exciting the North-South and East-West
stator windings of a resolver in the General Electric Model KD-6
Directional Gyro. The gyro provides the heading reference for
properly routing the command inputs. The resolver rotor, whlch
remains aligned at the initial compass heading, couples command
inputs as a function of instantaneous vehicle heading into the
pitch and roll servo channels to tilt the rotor in the commanded
direction regardless of the vehicle heading.
Automatic stabilization of the vehicle is achieved by means
of vertical gyro error voltages inserted into pitch and roll hub
control servo loops. The Lear Model 1080H vertical gyro pro­
vides pitch and roll attitude voltages to the summing bridges of
the corresponding servo amplifiers. Each amplifier provides
proportional plus derivative amplification of the gyro error
signal. The amplified signals are then summed in the output
stage to provide differential clutch current for the Lear Model
118AB actuator. Lear 1450lDI follow-ups provide actuator position
and velocity feedback signals to the amplifier inputs, completing

87

w
BkW"SfrWweWt'§ftlWf'fiWrrYlWni"''t#lr'fftWif:;ilW'tlit'''',c'ltif'irtW!l!l'¥!{7!Y'!!ilf";'ftl'l""'W*iftf f liitT'Z'rw'1frj'ii_yt"'rt?f1lliirnfrr FWfY',rmrr'trwe:mnr7',"'7;' rrx

TABLE 3

TELEMETRY DATA PROVISIONS

OPERATIONAL PAillUdETER TEST DROP NUMBER REMARKS

Pitch Servo Position 4,5,6,9,10,11,12,13 Demodulated Signal
Roll Servo Position 4,5,6,9,10,11,12,13 Demodulated Signal
Pitch Attitude 4,5,6,9,10,11,12,13 Demodulated Signal
Roll Attitude 4,5,6,9,10,11,12,13 Demodulated Signal
Directional Gyro Heading 4,5,6,9,10,11,12,13 Demodulated Signal, 2 Channels
Rotor Speed 4,5,6,9,10,11,12,13 Special Pulse Circuit Operation

00
Rotor Housing Position 6,9,10,11,12
00
Blade Cone Angle 6,9,10
Blade Bending 10 Demodulated Signal
Chord Bending 10 Demodulated Signal
Pitch Rod Force 6,11,12 Demodulated Signal
Roll Rod Force 6,11,12 Demodulated Signal
Collective Flare Arming 10,11,12,13
Lateral Accelerometer 4,5,6,9,10
the position servo loop. A derivation analysis of servo loop
characteristics and transfer functions is presented in Appendix C.
The flight program command control comprises the circuits,
switching, relays, and time delays to:
1. Uncage the directional gyro
2. Deploy the alighting gear and directional fin
3. Unground servo command signals
4. Arm and initiate the collective flare control
5. Implement other desired functions
Data sensors such as magnetic pickups, accelerometers, po­
tentiometers, strain gages, etc. provide electrical signals
of test data such as rotor RPM, axial and lateral accelerations,
heading, pitch and roll attitude, blade pitch and coning, and
blade stresses. The telemetry signal control amplifies or modi­
fies the data sensor signals into the form suitable for tele­
metering. The Sierra decoder unit converts and codes data sensor
information into a telemetered carrier signal for transmission
to the ground station by the airborne transmitter.
During flight, up to 30 amperes, 24-volt DC electrical power
is supplied for the airborne system by two Exide AC-54 batteries
connected in series. Portions of this power are converted to
250-volt DC current by a Universal Transistor Power Supply Dyna­
motor, Model 6075-10, and to 115-volt, 400 cps AC current by an
Eicor Inverter to fulfill the power needs of various subsystems.
The ground control station operates on 28-volt DC primary
power. A Bendix Aviation Type MG54C Inverter Eupplies 115-volt,
400 cps AC current for the ground station receiver and coder­
decoder.
A more detailed discussion of the avionic system is pre­
sented in Appendix III.
E. FUNCTIONAL TESTS OF THE FLIGHT TEST VEHICLE
Ground truck tests were performed on the flight test vehicle
to check systems function, obtain preliminary qualitative per­
formance data, and establish governor spring setting for flight.
A KRC-6 test vehicle without fins and alighting gear was mounted,
as shown in Figure 56, in a double-gimbal rig aboard a truck for
the checkout.

89

90

The small inner gimbal permitted angular displacement of

the vehicle about its lateral axis. The outer rectangular gimbal
permitted pitch attitude variation. Aircraft-type disc brakes
locked the gimbals in any selected attitude when hydraulic pres­
sure was applied. The pitch gimbal was strain-gaged to provide
rotor thrust data.
Runs were made at speeds 35 to 55 miles per hour (ground
speed) along an airport taxi strip and a half-mile oval speedway
track. Measurements were taken of rotor pitching moment in the
glide attitude, rotor RPM~ and thrust. Response to control com­
mands was observed.
Thrusts as high as 565 pounds were measured in axial opera­
tion. Thrust data indicated that a one uG u axial rate of descent
was 55 to 60 feet per second. In glide, thrusts of 535 pounds
were obtained at 86 feet per second airspeed, 1130 rpm, and 24 0
rotor angle of attack. The rotor was "speed stable" throughout
all attitudes tested.
The rotor pitching moment was continuous "nose-up" for the
speed regime investigated. However, moments were running higher
than predicted. It was necessary to increase the rotor tilt
nearly 50 per cent to +7 0 for adequate control during flight.
Systems functions were checked during the testing. No
major deficiencies were found. Transport for several hundred
miles over various road conditions proved the ruggedness and
reliability of the avionic equipment and" installation. Valuable
handling and operating experience was gained.
F. TEST FACILITY
Launch aircraft, chase aircraft, and other support services
were provided by the U.S. Air Force 6511th Test Group (Parachute)
at the Joint Parachute Test Facility, El Centro, California.
The Facility was established and is equipped to perform develop­
ment, testing, and evaluation of parachute systems and other
retardation devices. Detailed information concerning the Facility
may be found in Reference 8. The ROTOCHUTE drops were carried
out at the desert TATU range.

91

G. TEST PROCEDURE
Each KRC-6 test vehicle was readied with the necessary pro­
visions to demonstrate its test objectives. On the scheduled drop
day, the ROTOCHUTE was attached to the launch aircraft release
system at the station air field. The drop zone was approximately
30 minutes distant (by automobile travel). Test vehicle systems
were activated prior to take-off or in-flight. Flight personnel
were indoctrinated and co-ordinatedfor the required in-flight
activation and operation. The period between activation of sys­
tems and release was kept to the minimum possible whenever battery
operation was involved, since useful battery life was considered
to be 30 to 40 minutes on a full charge.
When all support operations were in readiness, the drop zone
range control guided the launch aircraft by radar to the launch
point at the established test release altitude and airspeed. The
TATU drop controller counted down the release.
High speed, l6mm color motion pictures, taken from the launch
aircraft, chase plane, and two ground cameras at the drop site,
monitored the drop test from launch to impact. Time from release
to impact was clocked with stop watches. Trajectory and other
flight performance were determined from cinetheodolite film taken
during the drop from the five stations located around the drop
zone. The cinetheodolite data were read, reduced, and tabulzted
by the 65llth Group and supporting personnel.
Telemetered data were recorded on the oscillograph which
was part of the Kaman-operated ground control station. As back-up
the telemetry carrier-signal was taped by the 65llth Test Group
Instrumentation Operations.
H. TEST PROGRAM
The air drop tests were established to provide step-by-step
knowledge and experience on the behavior and performance of the
remotely-controlled ROTOCHUTE system from release to impact and to
explore the systems capability for glide, control, and touchdown.
According to plan, initial drops were made with "bare model"
test vehicles (without control, stabilization or telemetry equip­
ment) to explore launching proc~dures and problems, to check rotor
deployment and performance, governor spring preload, vehicle
stability in descent, and to check the vehicle and mechanical sys­
tems airworthiness, functioning, and reliability.

92

;';'_:;>'."V,:;:ifii<y_:-w;:w1;:;;;j;;'~.;~,,,", :...',,,,':,::'~,i. y.,,,;,,~#_;;,,~~~~.ii..:,;;;,;,:vj,,,;:!-.,;-,,~~'.,\-i"':!i~~i;b" ••;;r&4;";1 ...;.';""';;;....>"i;.~C, ••""-"',';....'-:;;,:,:'.,,;'- __,,;;..~,G..',-i<.~,i'",,~i,' ~"",-;,;;i-i.;;;,~".;t,.J:'[Link]~(;

RELEASE DEPLOYMENT

~-~--...
~
"

VERTICAL
DESCENT

CD GLIDE
~
fj
~,

' ..

CYCLIC FLARE
"-~

~
COT~'ECTIVE
T FLARE

TOUCHDOWN

TEST FLIGHT PROFILE

FIGURE 57

Once the vehicle and mechanical systems were deemed to be

airworthy and functioning properly, the remote control models
with automatic stabilization, instrumentation, and telemetry were
air-dropped, with specific objectives planned for each particular
flight. The planned flight profile may be seen in Figure 57.
Data and results were analyzed after each test to determine
what, if any, modifications were to be incorporated in the next
test vehicle. Objectives for the follow-on test were revised in
accordance with those achieved from drops already performed.
The air drops performed during the test series are tabulated
in Table 4. Launch and chase aircraft, launch conditions, and
other information pertinent to the drop are summarized in the
table.
I. AIR DROP TESTS
Thirteen air drop tests were performed. Three KRC-6 "bare"
models, two "dummyt. models (to check launch procedures from the
H-2l helicopter), and eight KRC-6 controlled models were dropped.
Modifications to improve behavior and/or performance were in­
corporated whenever visual observation or recorded data indicated
a need.
A "bare" model KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE was readied for the first
test. It was ballasted to simulate the weight and inertia of
controlled models with a full complement of equipment. The
governor was set for 1140 RPM rotor speed. Fin deployment was
timed to occur 16 seconds after release.
ROTOCHUTE No. 1 was released from a B-66 aircraft at 254
knots and 1870 feet altitude. A relatively low release altitude
was selected to insure better visual observation and camera cover­
age of the release and deployment events. The aircraft was in a
10 0 dive attitude at release, simulating the launch attitude
planned for controlled models to minimize any possibility for
tumbling the attitude gyros.
The gyro gimbals are limited in their displacement. As
mounted in the test vehicle, if the body approached horizontal
and rolled 180 0 , the gyro limitations are reached and the gyro
may tumble.
The test vehicle separated cleanly from the aircraft, main­
taining a stable attitude to approximately 12 feet below the bomb
bay door. It then pitched up sharply and climbed relative to
the aircraft, passing close to the horizontal stabilizer. Two
seconds after release, the rotor deployed while the vehicle was

94

TABLE 4

SUllIlARY OF AIR DROP TESTS

ROTOCHVTE NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

USAF TEST NO. 1229 F62 1354 F62 1358 F62 1359 F62 1386 F62 1410 F62 1385 F62 1411 F62 1470 F62 2021 F62 2052 F62 0407 F63 0464 F63

DATE 7-16-62 7-20-62 7-24-62 7-26-62 8-1-62 8-7-62 8-16-62 8-17-62 8-22-62 12-3-62 1-8-63 4-4-63 4-11-63
TIIIlE (PST) 08:21 07:57 10:06 06:10 06:26 06:16 10:29 06: 57 08:10 12:25 08:39 09:39 09:22
GROmm TEIIP (oF) 89 99 104 86 87 90 109 94 95 70 75 70 66
SURFACE WIND (KTS) S-5 W-4 E-5 1111-7 1111-7 1111-8 N-7 0 SW-9 0 0 W-4 N-6

LAUNCH AI RCRAFT B-66 C-130 C-130 C-130 C-130 C-130 H-21 H-21 H-21 H-21 H-21 H-21 H-21
LAUNCH SPEED (KTS) 254 120 140 166 154 170 19 20 9 42 46 60 44

LAUNCH ALTITUDE,MSL(FT) 1870 3230 3165 5345 5740 8265 5715 5400 5420 6530 5485 5300 5880

CD
LAUNCH ATTITUDE (DEG) _10 0 +30 0 -.,0 _12 0 -16 0 -160 -900 _90 0 _90 0 _90 0 _900 _90 0 _90 0
CII

CONFIGURATION BARE BARE BARE GUIDED GUIDED GUIDED DUIIIIY DUIIIIY GUIDED GUIDED GUIDED GUIDED GUIDED
WEIGHT (LBS) 272 275 273 275 274 274 266 264 270 275 295 279 305

ROTOR DU. (FT) 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 10 10

GOVERNED RPII 1140 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 0 0 1000 1000 1060 820 820

TIllE TO IIIPACI' (SEC) 23.2 38.0 36.8 32.9 79.6 51.5 26.4 26.8 73.6 97.0 70.0 49.2 108.5

AV. RID (rT/SEC) 80.5 85.0 86.0 162.5 72.2 160.5 216.5 202.0 73.7 67.3 78.3 107.6 54.1

IIIN R/D (FT/SEC) 70.0 69.4 69.2 --­ 66.4 --­ --­ --­ 62.4 54.2 61.4 --­ 26.8

MAX GLIDE RATIO LID 0.55 0.64 0.40 --­ 0.26 --­ --­ --­ 0.59 0.94 1.07 --­ 2.38

,""..:,.,.."'1?'t"~~"";"""~t'~"~''::''·'''',!,C1';<''''·'''''"",/>~''''1f~~"
...·"",·,·"~ ·-·"·"'.'·"···"·'··~.'-!Io.~.~i'%'li'c·7":"'''~'SY!:·_U'<':.''~~~ '~""''t''f'!!'''''''',,'·j';!'i'X~f'''I.'·1.;''!'''~~·:'''·~''''T'.,;'~~~''''··.'·-·''''"'''>ry'''''' ;"""~'lit:'~"'!l'Y"·?:!."'-"";'~'~~',~~·"'!)r""<""''l'<':''·'·7'\'I'r:"''''''·''':'!'~' '~':~~~i?;'L'f';:~'i.~:,,,,,!~,·,·,~."''''>~'''''f}~'l''t''''''"''·'?l'''j;''!'.~~-' "';';"!~~',':~.....-:c<·"'/"":f"','or:·!tt::,j'i;O:$.ff~~""""l"N'·-'''·~~.''''''''.~.",~~~·"'r~''f'''''~'''''''','$~''''\'''",,"~ ''''''''_'''''''~'''''''''''",;':~~''''.1V~l_;i",.,"''''''~'''' _ _'_'''_
in a 450 nose-high attitude and began to decelerate the vehicle o
As descent reached vertical, a 4- to 5-second period spiral de­
veloped. The fins and alighting gear deployed as programmed o
The spiraling continued until impact, at which instant the body
longitudinal axis was approximately 550 from vertical. The nose
cone, alighting gear and rotor assembly were damaged. --The body
was relatively intact and reusable.
The following results were indicated by this first test. The
mechanical systems functioned properly and were airworthy. Longi­
tudinal stability prior to rotor deployment must be improved to
preclude gyro tumbling in controlled models from the pitch-up.
Rate of descent was higher than predicted because of rotor tilt
during spiral and above standard air temperature. The spiral,
while not excessive or unexpected, occurred sooner than desired
after rotor deployment.
Spiral instability of ROTOCHUTE systems often occurs when
rotor tip speeds are high. Although spiral of the KRC-6 vehicle
was expected at rotor speeds of 900 rpm or greater, the rotor
was governed at 1140 rpm to provide increased rotor stored (kinetic)
energy for the collective flare mode. Automatic stabilization
was expected to overcome the spiral if not too severe. It was
deemed prudent, however, that descent be stable until automatic
stabilization can assume control.
In consideration of the above results, the following modifi­
cations were incorporated on Test Vehicle No.2, also a "bare"
model. The rotor governed speed was reduced to 1000 RPM to delay
onset of the spiral. Since, on controlled vehicles, automatic
stabilization becomes operative when the fin and alighting gear
deploy, this sequence timing was reduced to 10 seconds, thus re­
ducing the required period for uncontrolled stable descent. To
improve longitudinal stability, the nose cone was shortened 10.5
inches and the fins were moved aft 3.5 inches. In -effect, the
vehicle density was increased, reducing any tendency to "float"
or "fly", and effective fin tail arm was improved since the body
center of gravity was now further forward in relation to the fin
surfaces o The modified version is shown in Figure 58 0

Until launch behavior could be demonstrated as being satis­

factory, the 65llth Group Flight Operations preferred to launch
from a C-130 aircraft at lower airspeeds. A launch device used
by the 65llth Group in a previous program was adapted for re­
lease of the KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE from the aft end of the C-130 aircraft o

96

~
z
o
u
~
(f)
o
z
Cl
~
H
~
H
Cl
o:;g

97

98

0
ROTOCHUTE No. 2 was released in a 30 nose-high attitude
from the C-130 aircraft, sliding aft, tail first, off the launcher
on a wooden carriage. This launch method was an expedient used
to check the vehicle stability and descent performance with a
minimum of delay while hardware for the launcher was being readied
to release the vehicles in an attitude compatible with gyro re­
quirements for controlled models. Release was at 120 knots
airspeed and 3230 feet altitude.
The ROTOCHUTE pitched nose-down immediately upon release.
The rotor deployed 3 seconds later (a 3-second delay initiator
was used). The vehicle achieved a retarded stable vertical de­
scent which continued until deployment of the fins after launch.
A spiral then developed and continued to impact.
Behavior and performance of ROTOCHUTE No. 2 compared to that
of ROTOCHUTE No. 1 was improved. Initial descent was stable for
a longer period, spiral was at a slower rate, and the average rate
of descent was comparable, 85 feet per second compared to 81 feet
per second. Mechanical system functions, vehicle stability, and
performance were now considered satisfactory for dropping the
controlled models.
"However, to demonstrate repeatability of performance and to
test the launch technique planned for controlled models, a third
"bare tt model was dropped. The launcher, Figure 59, by now was
fitted with a B-66 type ejection rack to support the test vehicle
in a 70 nose-down attitude. Vehicle No. 3 was similar to ROTO­
CHUTE No. 2 in configuration and timing of functions. The fins
and alighting gear were, however, non-deployable. Since spiral
during the No. 2 test began simultaneously with gear deployment,
it was of interest to determine whether the spiral was induced
by the extended gear or whether the occurrence was merely coin­
cidental.
ROTOCHUTE No. 3 was released from the C-130 aircraft at 140
knots airspeed and 3165 feet altitude. It nosed-down, pitched
up, and then aligned itself with the relative wind at rotor de­
ployment. Vertical descent was stable for about 10 seconds. The
spiral developed and descent was similar to that of ROTOCHUTE
No.2. Rate of descent again averaged 86 feet per second.
Similar behavior of the No. 2 and No. 3 test vehicles demon­
strated the repeatability of flight performance. Onset of spiral
was delayed sufficiently to enable the automatic stabilization
systems to assume control. Spiral rate was considered slow enough
to be controlled. Alighting gear position appeared to have little
effect on spiral behavior.

99
Acceptable aircraft separation (ground tests indicated that
a momentary pitch-up with simultaneous roll did not readily tumble
the gyros), rotor deployment, system functions, and performance
having been satisfactorily demonstrated, drops of controlled
vehicles were initiated.
The primary objective of the first controlled flight was to
determine vehicle response to commands, validate control system
gains and ratios, and otherwise become familiar with the vehicle
characteristics in controlled glide descent. As a safeguard to
assure achievement of test objectives, the collective "flare"
thruster was left out until the remote control, stabilization,
and telemetry networks were proven to be satisfactory and reliable.
A possibility existed that a random signal emanating from the
circuits could inadvertently "fire" the collective flare thruster.
An "arming" circuit was eventually provided as a safeguard.
ROTOCHUTE No. 4 free-fell after release from the aircraft
when rotor deployment was not initiated. A deployment initiator
with no charge had been inadvertently installed. The free-fall
theodolite data provided useful vehicle drag and longitudinal
stability characteristics.
Test No. 4 objectives were adopted for Test No.5. ROTOCHUTE
No.5, similar in configuration to No.4, was released from the
C-130 aircraft at 154 knots and 5740 feet altitude. The aircraft
was in a 100 dive attitude at release. This attitude was re­
quested to minimize a pitching tendency noted in motion pictures
of Drop No. 4 by improving the test vehicle alignment with the
relative wind at release.
After the rotor deployed, the vehicle decelerated into a
stable vertical descent. The fins and alighting gear deployed
at the programmed time. The automatic stabilization systems and
remote guidance systems became operative. The descent continued
stable and vertical. When commands were signalled by the con­
troller from the ground station, the vehicle responded. Limited
glide was achieved and the flight direction was changed. Theo­
dolite data indicated flight against reported wind. Average rate
of descent was 72 feet per second, substantiating predicted
rotor performance. Much of the avionic equipment sustained no
damage and electrical power had to be switched "off" at retrieval.
The batteries were still intact. The sensitivie gyros were damaged,
however. ROTOCHUTE No. 5 after impact is shown in Figure 60.

100

o
z

101

Even though the vehicle responded to commands and glide was

attained, the response was sluggish and the glide fell short of
expectations. Since the test vehicle was being flown for the
first time without previous experience to serve as a guide, the
controller may have signalled commands too rapidly for effective
control. In the next flight, the commands were to be signalled
more gradually and for longer periods to allow the vehicle a
better opportunity of establishing glide. Rotor tilt was in­
creased 50 per cent on all subsequent vehicles for additional
control power.
ROTOCHUTE No. 6 was launched under conditions similar to
Drop No.5, except that release speed was 170 knots and altitude
was 8265 feet. The vehicle began to tumble during rotor deploy­
ment, and rotor blade failures occurred approximately 11 seconds
after release. Plaue-to-air motion pictures indicated that
events up to rotor deployment were normal. Approximately one
second after deployment, the hub was tilted hard-over. This mini­
mized any stability the rotor was providing at the moment and
allowed the vehicle to yaw broadside to the flight path. The ad­
verse attitude prevented attainment of operational rotor speed
and induced excessive flapping of the blades to the extent that
several synchronizer rods buckled. With this flapping freedom and
low RPM, the blades were damaged against the shaft hardware. They
also hit the retracted fins, aggravating the tumbling.
Pictures and data did not establish whether excessive loads
displaced the servo to its hard-over position or whether the servo
lost its stiffness as a result of an electrical or mechanical mal­
function. Since the attitude at the instant of rotor deployment
appeared as favorable-as that of Vehicle No.5 at the same instant,
it is probable that airloads were no more severe. Random failure
of the servo or servo system electrically or mechanically is
believed to be the most logical explanation.
Accordingly, the servo circuits and power supply were re­
viewed for potential problem points. Rotor blade synchronizer
rods were strengthened. In addition, since turbulence behind the
C-130 launch area may have been a contributing factor in the
failure, remaining drops were performed from an H-2l helicopter at
or near hover. The ROTOCIWTE could be suspended vertically from
the personnel hoist, as in Figure 61, and released from a
cartridge-fired, quick-release hook.
To check the handling and release procedure and investi­
gate the effect of rotor downwash on the drop-away, two "dummy"
vehicles with non-deployable rotor assemblies, built up from
salvaged bodies and hardware, were dropped prior to controlled
vehicles. Drop Tests No. 7 and No. 8 proved that drop-away was
stable and satisfactory.

102
FIGURE 61 HELICOPTER LAUNCHING POSITION
103
The flight plan for Test No o 6 was adopted for Test No.9.
ROTOCHUTE No o 9, a controlled model, was released at 5420 feet
altitude from hover o The rotor and alighting gear were inad­
vertently deployed prior to release of the ROTOCHUTE. Upon re­
lease, however, the rotor accelerated to operating speed and the
initial descent was stable - the stabilization system was already
operative. Glide and response to control were improved over that
of ROTOCHUTE No o 5. Glide into wind and several changes in
flight direction were effected o The vehicle's collective flare
system - now installed with a safety arming circuit to preclude
inadvertent initiation - was "armed" and signalled to "fire" just
prior to impact. However, the "flare" failed to respond to the
command.
Examination of the flare circuit and hardware disclosed that
the failure to "fire n resulted from intermittent discontinuity
of the ground lead at the thruster igniter electrical connector.
Ground attachment to the igniter mating connector is unconventional 0

The circuit had checked out satisfactorily in all functional tests o

A more positive connection was provided in subsequent installations.
Although response to commands was imprQved and snappier, it
still was less than satisfactory. Glide performance fell short
of the expected potential. When the rotor tilt was increased,
control system "gains tl were left unchanged. As a result, full
"command" signals could now override "stabilization feedback"
signals which reached a limit at vertical gyro "saturation" - at
approximately a 50 0 pitch attitude. The control system response
to large "command" signals became open-loop, making the control
system "direct" control rather than one of "attitude" control.
Body attitude must, therefore, be controlled visually by the
operator o This was thought to be feasible. However, the rapid
attitude changes and visual distance involved rendered such con­
trol difficult. Recorded data indicated that the behavior and
non-phased corrections by the operator produced a flight with a
series of dives and pull-ups that prevented establishing proper
glide.
Accordingly, control system gains were revised on subsequent
installations to provide a closed-loop system for all control
stick commands o Commanded body tilt was limited to 45°0 Visual
indicators for roll and pitch attitude were added to the control
console for the operator's reference. Timed, planned commands
to establish glide as a function of control stick displacement
were planned for the next test. As an aid, a switch-operated con­
trol was added to the consoleo With the new control, stepped
commands simulating 20 per cent to 100 per cent stick displacement

104

could be signalled for East or West flight. An "option" switch

permitted changeover to manual control with the stick.
ROTOCHUTE No. 10 was launched from the H-21 at 42 knots air~
speed and 6530 feet altitude. The rotor was already deployed,
alighting gear down, and stabilization system engaged at release.
In accordance with the flight program, free axial descent was
permitted for the initial 10 seconds. Next, a series of commands
tilting the rotor from 20 per cent up to 100 per cent tilt in
the West direction was signalled during the next 35 seconds. Re­
maining descent and landing was controlled manually with the
"stick". The ROTOCHUTE had been launched approximately 1.5 miles
from ground control, and was not visible to the operator at touch­
down. Consequently, collective flare was never initiated before
impact.
Oscillograph data indicated that the vehicle responded satis­
factorily to control commands. Body pitch attitude and hub tilt
relative to the ground indicated that the vehicle was in glide,
but oscillated about the pitch axis. Hub tilt was less than
commanded because of servo droop. Theodolite data indicated that
0 6 to 1.0 ratio glide was achieved during the 80 per cent to 100
0

per cent tilt command period.

Flight data also indicated that approximately 200 foot-pounds
rotor pitching moments at higher glide speeds exceeded trim mo­
ments available through rotor tilt. The moments drooped the pitch
servo and reduced available control.
Rotor blade stresses were recorded during this flight.
Stresses throughout the flight were well below design allowable
and steady.
Vehicle No. 11, Figure 62, was fitted with a horizontal
stabilizer to provide an estimated 100 foot-pounds forward (nega­
tive) pitching moment, reducing required trim control within
available limits. The horizontal tail was attached to the aft
alighting gear leg. Dual pitch servos were installed in tandem.
Thus, droop was reduced by lessening the load at which each servo
operated. Servo loads were further relieved with a bungee system
attached to the hub. The bungee, attached to the hub and body,
counterbalanced 60 foot-pounds of the hub moment.
ROTOCHUTE No. 11 was launched from the helicopter at 46 knots
airspeed and 5485 feet altitude. Since alighting gear deployment
in flight was dictated by the horizontal tail installation, the
rotor was deployed after release. Otherwise, if the tail were
"down" before the rotor reached operational speed, tumbling could
be ind~ced by the pitching moment. The release was performed
approximately 1/4 mile from the ground control.

105
FIGURE 62 KRC-6 WITH HORIZONTAL TAIL
106
The flight plan used ill Test No. 10 was again followed. The
vehicle responded well to commands and a definite glide was noted.
The collective flare was initiated approximately 150 feet above
the ground to insure coverage by theodolite cameras. A peak 2.5
"G" deceleration force was recorded. Rotor RPM decayed to zero
RPM in approximately 0.58 seconds, and the vehicle free-fell to
impact.

Flight data, Figure 63, indicates that the vehicle closely

followed the commands and commanded direction. An approximate
90 0 change in flight direction was performed. Directional insta­
bility during glide was encountered. Because available lateral
rotor tilt was less than in forward pitch, yaw displacement re­
duced the rotor tilt and the vehicle tended to porpoise pitchwise
in the direction of flight. Since the glide attitude was not
steady, glide performance was adversely affected.

Al though a peak 2.5 "G" retardation was recorded, full bene­

fit for vertical retardation was not realized, because the body
was pitched forward nearly 42 0 • Total deceleration along the
longitudinal axis was 1 "G'!.. second. It is estimated that the
resultant vertical retardation was 13 feet per secoP-d, too small
to be reflected in the "smoothed" theodolite data showing a "dive"
high rate of descent.

To minimize or eliminate heading instability, two vertical

fins were mounted at the tips of the horizontal tail on the re­
maining test vehicles. This reduced any "blanketing" of the fins
by the body in forward flight. Operation of the increased
vertical tail area in improved air flow was expected to improve
the directional stability. Also, the two forward alighting gear
tubes and fins were left off. In yaw, one leg exposed its full
length to air flow while the other foreshortened. The unequal
drag results in a turning moment. Removal of the legs also re­
duced vehicle parasite drag, a factor favorable for improving glide
performance.

To increase the rotor rpm decay period and improve the flare
performance, rotor inertia was increased with tip weights. Rotor
diameter was increased to 10 feet from 8 feet to lower the rotor
disc loading. The vehicle gross weight had increased to nearly
300 pounds as a result of modifications. The lower disc loading
would reduce the axial rate of descent and improve glide performance.
The modified rotor is shown in Figures 46 and 47.

107

100
AI!!!!!!! TIKI HISTORY TIST NO. 11
IIPII 10

1200

(\ 1\ II\. I
.!!!m!!
~
1100

1000
"" I'-..
'­ ""
~
...,I - 1/
""j "" r--­
\.
!
i
I 86.7 Sec.

~
J \ I 31
2 I
. 1 I
1•0 i I I I I I j" I ~..........
[Link]"""" I i I I I . I

o .2 .4 .6 Sec.
IoID UTIO COLLECTIVE FLARE
o I I I , ............. J I I I I I I I I I I

.....
180'~o
/1
/ .
/I
--- COlfTI OL D PuT
....
BUDJRG

360' D
/ / !
V " -­ ..:..
- - .1'. -
o
00 ~"ARDI.R~GBT

BODY PI'l'CR/ROLL
10

0 /'­ ~. 7>t
-
~I
- ,., .,..;; \
-.­ Z --- i-­

I '" -I=' ­ ~
\ r~1 .~
1',\ I
.~

I
Arl'!LRft 10
Elm
---agw.
20
PORWAllD!RIGBT
-
...
-'"­ \ I; , J l-l I'-­
BUB TILT
An'!LBFT
o
10
" ... " 'J \. , 'J ~ ~~ .... \ il V ,..­
A ~

,,
5O'J,
COIIIWfD o '- t---\. \
......... I FIGURE 63
1001
S~DS APTER LAUNCH o 10 10 30 40 10 60 70

TIME HISTORY TEST NO. 11

Figure 63

All anemometer type airspeed unit" seen clearly in Figure

51" was mounted from the front of the body to provide flight
airspeed information to the operator for controlling th~ glide
and attitude. To minimize nose-over pitching durin~ the collec­
tive flare phase" the horizontal tail was mounted to pivot
freely automatically when collective flare was "fired".

ROTOCHUTE No. 12" Figure 64" incorporating the above modifi­

cations" was released from 5300 feet altitude and 60 knots air­
speed. Because it was released at a higher than normal forward
speed" the test vehicle" being aerodynamically stable" nosed up
sharply to 10 0 above the horizontal and rolled simultaneously.
This change in attitude exceeded the vertical gyro design limita­
tions and was sufficient to tumble the gyro and lose control of
spatial reference. The lack of reference resulted in loss of
stability and control after the automatic stabilization became
operative.

Finding no indication of other malfunctions" it was con­

cluded that the severe pitch-up was a random event brought on
by the particular launch conditions. No change was made to
Vehicle No o 13" except to increase its pitching inertia o Twenty
pounds of ballast were added in the nose section. Drop proce­
dures were reviewed with the helicopter flight officer.

The final test vehicle" ROTOCHUTE No. 13" was released at

44 knots airspeed and 5880 feet altitude. Rotor deployment
and other programmed functions were normal.

Control stick commands were signalled for gradual tilt of

the rotor to the West until indicated airspeed stabilized at
approximately 70 miles per hour o Airspeed" pitch attitude" and
rotor rpm were monitored from the control console indicators"
Figure 65. The command was then gradually changed from West to
East until glide was re-established in the opposite direction.
Besides being a change in flight direction" the maneuver repre­
sented a "slow" cyclic flare.

A rapid cyclic flare was performed at 1100 feet altitude.

The vehicle tilted aft and slowed. It then rolled off to the
right into a tight spiral. A commalld was signalled for glide"
but the vehicle did not appear to respond immediately. Since
little altitude remained" the stick was put at neutral for verti­
cal descent to ini tiate collective "flare" in as nearly a vertical
a tt i tude as pass ib Ie
0 The flare thruster was "f ired" two seconds
before impact.

109

FIGURE 64 KRC-6 TEST VEHICLE (Final Configuration)

110
I-'
I-'
I-'

FIGURE 65 GROUND CONTROL UNIT (Final Configuration)

Telemetry signals were recieved at the control station
after impact. On arriving at the touchdown site, the vehicle
body was found to be relatively intact, except for the nose cone
which had sheared off laterally. Avionic systems were still
operating electrically and were switched "off". Subsequent bench
tests indicated that the avionic equipment was still operable
and undamaged. Even the sensitive gyros were not damaged.

The final drop was the most successful of the series in

regards to performing desired flight functions and maneuvers,
flight performance, and recovery of sensitive equipment. Nominal
rate of descent was 54 feet per second.

Flight direction was changed 180 0 • This is shown by a plot

of the x and y co-ordinates as recorded by theodolite, Figure 66,
and in flight data as recorded by oscillograph, Figure 67. The
small arrows in Figure 66 indicate the relative wind at the vari­
ous altitudes. Average wind velocity multiplied by the flight
time from Point A to B equals the drift distance from A to B.

Glide at LID ratios ranging from 1.6 to 2.0 was maintained

for extended duration. Maximum LID of 2.38 was achieved for a
short period. This is indicated in Figure 67.

Horizontal velocity was retarded to 12 feet per second from

84 feet per second during "slow" cyclic flare. Vertical rate
of descent was retarded to 27 feet per second. With respect to
ground, the vehicle actually reversed direction of flight.
The "rapid" cyclic maneuver retarded horizontal velocity to 4
feet per second and increased rotor speed to 910 from 810 RPM~
Rate of descent decreased to 46.5 feet per second. Figure 68 in­
dicates the changes in velocity as obtained from theodolite data.
Respective commands for the maneuvers are also indicated.

The large decrease in horizontal velocity with attendant in­

crease in rotor speed demonstrate the feasibility and value of
cyclic flare. Co-ordinated cyclic flare and collective pitch
control (not feasible with the test vehicle hardware) would un­
doubtedly improve over-all performance of the landing maneuver.
Spiral during the cyclic flare is attributed to softness of the
lateral control. The control did not effectively overcome the
rolling tendency induced by gyroscopic coupling of the rotor.
Gyroscopic moments are generated by the 1011gitudinal pitch rate
of the rotor.

112

4000 ,.------,----r--------,---'---,--.--,-----,

3200-----+-+/--.-sr---+----.-r-
I
r
I
!
i

2400 ------+-1
TOUCHbovm
--t-------'ft---
:
I
I II 1
!
I I i
i I I
------1----_·----+----+---"I~-4'-- T---------­
I
I .
I

I I i
I I I
1600 1----1--------­
-i1f---------¥'-+-----~--1
i
'~-'
I I

800 J------t

1-----111--j-~--
i
i
I
!
I
I I LAUNCH
OL..-_ _----'­ ....l-_ _----l ---'- ---l

2400 1600 800 o

Y DISTANCE FEET
GROUND FLIGHT PATH, TEST No. 13
.,
FIGURE 66
113
:; 7 -r7 'W 7rzmrmrnrr7mW''t''UmretNYrTtIfWmlti&fwifMeWi~1ff'''1fWWTZi!''j*¥ttW:!rmrr§'¥f#1'~t~n¥¥Wfj§f'Mi'Em'."jfWJWnifWWmt&tffi~~~~~~"l!l~!I!lJ! _

AIRSPEED
lIPS 01 , :J 1 I I'" I I I ! I I I I I I 1-'-- t-t~J-rl:
...•.._ .. _... ""_"-"-j

ftftft , ...
ROTOR RPM
r . - 1----­ ~---
1\ I' I-I
Ij .... ~
...... -."..
r­
~ t"­
-­ ~-
-~ j
,
"
_.... ~
1/ -­

ACCELERATION 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :g." I/'?-I~ I J:=:]!

(G'.)

LID RATIO

0'
+-'

........ READIKG 180 .u

~
360'
0
nD/RIGHT 50

BODY PI'l'CH/ROLL 0'

An/LEn' 50
urg
FWD/RIGHT 20 0 -mu.&.
_I ! i
...... ~ 17 [
11
HUB TILT 0'
10 :)
)

- 1 - . -1 - - ­ -­ 1--... - 7t~=
1--.....­ !
~--
i..:

AFT/LEFT E 1vv.r --~- -­ h--- -----­

~
.- --- - ­ ._­ -_. -­ ~

COIIIIAND 0
V 1\
~ .. \J
l' ~
8~D8 AFTER LAUNCH 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 no
TID HISTORY TI:ST 10. 13
FIGURE 67
')ifi¥~~f~~~J;tr;~w~mYft5'M1!"fi'%'fwwwr~$i'fm'jiMffljiillf'+'rl&~%iWi~~~4rWi#wmt~'iW1tt"mewwtcr'WU'WW"t)":!Wr't8*~11Wt6fWffi&iirYrN,,.'tjj@rjfKWnitft'ft¥ll!Wftfft'f5tWwlr'"'7 ' .r5WM1'ffl"""'miit'ttMWrrmnrtW'tZ7f1'f"p;mrVtmwn:wzZ

--~---_.- ----.,- ··--"·'l-·~·""'-

i
" i I
800 "'"

'-
:
'

I !
II

I I
, I
'~ : I [
: .....
--j- .'<::.. '
;~:._-~_._-_. If
.: I
j
'

--- t'..- ­

::s 600 ~A-------r-- i '- 1'----­

~
Q ~;:c:'\ • I rTHRJsT'" "" . ! l
:a " / ,
~ . .) " ......... I,i

i
CIJ
Q " / . '; / / / ,
~
~
Z 400 '1:~;/~
"-:~";
" '// ,. / / . . """'--!I'
,____ .........--\...

.
Q')
5

Po4
. /

Z /-~. / 1 / / :i I
!
'

r~'I
1-'4 <' (

E-4
rI)
0
P::
200 - L I ---
Ii -----i--.-r- I
!
::r::
E-4
,
,,
. + ., "..
i ---t-:, -~--
. II I

o
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
TIME AFTER DEPLOYMENT - SECONDS

ROTOR [Link] DURING COLLECTIVE FLARE (TRUCK TEST DATA)

FIGURE 69
Data on collective flare perforMance did not corroborate
one another fully. The operable condition of the avionic equip­
ment and gyros after impact indicates a soft touchdown. A 1.4
"G'~ second deceleration was recorded by the vehicle accelerometer.
Taking into account the 35 0 tilt of the vehicle at the instant
vertical descent should have been retarded by 37 feet per second.
Yet, recorded vehicle airspeed indicated little retardation.
Airspeed anemometer rotor inertia may not have reflected the
rapid deceleration. Theodolite data stopped a fraction of a
second after initiation of the flare.

A structural failure in the collective flare control sys­

tem prevented attainment of the retardation potential recorded
during truck tests, Pigure 69. The fitting attaching a "flare"
control rod to the rotor spring housing broke upon initiation
of the flare. As a result, the housing was not positioned for
optimum blade pitch setting, and maximum thrust was not developed.

J o HESULTS

The air drop tests demonstrated that a rotary-·wing decelera­

tor system, and in particular the ROTOCHUTF. concept, call:

1. Be deployed at various launch speeds and attitudes.

2 0 Be guided from axial descent into glide flight.

3 0 Be kept stable in all flight regimes.

4. Be maneuvered during descent and controlled in

heading.

5. Glide at LID ratios of 2 0 or better o

0

6. Retard impact velocities through cyclic and

collective flare.

7. Recover payloads intact and in an operable

condition.

117

The following performances were achieved with the KRC-6

ROTOCHUTE flight test system during the air drops:

Rotor Drag Coefficient, CDR

Terminal Rate of Descent (Axial) 52 it/sec

Maximum Glide (From Horizontal)

n.,o
£'0

o
Extended Glide (From Horizontal) 30

Cyclic Flare Retardation

Horizontal Velocity to 4 from 17 ft/sec
Vertical Velocity to 27 from 77 ft/sec

Collective Flare Deceleration

Peak 2.5 "Gil
Average 1.4 "G'~ seconds

Although the KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE vehicle was a newly created

flight system and was flown for the first time in the air drop
tests, all systems performed their intended functions in most
instances, even during adverse conditions.

The rotor sy~tem deployed satisfactorily and reliably, even

in adverse yaw attitudes. Although stable flight prior to de­
ployment is desirable, ceployments during the test demonstrated
that oscillatiolls as high as 45 0 yaw can be tolerated.

Spiral tendency of the lWTOCHUTE induced by operating the

rotor at speeds above the stable range to provide maximum rotor
stored energy for the flare phase was satisfactorily curtailed
and controlled by the Autornati~ Stabilizatioll System.

Axial c1escelit performance closely agreed with the performance

predicted analytir;ally. The performance in glide was predicted
qual i tati vely. (luant ita t ively, actual gl ide resul to failed to
agree more closely because accurate detail data of the vehicle
charact'3ristics were lacltil1g. The program per:ni ttf.!d only
limited investigatioH and testing prior to flight.

The vehicles were maneuvered during descent and flight

headir1 gs challged. With proper system "gains", adequate servo
stiffr,ess, and stable ('irectional control, the vehicle respo:lded
to commands alld flew ill the heading commauded, lleglecting wind
drift, oven illto rO:Jortcd winds. Vehicle respouse lagged com-­
!;lal1(:S by [Link] one second.

118
Vehicle drag prevented glide at LID ratios much higher than
2.0. The test vehicle body equivalent flat plate area was large
relative to the rotor disc area~ the rotor hub assembly was dis­
proportionately large to the rotor size (in comparison to rotors
for larger payloads)~ and modifications to the rotor (increas­
ing the diameter by adding blade tip extensions) resulted in
higher blade drag. When body drag was reduced by removal of the
legs and other minor modifications~ the glide range improved.
The test vehicle configuration in actuality simulated a missile
booster recovery configuration. Capsules would be smaller in
relation to the rotor.
Although a horizontal stabilizer was ultimately added be­
cause the rotor tilt on the test vehicle could not be increased
to produce enough trim control to counterbalance rotor aft
pitching moments being encountered~ the surface is not necessarily
essential in other applications. Providing adequate trim con­
trol by designing insufficient rotor tilt at the outset or re­
ducing the rotor pitching moment by using cyclic pitch of blades
to tilt the rotor plane would eliminate the need for a hori­
zontal stabilizer for trim.
Touchdown velocities were higher than_predicted because the
vehicle rolled and spiralled during the cyclic flare and collec­
tive pitch control was not co-ordinated with cyclic control
during the landing. This was not feasible with the existing
test vehicle control provisions. The lateral control must be
made more effective to prevent roll, and ensuing spiral, during
the cyclic flare mode. Servo control of collective pitch would
permit co-ordination during the landing maneuver. The servo
could also be "slaved" to rotor RPM for governing~ eliminating
the governing spring.
Just as with any other experimental aircraft or aerospace
system, each test provided data, knowledge~ and experience to
make the succeeding flight a better one.

119

5. APPLICATION STUDIES

INTRODUCTION
Limited preliminary studies were performed for the use of
rotary-wing systems in recovery of missile boosters, data cap­
sules, manned capsules, and other payloads. While basic re­
quirements are similar for most of the applications, enough
differences exist to conclude that use of rotary-wing decelera­
tors, although feasible technically, in all applications, are
more practical in certain ones than others.
The stored energy rotor recovery system combines in one
system all elements for initial retardation and stabilization,
drag modulation, useful LID ratio glide, guidance capability,
and touchdown at near-zero velocities.
In the present state-of-the-art, cost, stowage, and weight
may be unfavorable for simple recovery missions. However,
when control during descent, glide capability, soft touchdown,
or accuracy of delivery is an important consideration, rotary­
wing decelerator systems are competitive.
APPLICATIONS
In addition to many features of rotary-wing decelerators
already mentioned, advantageous use may be made of the follow­
ing inherent or design ROTOCHUTE concept characteristics in
applications:
1. Low drag profile prior to deployment.
2. Controlled deployment forces without shock loads.
3. Rapid deployment openings which are repetitive
within close tolerance from system to system.
4. Programmed launch and deployment cycles.
5. Wide range of speed and altitude deployment.
Broadly speaking, applications for rotary-wing decelera­
tors may be classified in the following categories:
A. Recovery Guided delivery of payload to a selected
site. Recovery of boosters, data capsules, manned
capsules, instrument packages typify applications
in this category.

120

B. Delivery Free-fall aerial delivery of items such

as supplies weapons, instrument packages, and remote
operating stations for meteorology and guidance.

c. Retardation Initial deceleration to provide maxi­

mum separation between launch vehicle and payload;
or descent where terminal delivery is not a considera­
tion. Retardation of tactical and anti-personnel
weapons, flares, and meteorological sondes fall in
this category.

A. RECOVERY APPLICATIO~S

Figure 70 depicts the wide variation in size, shape, and

weight of present-day missile boosters, manned capsules, and
nose cones. The variation makes nearly each application an in­
dividual design task. However, recovery requirements for each
group may be categorized to Some extent.

1. Boosters

Since missile boosters or separable first stages, presently

expendable, involve expensive rocket motors and related hard­
ware, recovery of such units becomes an important economic con­
sideration, especially as the number of launchings for a system
increase. Savings effected through such recovery could reduce
a program over-all cost or permit more systems for a given
budget.

For practical recovery of missile boosters, a recovery

system must delivery the booster to a convenient site down range,
since this will affect transportation and other refurbishing
costs. Return to the reconditioning facility must be a rela­
tively simple matter and involve a small number of personnel.
Damage of expensive engine and control systems by contamination
from salt water or earth must be limited or minimized. Glide
range of a recovery system will establish the extent of choices
of recovery areas.

Recovery touchdown must be at low enough velocities to

prevent major damage to relatively fragile shell structures
of most boosters in the recoverable state.

Recovery of boosters with rotors, although technically

feasible, does not represent the best field for immediate appli-­
cation. Limiting the rotor disc to a maximum loading of
6 pounds per square foot for collective flare performance con­
siderations, a 100-foot diameter rotor would retard 47,000 pounds

121

~ I ~ o
<Q b NOSE CONES
(W~ 200 Lbs. To 2700 Lbs.)

b
MANNED CAPSULES
(W=::s 2500 Lbs. To 12000 Lbs.)
I 1

....
~
~

BOOSTERS
(lf~400 Lbs. To 125000 Lbs.)

--=-=---j !Afr<o CJ ~
REPRESENTATIVE RECOVERABLE SYSTEMS
FIGURE 70
gross weight to 65 f.p.s. terminal descent. In general, for a
given descent rate, the required rotor diameter will be the
same as that of the projected diameter of a parachute.
Stowage of rigid or telescoping blades may be a problem,
especially since the blades should not be attached directly to
the shell. If attached directly, energy of rotation of the
booster at impact can be as detrimental as a high impact
velocity. Figure 71 shows a proposed system for a typical booster.
Development of stowable, flexible blade rotor systems can
change the picture, since larger rotor diameters may become more
practical and stowage becomes less of a problem.
2. Manned Capsules
The prime requisite for manned capsule recovery systems is,
of course, to return personnel safely and unharmed even under
emergency circumstances. Other requisites may be summarized as
follows:
Reliability - The recovery system should be at least as
reliable as present-day parachute systems. If this requirement
is not met, remaining requirements become academic.
Low Deployment Shock Forces - Retardation systems may be de­
ployed during a period of high "qu. Resulting deployment shock
forces should not be so large as to transmit objectionably high
loads to the capsule. Both the physical "G" tolerance of the
astronaut and the strength of the capsule (with its influence on
weight) must be considered in determining what constitutes ob­
jectionally high loads.
Stabilization - During re-entry, many capsules must'be
stabilized to prevent tumbling and align the heat shield. It
is desirable that the recovery system assume this function as
soon as feasible to reduce the operating time of reaction control
jets.
Drag Modulation - To reduce peak values of deceleration
during re-entry, drag modulation by the recovery system becomes
a desirable function.
Glide Capability - Glide capability is desirable to compen­
sate 'to the extent possible for errors and tolerances in the
retro-rocket firing and re-entry events. This is especially so
for proposed land recovery operations where the vehicle must
touchdown at the prepared area.

123
~ ~

I
II I
I

II
II
:1--
I
ROTOR FOLDED

'I I

\ I DEPLOYED
II

CONTROL AND GUIDANCE

ROTOR DIA. ~ 45 FT.
PAYLOAD - 7000 LBS.
IMPACT - 0-10 FPS.
CABLE

BOOSTER
\ :I
I,
\
\
\ II
!
i
"

I
EJECTOR TRACK
I :

\..J

'­ ASSYMETRICAL STOWAGE POD

ROrl'OChUTE IN..,TALLATION FOR AN ATLAS-TYPE BOOSTER

FIGURE 71

124
Maneuverability - The recovery system must be capable of
being guided to the selected landing site. In addition, it must
be sufficiently responsive to control commands in avoiding local
obstacles or hazards, especially if an emergency recovery at
an unprepared site was being performed.
Handling Qualities - A capsule and recovery system must
exhibit good handling qualities during the glide descent and
landing phase. The physical and mental conditions of astronauts
returning from a space mission must be considered in evaluating
"good handling qualities" characteristics.
Zero Velocity Touchdown - The unpredictable tolerances and
errors durIng re-entry deem it probable that a percentage of
the recoveries will not reach the prepared recovery area. The
recovery system should, therefore, be capable of providing zero
horizontal translation and near-zero vertical velocity at
touchdown.
Remote Guidance - Remote guidance and control of returning
space vehicles is not only desirable, but essential, if astro­
nauts are disabled or incapable of control for any reason.
Simplicity - The above functions should be capable of
being carried out with rugged, durable hardware and a minimum
of components, subsystems, and sequences to provide optimum
reliability, minimum weight, and minimum expense.
Compactness - The recovery system should be lightweight
and of a configuration that is readily stowable on the recovery
vehicle system.
Without a doubt, other recovery systems may be optimum ill
providing one or more of the above requirements. But rotary­
wing decelerators have the potential in providing' a majority
of the above requirements.
In particular, such systems are capable of providing
initial retardation and stabilization as well as terminal de­
scent retardation. Only one deployment sequence is involved.
Deployment may be initiated at high speeds and altitudes.

Figure 72 shows one stowed configuration.

125

ROTOR DIA. - 26 FT.

PAYLOAD - 2400 LBS.
IMPACT - ZERO FPS
-l._--PRESENT CONFIGURATION

ROTATION

-- ­ - --=---:- ~
- :::.--­- -_::t­

HEAT SHIELD
JETTISONED PRIOR
TO RIC DEPLOYMENT

ROTOCHUTE INSTALLATION FOR A MERCURY-TYPE CAPSULE

FIGURE 72

126

The ability of rotarY--WilJg decelerators to provide re­

covery at Dear-zero horiz0ntal and vertical speeds is considered
to be the most importal~t attribute. This means that a rela­
tively small recovery site need be provided. But more im­
portant, the system provid~s a poteutial for safe recovery away
from a prepared site. Emergencies in orbit or errors during
re-eutry could lleceE-~sitate such touchdown. A rotary-wing sys­
tem provides the maneuverability to avoid local hazards during
the approach.

In the COJltractor's opinion, recovery of manned capsules

representE the best potelit ial application for sophisticated
[Link] rotary--wil1g decelerator systems. Safe re­
turn of persolJncl waXTants consideration of the features and
performance Sttch systems are potentially capable of providing.

3. pata Capsules

Many space pX'ogl'ams involve the gathering of important

scientific data with relatively expensive instrumentation. Re­
covery of such packnp;es becomes costly because a number of teams
must patrol a broad recovery zone. Guided recovery with drag
modulation could reduce the recovery zone target by compensating
for errors such as wiud drift.

Meteorological sonde packages are often lofted almost

vertically to high altitudes by rockets and drift down at es­
tablished rates of descent. The rates at the higher altitudes
are such that the recovery system will give very low rates of
descent at lower altitudes. Such systems are subject to excessive
wind drift and eventual loss. Recovery could be enhanced by
jettisoning the initial retarding system and using a rotary-
wing decelerator at the lower altitudes. This category of op­
eration essentially involves a launch, retardation, and un­
guided vertical descent. Performance of the rotor at the
initial and terminal phases is an important design consideration.
This arrangement could provide higher rates of descent with
less wind drift and recovery at the launch area with return
guidance by a homing beacon system.

Figure 73 illustrates a typical data capsule modified

with a rotary-wing decelerator o

127

EJECTOR ROCKET -- ~.,- -_.--r- ,--:­

~i I _--,-ll~~l c­

I
: I ~J I
DATA CAPSULE.-­
~
.......
I I
f
_1 - I __ I
I
--i,
._ - . I ........

PRESENT RECOVERY SYSTEM

ROTOR DIA. - 8 FT.
PAYLOAD - 250 LBS.
IMPACT - 0-10 FPS
!-'
I\:l ROTOCHUTF. RECOVERY SYSTEM
OJ

EJECTOR ROCKET __:[bJC

I
DATA CAPSULE

ROTOCHUTE­

ROTOCHUTE INSTALLATION Fon A DATA CAPSULE

FIGURE 73

_~_ B bl__ ~
B. DELIVERY APPLICATIONS
Rotary-wing decelerators are particularly suited to de­
livery of arms, ammunition, supplies, and similar small cargo
to isolated troops. Delivery may be made from low altitudes
and high speeds, from modern fighter aircraft since the rotor
system may be integrated into an aerodynamically clean package
and deployed at high q's. The one-phase deployment, repetitive
within close tolerances for a given system" makes possible
more accurate prediction of trajectory.

Such deliveries may be performed without or with remote

guidallce. Without guidance" the system is relatively simple
and inexpensive since no avionic equipment need be involved.

Another potential for accurate delivery of supplies is by

means of a ground-to-groud missile boosted to a ballistic tra­
jectory. The rotary-wing decelerator would be deployed in the
terminal descent phase at low altitudes to reduce wind drift.
Predictable" repetitive opening cycles make such deployment
possible.

c. RETARDATION

Rotary-wing decerators may be used purely as a retarding

device. Touchdown performance is of relatively little concern
in this case. Rapid retardation may be provided to give maxi­
mum separation between the launch aircraft and the system being
delivered.

Delivery of tactical weapons" anti-personnel weapons"

flares" and similar systems are typical applications. Such
weapons may be delivered from low altitudes at high or low
speeds. The high rate of retardation will result in rapid
separation between the weapon and the aircraft" providing an
added margin of safety for the aircraft and personnel.

Rotary-wing devices may be programmed to provide a variety

of trajectory characteristics. The opening may be governed
for relatively constant deceleration. Deployment may be delayed
as desired. Power augmentation could provide a short period
hover capability" especially for flare delivery.

A rotary-wing decelerator with the capability of controlled

opening and closing may be used as a drogue or air brake for
fixed-wing aircraft. Such a device could be deployed and later
retracted without repacking.

129

OUTB'D PANEL (EXTENDED)

EXTENSION RATE CONTROL TUBE

RATE CONTROL WEDGE AND STOP

RETENTION RIB (OUTB'D PANEL)

INB'D PANE

RETENTION MEMBE

FLEXIBLE TUBIN

FLEXIBLE BLADE
PRESSURIZED GAS (80 PSI)----~~~~

FIGURE 74
130
D. FUTURE POTENTIAL
Many of the above applications have already been demon­
strated in actual tests with rigid~ fixed-span blade rotor
systems. Telescoping blade rotors have also been used for
applications where stowage space prior to deployment was a
problem. A typical telescoping blade configuration is shown
in Figure 74.
The potential use of rotary-wing decelerators will be
enhanced when a practical~ stowable blade concept is developed.
An approach that appears to be promising is a flexible in­
flatable type blade. Prior to inflation~ such blades can be
packaged into a small volume of space. Inflation will pro­
vide a nearly true airfoil structure with torsional stiffness
that will aid in control of such rotors.
Power augmentation of the rotor by tip jets~ trailing
edge jets, or other means will reduce the required rotor size
(for a given touchdown performance), extend the glide range~
or permit a short-period of hover. Initial study shows
this to be feasible and research in this area is recommended.

131

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RZCOMMEIJDATIONS

A. COHCLUSIONS

Analytical investigations and results from experimental

tests couducted during tile performance of the program have been
instrumental in forming the following conclusione relative to
rotary-wing decelerators in general, and the rigid blade rotor
system in particular.

1. The basic concept of using a controlled autorotating

rotary-wing decelerator system for the retardation alld recovery
of payloads is SOllHd and feasible technically. Adrlitiollal
effort is required ilJ some areas to fully demonst):ate the full
poteutial, particularly ill the lanc:illg moc1e.

2. Performance aGd stability of rotary-wing decelerators

can be predicted analytically. Agreement with actnal per-­
[01'\l1a11Ce amI behavior will be dependent upon the detail and
ac~uracy of inpGts for over-all system characteristics. These
call be established with detail analysis andlor experimental
tests for a given system.

3. Use of the rotor for retardation is presently feasible

hi axial floVl operatioli up to speeds where aerodynamic heating
is below critical for developed materials and fabrication
mpthod~. Additional detailed study and development of blade
structure is requirpd for use at high speeds involving more
severe aerodyuamic heating.

4. Glide descent at LID ratios of 2.5 or better is deemed

feasible. The test vehicle, whose body equivalent flat plate
area was larl;!;e in relation to the rotor disc area, approached
an L/D ratio of 2.0 in steady descent with a peak LID ratio of
2.38. Helicopters with aerodynamically clean bodies glide at
LID ratios of 2.5 in unpowered descents.
5. Use of the rotor kinetic energy to retard touchdown
velocities to 5 feet per second or less, although not fully
demonstrated in tests, is still believed feasible. Limitations
imposed by test vehicle control provisions handicapped demon­
stration of potential performance. Soft touchdowns are per­
lormed by helicopters in power-off lalldings.

G. The glide and control capability of rotary-wing de­

celerators coupled with potential touchdown at low or zero hori­
zontal and vertical velocities should enable recovery in small
confined sites.

132
7. The same characteristics would permit emergency land­
ings in rough J unprepared areas with a minimum risk to human
occupants or sensitive payloads.
8. Artificial stabilization can be effectively used to
stabilize the spiral mode. The spiral mode can also be made
inherently stable by operating the rotor at a lower tip speed.
9. Over-all weight for a rotary-wing decelerator system J
including remote control and automatic stabilization pro­
visions J is estimated to run from 10 per cent to 15 per cent
of a recoverable system gross weight for payloads over 2000
pounds. Many of the remote control system components are nor­
mally found in recovery capsule systems and would be usable for
the rotor control.
10. With development J rotary-wing decelerator systems have
the potential for combining in one unit features for initial
retardation and stabilization J drag modulation during re-entrYJ
glide at useful LID ratios J control and maneuverability in de­
scent J and terminal flare with near-zero velocity touchdown.
These characteristics are especially desirable and suitable
in recovery of manned aerospace systems.
11 0 Development of flexible J stowable blades would en­
hance use in potential application systems where storage volume
is limited or at a premium.
12. Rotary-wing decelerator systems appear feasible for
manned aerospace system recoveryo Use in other applications
should be considered when limitations of established recovery
systems limit the deployment speed or do not provide the de­
sired trajectory control J delivery accuracYJ glide capabilitYJ
controllabilitYJ or potential for soft touchdown.
B. RECOMMENDATIONS
In view of the above conclusions J the following recommenda­
tions are submitted by Kaman Aircraft Corporation to advance
the knowledge and state-of-the-art for rotary-wing decelerator
systems and expand the scope for potential applications.
1. To provide more detailed information of behavior and
control requirements for the landing phase J as a guide for pro­
gramming control for the maneuver J it is recommended that addi­
t~onal studies and experimental tests relative to the landing

133

phase be conducted, using the present KRC-6 test vehicle. The

vehicle aerodynamic and stability characteristics should be
established in greater detail by wind tunnel and/or ground
tests prior to flight.
2. Glide range of rotary-wing decelerator systems would
be extended if glide at supersonic speeds were feasible. The
scope of the present reported program did not permit determina­
ting feasibility of such operation. It is, therefore, recom­
mended that studies be initiated toward this regime of operation,
and that the KRC-6M model be adapted for wind tunnel investiga­
tion in glide attitude at supersonic speeds.
3. To improve prediction of performance and behavior in
the transonic and supersonic regime, data from 0 to 180 degrees
angle of attack should be determined and made available for
airfoils that may be potentially used for the rotor blades.
Such data in the high speed spectrum is presently insufficient
or lacking.
4. Although the ROTOCHUTE concept can be made inherently
stable in vertical descent with present knowledge and without
the use of automatic stabilization, an understanding in greater
depth of the effects of various parameters such as rotor disc
loading, rotor inertia, vehicle center of gravity location, etc.
is desirable for more accurate prediction and achievement of
inherent stability. It is suggested that detailed parametric
studies in this respect be initiated and corroborated by ex­
perimental tests. Such knowledge is essential for manned
recovery applications.
5. With a view to improving stowage of rotor systems and
reducing weight, studies should be initiated and directed toward
investigating various flexible blade concepts. Development
of such concepts would particularly enhance potential use in
space systems where stowage volume and weight of installed sys­
tems are at a premium. It is possible that costs of rotor
systems for more conventional applications would also be reduced
with flexible blades.

134

LIST OF REFERENCES

1. Joy, D. P., and Simmonds, R. M., "Transport Helicopter

Design Analysis Methods", Hi!-ler. Air~raft _Corporation,
Report No. 473.6, 1955

2. Gessow, A., and Tapscott, R., Charts for Estimating

,'?erformance of High Performanc·e·HeTlco·pters, 'NACA ­
ne-poi;r 14'"o-.~~·-Hf56-·--···-·---- ­

1. Allen, H. Julian, and Eggers, A. J., Jr., A Study of the

Motion and Aerodynamic Heating of Missiles~ferrrigtlie
Ear·t h's' A·t-rTlos·plie-r-e-a:T"lUgn--S-upers-emi c Speeds, NA CA
',},:N'- '4fY4'1 ;- Hf57--" - ._
.... --------.- -----­

4. Chapman, R. Dean, ~n Approximate Analytical Method for

Studyin?:
'i1YS'g- '" Entry
.. _.._. - --­ ._... __.... --.--. -_.. _-- -. _ . _ ­ ,"-NASA TR-R-=1:1,
Int"6--Pla-netary-A1:mospneres
-~

5. Horner, <). F., "Fluid-Dynamic Drag" (Published by the

author, 118 Rusteed Drive, Midland Park, New Jersey,
IE 58)

6. Arnold
.,...•- ..Center
~~. .. _...•Test Facilities
'~,' '0'6-'"
-'~
Handbook,
_.. _._-- ..--- .. - - - - - - - ­ I, Arnold
Volume
rtlr rorce ~tatl0n, 1_ 1

7. Pitts, W. C., Force, Moment, and Pressure Distribution

Characteristics"·o{·lfec-tau·gui"ar-;i(ings-at-·HignAngIes--or

XFfa'c-Vuarid Su·p·ers-on·{c'··S-peeds-;·-·1fi\CA RM-A55-K-09, 1956 ..

TCON'F-:£·1YE1i;"'rTJ\i.)- -.-- .._- - - - - ­

8. Joint Parachute Test Facility, USAF 6511th Test Group

(Par-a-clitit""€Y"and- U.-·"S-:~ar15arachute Facility, El

Centro, California

9. Nikolsky, ~~}_~E~pter Analysis

10. Ha ig, C. n., "Vertica 1 Landing and Glide Characteris tics

of Rotor Landing Systems", Bell Helicopter Corporation,
Report No. 8008-099-009, 1961J--­

11. Castles, W., and Gray, R. B., Empirical Relation Between

Induced Velocity, Thrust, and Rate-ol:~escent of a
HelicopterlfOtor'AS""Determined 13Y"WInd TUnnel Tests on
!our-'~~~~~otors, NACA TN-2474, 1951

12. Crabtree, J. A., and Amer, K. B., Helicopter Configura­

tion and Propulsion System Study: Part I - Statistical
\Veight~na1ysis, WADe Tn-57-583, Part I, 1957

135

11. Gessow, A., and Meyers, G. L., Jr., ~erodYE~~ic~-9!-!~~

Helicopter, Macmillan, 1952

14. Feldman, S., Hypersonic Gas Dynamic Charts for Equilib­

rium Air, A~S~_ C~:poratio~, 1957

15. Finstron, M.,and Barron, J. R., "Notes - Investigation

of Rotor Aerodynamic Heating' for KAC", ~Iassachusetts
.~nsti_t.u.~~ of_-!~..?E.E0logJ'..L_ynp~_~lished, Hf6l---------­

16. Herron, R. D.,and Bi~ion, T. W., Jr., Tests of the

Kaman KRC-6M ROTOCHUTE at Transonic Speeds-;-"AJm-c:,-­
rnr..:m:-.:.bO, -May-1."'91rr----- -------,~----
17. Galigher, L. L., Wind Tunnel Tests of the Kaman KRC-6M
ROTOCHUTE at Supe'rsonTc:ipeeas-;-"11IDC="T'D1f~"2"B,J"uly
1""9t>~ ------.---.-----.-----­

18. Sch1icting, H., ~?~?~a!}~_~y~! Th~ory, McGraw-Hill,

1955

136

I
APPENDICES I THROUGH V

137

APPENDIX I. ANALYTICAL STUDIES

A. AXIAL FLIGHT - "STRIP ANALYSIS"

Introduction
In autorotative axial flight at the moderate flight
speeds being considered, the relatively low inboard and high
outboard rotor tangential velocities mean that stall con­
ditions prevail towards the rotor hub, while the blades are
unstalled towards the tip. It follows that ordinary heli­
copter rotor theory for forward flight based on a modest
amount of stall on the retreating blade is thus inapplicable.
For this reason, a "strip" analysis is carried out.
For different descent velocities, the aerodynamic force and
torque are expressed parametrically for an assumed blade
pitch angle (9). The correct value of 9 must satisfy the
requirement that the net shaft torque in autorotative flight
must be zero.
Strip Analysis
Consider an element of rotor blade of length, Ar as
shown in cross-section in Figure 75.

'-----.
y-­

FIGURE 75

139
The aerodynamic lift (AL) and drag (6D) are expressi­
ble as follows:

AL
"2
b
ec U
2
CL ~r
b
"'"
2
~c U2 CD 6r
Also,

U "'" -J UP 2 + UT2

Up = (V -v) cos Bo
UT Dr cos Bo
Next:
R
(L cos ~ + D sin ~) cos Bo "'" ~ ~ ec U
2 (C cos~ + Co sin ~)
e 2 L

x(Ar cos Bo)

Thrust, T
where

cos (J =­ UT A.
- - , sin 'P
U
... ~,
U
at blade element

Thus,
T';;' b *"
"2 ~c LI (UT n CLn + Upn CDn ) Un 6r, since cos Bo -; 1

where n identifies the blade element

Dt
or
-or u

From Reference 9, Page 21,

f .. 1
. -­
Dt
dr
b
~ ec (UT CL + Up CD) U
41rr~V2

140
Let
U V bc
-1.,and Ad = ~,and (J
OR "R

• • f =

For a particular rotor, ~ and R are established

quantities. CL and Co are fixed for a particular airfoil
section once the angle of attack is known. The angle of
attack is estahlished when e and t/J are known (0( = e + r/J).
~ is determined when Ar is assigned a value. e is decided
by torque considerations to be considered below.

Torque Q = (L sin ~ -0 ~os ~) r cos 8 0 cos 8 0 -;;::: 1

I"sk

=
L+
r·e
ec u2 r (C L sin ¢ -Cn cos ¢) Ar

- .JL
2
~c
fin

L r n (U pn CLn -U..,-n CDn ) Un Ar

I

= 1/2 " ea 5 2
R 0 L"' r n (A r CL-n rn CD)
x -J A2
rn
I n
+ -r n 2 • ( A rn )

1/2 CL -r n COn)
-2
r n D ( rn)

In autorotative flight Q, and therefore CQ/cr, - 0

141

Determination of Ar

Since Ar - Up/OR, the determination of Ar for a particu­

lar rotor configuration at a given speed, 0, fixed Up, the
component of air velocity perpendicular to an element of the
rotor cone. As an approximation, since cos 80 - I, U may be
taken as perpendicular to the plane of no feathering (PNF).
Ar is determined by using the following formulae and
chart:
(1) f ­
8 r A~

(2) Ar - Ad.j{

(4) Glauert-Lock Experimental Curve llf versus llF

(Reference 9, Page 23)

In Equation (I), Ad and r

are assumed known. That is
to say, the descent velocity, V, the rotor speed, 0, the
rotor radius, R, and the station radius, r, are known or
assumed.
A value of Ar is then assumed. This fixes ~ and thus
the angle of attack ~- e + ~ and, in turn, CL and CD. Thus,
f can be calculated. This yields a value of F from the
curve, llf versus IIF (4). Then Formula (2) is used to cal­
culate Ar , and comparison is made with the assumed Ar • If
agreement is not within one per cent, a new value of Ar is
assumed, and the process is repeated.
This procedure is carried out at each station along the
rotor blade until each station has a value of Ar associated
with it.
Formula (3) is then used to calculate the torque acting
about the rotor axis of rotation from aerodynamic forces on
the rotor blades. For autorotative flight, this torque must
be zero.

142
If the torque thus calculated does not sum to zero,
a new assumption must be made for 9, and the whole process
repeated until finally the torque sums to zero.
Lastly, the values used to sum torque to zero are in­
serted in the following formula to determine the thrust:

T - 1/2 'Jf e (J" 0

2
R
4
~ (r CL + Ar Cn) -V A~ + r 2
. A rn

NOTE:
Tip loss factor can be accounted for by subtracting
three per cent of the blade radius from the length of element
or station at the blade tip. Thus, has been calculated for
a particular rotor in autorotation at a given speed, the
axial component (Up) of air relative to the rotor at each
blade element, and the total thrust corresponding to this
velocity distribution.
Gliding Flight Analysis
The ROTOCHUTE equations of motion are:
mV~ - T cos a R -H sin a R -W cos)' -1/2 e V2 f sin aF
+ 1/2 @ V2 CLa (aF + bt ) St
2
mY = -w sin r -T sin aR -H cos an -1/2 p V f cos a F
2
-1/2 V CLa (a F + b t ) St sin (a + St)
F
Iq --Th sin BIZ + Hh cos BlS + By sin al + 1/2 ~ v2~f
+ (aMt/ aa ) (aF + St)

These equations are written in terms of forces and mo­

ments which lie in a wind axis system. Use of Euler's
equations permits moments of inertia to be evaluated relative
to the vehicle body axes. Since these are steady-state
equations, velocities perpendicular to the direction of
motion along the wind (X) axis are zero. Likewise, it is
assumed that only pitching moments exist - that there are
no rolling and yawing motions.

143

The tail effects are included in these equations. In

practice, the drag term in the X-direction is ignored.
Using data from NACA Report No. 1266, and simultaneously
solving the equations for stalled and unstalled tail con­
figurations (see "Special Derivations"), the angular atti­
tudes of the ROTOCHUTE are found for various assumed values
of flat plate area; for different values of advance ratio;
and for 8- and 10-foot rotors.
The various steps ill the procedure are given below.
Because the charts found in Report No. 1266 were on too small
a scale to be used accurately in the range of interest, it
was necessary to program the relevant formula for the IBM
computer and plot the results in carpet-plot form. There­
after, the iterative process of solving the simultaneous
equations was carried out on the Burroughs computer. The
graphs BIZ, Y, and e plotted separately against ~ are the
results.
Optimum glide ( '1 = -0.5 radians; i.e. 28.5 0 ) is in­
dicated at about ~ = 0.14.
Specific Derivations
Forward Flight - Steady-State Analysis
In the Steady-State Analysj.s, the following relations
are developed from the three steady-state equations above.
The acceleration terms on the left-hand side have been
omitted, since the analysis is for steady-state.
CH ... (Cw sin} -I- C tan a + 1/2 ~2 C cos aF )
cos 'I T R f cos 2 aR

BIZ (for stalled tail angles)

144

BIZ (for unstalled tail angles)

CT (for stalled angels)

eH'tan IX + C IAJ Cos "1 + L.,# l-Cr ...fIN 0(,,­

R Co, II(R 2. cas 3 P(R

CT (for unstalled angles)

(* Change sign for negative stall)

Collective Flare Study

This following study was performed to investigate the

comparative merits of performing a collective flare maneuver
after glide and cyclic flare versus performing the collec­
tive flare from vertical descent. Results indicate that if
flare is performed from vertical descent, the rotor must
be larger and heavier.

The minimum vertical rate of descent of a rotor-supported

vehicle at sea level has been determined experimentally in
a variety of tests to be:

145

The rotor kinetic energy required to decelerate the ve­

hicle from the descent speed given by the above to zero ground
contact velocity can be estimated by a modified form of the
simple analysis given in Reference 10.
Following this analysis, the power required by the rotor
at sea level is given by:
p - 14.5 • nW .yn (W/A)
M

Step-by-step calculations indicate that rotor stall

occurs if an attempt is made to maintain a constant flare
load factory by increasing blade collective pitch while rotor
rotational speed is decreasing. The calculations indicate
that a more reasonable assumption is that rotor thrust co­
efficient remains constant, as indicated in Reference 11,
while rotor load factor decreases linearly to a value of unity
at the end of flare as rotational speed decreases, at which
point the decleration becomes zero.
The load factor is expressed by:
n - no -(no -1) tltf
and deceleration is: a- g (n -1)

Theu: - jtf a dt - 1/2 (no -1) g tf

o

taking

1/2 (Do -1) g

'::::J - 1. 56 -J wI A
no -1
where downward initial velocity Vo is considered negative.
The rotor kinetic energy (KE) required for flare per
pound of vehicle weight is:

. 1~
o
~ • dt

- 1'0~ 14.5
M
fi
-V A n
3/2
dt

- W
A

146

Increasing rotor initial load factor decreases the

kinetic energy required for flare. However, the
rotor stall considerations place an upper l1mit on initial
load factor. It is assumed that an initial load factor of
two can be achieved in the present case. Assuming a rotor
figure of merit of 0.70, the required kinetic energy be­
comes:
KE req
W
60 -
w
A
(5)

Rotor kinetic energy is expressed by:

KE - 1/2 I U2 p
2
- 1/6 mb (UR) for a uniform blade
It is assumed that two-thirds of the rotor kinetic
energy can be used before rotor stalling occurs.

•• • -KE
W
available _ 1/9 • w; 1
g
(UR) 2 (6)

The ratio (Wb/W) is expressed in Reference 12:

,89
~
W
a. ,OO,~~
WI.•,
[<7!!.A R4 (n..R)t. (c~c. +. ZJ)J (7)

for 15 ~ blade aspect ratio ~ 20. The rotor blade weight

is assumed to be one-half rotor group weight.
A rotor weight comparison between gliding and verti­
cal autorotative descents may now be made on the following
basis. It is ass'lmed that a zero contact velocity landing
can be made from a gliding ciescent with a rotor having a
disc loading of five. This assumption is justified by
helicopter experience and by analytical investigations.
Then the required rotor weight increase to permit a zero
contact velocity landing from a vertical descent is calculated
using Equations (5), (6), and (7). Vehicles of 100, 1000,
and 10,000 pounds gross weight are considered.

147

The gliding rotor is assumed to have a disc loading

of 5 0 0, four blades, a solidity ~ of .080, and a thickness­
chord ratio tic of 0.12 The vertical descent rotors are
0

assumed to have disc loadings of 5.0, 3.0, 2.0, and 1 0, 0

two blades, a solidity of .032,. and a thickness-chord ratio

of 0.12 0
All rotors in the comparison satisfy the following
conditions:
a o Blade aspect ratio ~20: Satisfies Equation (7)
b. Before flare, CT/~max =0.10: Insures that rotor
stall does not occur during flare.
c. Rotor solidity is a minimum within the limits
set by Conditions (a) and (b): Corresponds to
minimum rotor weight for a given disc loading and
tip speed, since (Wb/ W) is proportional to ~.8' •
d. Rotor tip speed is less than 900 feet/second to
avoid serious compressibility effects.
NOTE
The number of blades is determined by Conditions (a),
(b), and (c). Since the vertical descent rotors in general
operate at higher tip speeds than the gliding rotor, their
thrust coefficients are less, and they can use a lower
solidity, as indicated by Condition (b). Then Condition (a)
requires the minimum number of blades, i.e. two.
Solidity and tip speed can be chosen on the above basis,
since vertical descent velocity is relatively independent
of CT/<T, as shown by Figure 6-11, Page 136, of Reference 13.
For values of CT/~between .06 and .10, the corresponding
values of CDR are comparable to the value of 1.16 for CDR
implied in the equation of the present analysis. Torque
Equilibrium is satisfied by an appropriate choice of collec­
tive pitch angle, as shown by Equations (71) and (72),
Page 208, Reference 13.
The results of the calculations are as follows:

148

L,
Disc Loading 5 Pounds/Sq Ft

Gliding

W A R c
(0- - .080)
(Wb/ W) (f2R) -1 078 c
Yertical
(0-'" .032)
(Wb/W) (nR)-l. 78
100 20 2.5 0156 .69 x 10- 6 .29 x 10- 6
10,,000 200 8.0 05 065 0 27

10,,000 2,,000 25 1 .. 56 1 0 05 042

The rotor rotational speed required for flare is found

by sUbstituting Wb/W in Equation (6) and equating to Equa­
tion (5)" e.g." for W - 100 pounds"

1/9 x .29 x 10- 6 1

g
... 60 x 5

(QR)req 1090 ft/sec

This value is impractical aerodynamically" but will be used

to establish a weight comparison curve. At this tip speed"
for the vertical case"
Wbvl W ... 029 x 10- 6 (nR)1078

=- .074

o
o
0
... .148

For the gliding case" the tip speed can be taken as 500
ft/sec and"

WbG/ W 0044

l'IRQ/W ... 0088

Results are as follows:

Vertical Gliding
W (QR)req Wby/W WRy/W WbG/W WRQ/W WRvlWRo
100 1090 .074 0148 .044 008 8 1 0 68
1,000 1110 0071 .142 0042 0084 1.69
10,,000 986 0090 0180 0067 0134 1.34

149

The iteration required to include the increase in gross

weight is not performed in this first approximation.

Disc Loading 3 Pounds/Sq Ft, tT - .032

W A R c (Wb /W ) (OR) -1.78 Ry/RG

100 33.3 3 0 26 .163 .50 x 10- 6 1.30
1,000 333 10.3 .52 .44 1.29
10,000 3333 32.6 1.63 .76 1.30

w (OR)req WbV/W lfRy/W WRV/WR<i

100 820 .077 0154 1 075
1,000 850 .072 0144 1 071
10,000 740 .097 .194 1 045

Disc Loading 2 Pounds/Sq Ft, t5' - 0032

W A R c (Wb/ W) (nR)-1 078 Ry/RG

100 50 4.0 .2 .715 x 10- 6 1 06
1,000 500 12 06 .63 0675 1 058
10,000 5,000 40 2.0 1.20 L6

W (nn)req WbylW WRy/W WRY/WR<i

100 672 0077 .154 1.75
1,000 682 .075 .150 1.79
10,000 586 .101 .202 1.51

Disc Loading 1 Pound/Sq Ft, (j ­ .032

W A R c (Wb/ W) (nR)-1.78 Ry/R

G
100 100 5.65 .282 1.36 x 10- 6 2.26
1,000 1,000 17.8 .89 1.36 2.23
10,000 10,000 56.5 2.82 2.62 2 0 26

150

w <fm)req Wby'W WRV/W WRv/WRci

100 470 .078 .156 1.77
1,000 470 .078 .156 1.86
10,000 396 .110 .220 1.64

The results are plotted in Figure 13.

B. STABILITY AND CONTROL - SUBSONIC AXIAL FLIGHT
Section II, ANALYTICAL INVESTIGATIONS, outlines the
methods used to determine the conditions for steady-state
equilibrium. Because of non-uniform inflow in axial sUb­
sonic flight, a strip analysis was necessary. In forward
subsonic flight, the equivalent condition was derived from
NACA Report TR 1266 and equilibrium equations.
With these steady-state conditions as background infor­
mation, it is now possible to investigate dynamic stability.
Fundamental to this investigation are the perturbation
equations of the system, written in terms of force and mo­
ment derivatives which are, in turn, written in terms of
flapping derivatives.
The first step is to determine the flapping derivatives
for axial flight. The derivation, by co-ordinate trans­
formations and Lagrangian methods, is presented below under
"Flapping Derivatives".
Next, the force and moment derivatives, as indicated in
"Force and Moment Derivatives", are found from elementary
considerations, using the method of Bry?n, and are finally
expressed terms of the flapping derivatives. Certain of
these derivatives are with respect to control variables, i.e.
AIZ and B1 7 ' the harmonic coefficients of Bs and express
the contribution to the forces and moments of control input.
When a tail is added to the ROTOCHUTE, the assumption
is made that it does not materially influence the ROTOCHUTE
forces when a change in a variable takes place. However,
its effect on the ROTOCHUTE moment is taken to be significant,
and a derivation for this derivative is included.

151
\ -- --- - - - - - - - - { > y
\

ROTOCHUTE PARAMETERS

FIGURE 76

152

NOTE OF INTEREST:
With the successful derivation of Forces and Moment
Derivatives, the axial flight analysis, for the purposes of
analyzing the ROTOCHUTE stability through the total flight
spectrum, is complete.
However, with these derivations, it is now possible to
perform an analysis for axial flight alone. The perturba­
tion equations for axial flight can be written and solved,
by assuming solutions of the form m - exp (pt), where p is
complex. The perturbation equations, in terms of the
number of variables of interest, can be reduced to a charac­
teristic equation soluble by numerical methods. Finally,
the modes of motion can be identified, this being the last
step necessary for a parametric study.
Flapping Derivatives (Reference, Figure 76)
By suitable co-ordinate transformations and Lagrangian
methods, the equilibrium of the ROTOCHUTE rotor about the
flapping axis is expressed by:

I,~ + fn.t.(I '1'.Jl..5h ) + ~}f3 +.n (I,+.e. Sa,)e +.a1.(I R +.5e )e

I

+I ~ + .n2. I R ~ + (I. + ~ Sb) n" + Jl t. (I I +

R
L 5.,) n
_ ~ (r-.e.) [AL co!> (¢1"6¢) -t A D ~IN (¢ of A¢»]
Making a harmonic substitution for B; using the definition
of ~ and n; remembering that the ROTOCHUTE blades do not
feather, (e - Ao); and substituting for the right-hand side
of this equation as indicated in "Special Derivations",
three equations may be derived from this single equation.
That is, steady terms and the coefficients of sin 'fJ and
cos If' are equated to give the following equations:

Lt(TR ore Sa )A o + [J't (1.1" eSb) + K13J a. Q

:=. Z'b 11 eo-.n.t.R'{HcH,3+AA.(M1.-I'113)}
Z..J.R '( A-e)] Ptiz.(I,1'eSb)b+rl(6_8~\)
K.~.tKz.b.-tb{ ibrreO"n.R~-.Jl. A3- 'Z~ + i1t'[Link]" .n.. l. I~JJ

+ilR (5t. -6.~ ) if< (Bz. -5,"S) -x.:R (A -A.1)

+-0(,.( z

+ a.o~d O<y (A z -A, '3) =. 0

153
-t-f~~~~~R~ -~ (A~-A~ ~)} KJ
+P t{ ~~~~~~RS ~ (A~-A~ ')} K
- L

_ {[Link](I,Te ~l. . . ..!l (B - B ~)}

-t'Tieo-.J1.'[Link] .n. 1.'
KJ•

+X{(BI.-B, )lit +(A1.·~.i) '1i.~' }

-4-i{(Al.-A,~) ~~ - (6a.-B.~) ~}
.... D(x{(Al.-A.,11 KI.a.o~cI- (B1.- B,1) K,;\~}

-()(y {(B1.- B.3) Kz. ~cI + (A~-A,l) K, ~o Ad}

+ A,s {-K~KI+ K.[M~ -1'1. "5 - 'HA~ -A, 3)] }

+ B,s {-Kz. [M L -M. j - ~ (A~ -A, i)] - K,lo }

from which are available immediately the flapping derivatives:

154

where:
A =: J
· ~. ,
f to, x.) O{JC, oc y

Lateral derivatives can be found from the relationships be­

low which follow from symmetry:

ab, = ac1.. ab. =­ a4..

op 0<i ~ OP
o b. da", ab. _ 00.,
oO<y = arXy aO(y- aO( )f

ab. _ ab. aCL,

-
ax- o''iI
(;) Q",
--=­
a~ ax

Special Derivations
Lift and Torque Forces - Axial Flight
The steady-state lift force is expressed br
( L cos f/J + D s in ~) and 'the torque force by l L sin '/> -D cos ;)
where L is the lift on a blade element. It is necessary to
express parametrically the incremented lift and torque forces.

(L + AL) cos (f/J + A~) + (D +4 D) sin (; +~;)

and (L +4L) sin (~+4;) (D +AD) cos (~+A;)

b 2
From: L - 2~C CLU dr

is developed:

L +..AL - dr

Also, ~ CL - C (A a)
La

A 0( = A ¢ l' A e = A ta.,,_1 ~i + A e - U T(£lUP)- Up (AUT)

Up'Z.. + U/·

155
Finally:

U + AU'" -J (Up + 6 Up) 2 +

Thus"

cos (r/J +A~) ~ cos tJ - AP sin ~; 6~ small

Up [UT(AUP)-UP(AUT)]
(U p L .. U r1.) 3/1.

Similarly:

Sin (, -4- A,) ~ Up + UT [UT(.~\UP}- UP(AUT}]

V Up 7. +UTZo ( Up&" UTI) II&.

Substituting in (L + AL) for ACL (i.e. forA a) and for

(U +AU)" and for cos «(J +A~) and sin (r/J +A~); multiplying
out and ignoring non-linearities" the following is derived.

(L + AL) cos (; +A,) + (D +AD) sin (~ +A~)

.. V2. ebc
_ / 2 2
V Up + UT

+ (AUp ) [ CL Up UT + Cn UT2
+ 2Cn 2 2
Up + CLa UT +:-CDa Up UT ]

+ (AUT) [ CD Up UT + CL lTp
22
+ 2 CL UT -CLa Up UT -CDa Up J
2

+ AS (Up
2 + UT2) CUT Cx... - Up cDaJ} dr

(L + AL) sin (; + A~) - CD +AD) ~os (; + A;)

... Vz. pbc

156

+ (A Up) [CL UT
2
+ 2 CL Up
2
-Cn Up UT + CLa Up UT -CD UT
a
2
J
2 2 2
+ (A UT) [CL Up UT -<;, Up -2 CD UT -CLa Up + C
na
Up UT ]

+ Ae (Up 2 + UT)
2 [ Up

The final step is to non-dimensiona1ize the results.

Thus"

Lift Force (L +AL) cos «(J +A¢) + (D +t.D) sin (~+A~)

~ 1/2 lI'f (T OR
3
{HnR + A (A Up) + B (A UT) + MnR (A e)}Ar

Torque Force (L + AL) sin (f/> + t. ¢J) - (D + AD) cos (~+ A~)

~ 1/2 lI'pCT OR
3
{JOR + C(AUp ) + D(AUT) + NOR (Ae)} .a r

where the coefficients A" B" C" D" H" J" M" and N are as
defined under "Force and Moment [Link]".

Axial Flight

A Up and AUT - Lift and Drag on a Blade Element

-----------------...... x

!
V
z Z.
FIGURE 77

157
Perturbation Velocities (Reference, Figure 77)
The velocity of an element of rotor blade, relative to
axes (x, y, and z) fixed in space, when the body ~imensions
h, r, and e and the angular motions (including associated
velocities) 8, ax, «V, and ~ are accounted for, are (after
small angle assumpti6ns):

• •
q
X- X -Va -h -r 8 + Or sin.p q
. y

.
z-
y -
y +Vax + hp +r l 8 p + Or cos ~
Vv -rl 8 -Or { a y sin" -r/J J [q cos'" + p sin '!']+ Z
cos" +r

These velocities, except for a sign change, are also

the orthogonal components of fluid relative to the blade
element. Interest is mainly directed towards the fluid
velocity components normal and tangential to the rotor sur­
face of motion, since it is from these components the lift
and drag forces on the blade element are calculated.

ROTOR DISC.

flltOTlON

BlADE AX'S-+-.

FIGURE 78

158

Therefore, (Reference Figure 78) taking components along

and perpendicular to the rotor blade:

Up 1" AUp =Z-y -(x ,o~ 'f - If SIN '/I X,dt Yf )+ (X SIN"" Ycos'!') r
UT tAUT = i< SIW~ +1 [Link]'l'
Substituting in the above for~, f, and i,for~, ~, and
~, and ignoring non-1inearities, the vertical increment of
velocity, and the rate of control input, the following ex­
pressions are derived:

A Up = COS ~ [nb, (r-e) t f(... +h~.) -x 0,,0 1 v~.O(y .... en. AI,,]
+ Slfli cf [-.n~, (r-e) + peri" ho. o)+-N-Q..o .... Va.-, O(x t eJ1. 8,sJ

AUT =: cos f"[ j ... VQ(~ + {h .. (r-e) 41 0 } .., ]

+ SIt-l t [ x- Vo<y - fh + (r-e) 4.0 } if ]

Subsection 1: Force and Moment Derivatives - Axial Flight

Analysis

- - - Q.- - - ~-+---~----.,,;~ b

Up

FIGURE 79

159
Steady State
Let Land D be the lift and drag forces on a blade ele­
ment of area Co l:i. r

Then L - -i- e c CL U
2

and D- -i- P c CD u
2

Let T - aerodynamic force on blade element normal to

surface of motion (i.e o perpendicular to a and b in Figure 79).
and H - aerodynamic force in the surface of motion
(ioe o along a and b)
then T - L cos ;> + D sin rjJ
and H - L sin ~ ­ D cos ;
Tx - T sin B cosr + H sint -T ay
Ty - -T sin B sint + H cos r· +T ax
Tz - -T cos B

Perturbation
Tx + ATx - (T +.6T) sin B cos r; + (H + ~H) sint -(T +AT) ay
where
T + ~ T - (L + AL) cos (~ + A~) + (D + AD) sin (~ + A~)

H + AH - (L + AL) sin (t/> + a;) - (D + AD) cos (; + A~)

It can be shown (see tlSpecia1 Derivations - Lift and Torque

Forces") that:

(L + AL) cos (0 +6") + (D + AD) sin (~ + A~)

= t 1l"'pO" ll.R ~ {[Link] + A (AUP) + B(AUT ) A r

160
and
(L +AL) sin (V> +A~) -(D +AD) cos (~ +A_)
~ [Link]~ {J.n.R +C(AUP)+[Link])Ar

Coefficients A, B, C, D, J , and H are defined at the end of

this section. It can also be shown (see "Special Derivations U )
that:

A Up = cos t { llb. (r- e) + (r+h4.o)~ - itLo +[Link] Y ... e.n. AI,. J

+ SIN Y{-llo... (r-e) +(r+ ho,o)p -+ ~ a..o -+ \lC1..«~ + e.n.B,s} -(,.-e)~o

AUT =- c..os t [~ {o . . (r-e) Q"o} pJ

+ Vo<", ...

t SIt-} Y[x - Vo<y - {h + (,.-e) ~o J~]

Also

~TX - (T +AT) sin B cos t + (H + 6H) sin t -(T +aT) ay

-T sin B cos; -H sint+ T ay

For small flapping angles: sin B ~ B - a o -al cos t - bl san"

Substitute for (T + 6T) and (H + AH) and average around the
azimuth to obtain (A Tx ) AV. using integrals

161

(A T,.; )AV. ::. 'iTfpa.n.R

1
{t (1,0 A[Ab, (r-e) +- (r-t hCA-o ) ~ - V t'(1]
)( (1,0 T Qo

- [Link]<y ... t Q..8[~ ...'Irx/C + (h+-(r-e)o,o) P -j 4,H.Q.R

i. c [-.[Link], (r-e) ... (.. . + hQl.) I' ~ ~o Va..ot)( J
t t ...

+ 1: 0 [x -VO(y -(h-t-(r-e)o..oJ ~ ] - ~ NJlR (AB,s )}Ar

This can be broken into partial derivatives by the method of

Bryan.

AT)( = *rrp a {x [- Ao...~ ... D ... ..n.R (f- )" )a.,o A ~:'
.n.R"3
- [Link].R ~'Z' - C.n.R (r-~) ~~' ]

-to ~ ['loB +a,~A.Q.R (r- i) ~~' - H.n.R"~~'

- C.a.R (r:- i) ~;' 1" C aJo ]

-t ~ [RA tJ. o (r-., tAlo )" Aa.Q..n.R (r.- ~) ~:

- [Link]~' - CAR (;;- f)~' - RD (Y\ +(r- i) ~o)]

a~ a,
+ P [GLoA.a..R (r- ~)~ + ~oBR (yt .. (r- ~)a..o)

.,. Ci=( (r .. YlQ.,J - eRn.. (r-~) ~~f - Hn.R ~ J

162
+0<)( [a..[Link] (f- i) ~~¥ + a..o BV - HllR ;:-~

- C.Q. R (?- ) ~~~ + C OJo v ]

1"' r0. 0 An.R (f- e)ob,

ex y II ~ aocy
-+ A o..l-V
0
- HnR ~

ooc'l

- C.a.R (f- ~) gao, - DV - Z H n. R]

QD<y

+A A,~ [a... [Link] (r- i) ~~:~ +- a,o n.R 3' - "'0 M.a.R
- H ~R c3o.., - C n..R (r- 5) 90..,
3AI~ aAI~
J
i" Ael~ [[Link] (r:. i')~~:) + C.n.R ~ - H.a.R ~~,
- C J2. R (r=. ~) ~~;tt - N n. R ] }

From this can be derived immediately non-dimensional force

derivatives as follows:

~'lTE'lcr.rtR4 ~(~) = D,-A.a..~ + ;(~) (-H,-C1 +C,'3)

+ a~l) (-A, 3 a.. -I- A~",o)

~ 'IT fl~ ..a1.R4 a3 (l-) =- <Lo (e, ... c.) T Cl(~) (-H,-Cl. 1(. ~)

- 00;') (Al.. Q.. o - A, ~ a. o )

a(-lR
------:I~-A
V4-1Tea .Q.~R'"
aT'l(
aCt) = [A. 'tl Q.~ + A~ Cl o - O. (Y\. ~ Q.,o\._j""\~[Link]
lr­

163

In a similar fashion, the Moment Derivatives are derived

from:
A~)(. ~ - F (e C.Q~j3 ... h SIN (3) ~IN r.. . C7 [h t (r- e) SIN~J c.o~ t
- e b Sb n."I. SlN (d ~'N t ~ I 1H\J6 .n. i

and, in non-dimensional form they are:

~rre~.n."R' ;(~) =- ~B.(3+a.. ..r\)-CIQ..(h-i~.)-CL""~J

+ ~~) EA.'l(3 T a...Y\)+-A1.("i+- ...."')]

+
d
'(..t.)
Il.R
~."TKI-CI'Hll-l",.)

+- C'I. ( 't - z. ~ Q. a) T C) Cla J

164

""':""-~,-_. ~
~'iT~(T1l.1.R5 a(:L) = [ -A.a..o ( r+a,.,o'1 ) tD.\'1-ra,o)+D2.Q"o]
(

.n.R

+ a(~) EA, ~(~t ....\) + AL(~-+a..'t) ]

- 3(A) [H'''I.-+K,-C,Htt- "io.-.)

+ c~ (It -2 'i (1,,0) -+ c3 Q,o J
B, (~ + a. on)( ,,- 'ia..o ) + B 2 ,,0 ('3 + Qo~)
of- C, a..tt (tt- )' a..) + C~ (rt- ~4.o -+ ~"1.,,)
+C a, + I'[Link] .n..7..
~ 0 V4'lle a1l"[Link]

of :<i-) [- A, l (~t ..... tl)+ Ad ~ +a.~) ]

- :(i )[H,1'l + K,-C, ~ (h- r; <1.0)

+ C2. (rt- 2. ~ £1,0) + c ~ a. 0]
Force and Moment Derivatives

1~1l'p~n~RS ~(~) = -A,a..rt('l+a..,,)-Az.(S'ta..,,)

. + O. (rt- )' a..o)~ 2 Oi Qo (tt - r'to)f D3 a.\

165

-I- .:c*l C:A. f(ho..'l) .j. A.. ('~ + a. 'I) J

+ ~!) [I-l.~t-KI -C, 'Hrr- c; .... )
+C2.(~-z~a..)+ C~Q.,oJ

_ _-'~~ aM)( = M.(l+CLo\\)-A,1j(~+[Link]\1)

~ 1Tf<T.n.&. R~ a 8,s
+ ~~'~ EA. l () +o..rr) -+ AI. ('; of aol-l) J
+ ~~:s [H•., -+ K. - c. , (~- ~ ~o )
+ C'Z, ('l - 2 ) ~o ) + C3 a.. J

_ _....I.I----",.~ aM" = _ N, ('1- )Glo)-Nl.a. o -K, TC,l( r\-

'411' fI CT n.1. R' dA.~
'0. 0 )

~ C1. jq,. + ~;;~ [-At') (f ta..~)+ Al (~tao")]

- ~ :;~ [H It. +
I K I - CI ) ( tt- r; Q,. )

+ (1. (tt -z )a...o) t- C 3 ct.. ]

a is the longitudinal harmonic coefficient of flapping.

l
Thus, the Force and Moment Derivatives are written in terms
of flapping derivatives.

166
Where:

1.0
At. = £.J AF d;;=

t·o
B, =1; B dr:

and (see "Lift and Torque Forces")

A - -.; A.. ' T .,.

1- {y:.l(CLolT (0)1" Arr (CL+CDoe.)1-'l. CD A~}
r

B=y' 'L '_

')..... +r
£ {1. F "[Link]+A r r(Cp-CL-.)+"A:(CL-CO CO()}
H [Link],,8 =-v':>"r'l. .. f"t: {f (J- i ~'L) C + Ar (1- ~ (!>"'-) CD }
L

J COS t8 =- -J ).;- +7""2. { Ar (1- -l f3l. ) C r (1- i ,8"1) CD]

L -

C='.y
Ar
~ Ii.,­_ to {rZ.(CL- CD.J ;. ArT (CLIl(- C,D)+ [Link]).~ J
o =-V)..r~l... r2. {-[Link]) of. ~r'f (CL+CDo<)- .:t,1.(C D +C L Ol.)j
M :.,j,,; COS"[Link] + ['3 + (r- iJ COS ~J 2.. [Ct.1l(.{t +(f-~) (,05,8 }
+ CD~).'" COS,6J

167

N =.J'\;- (,05 ,Z~ l' ["3 + (Y"- ) ) C:OS;.3] z. [C L A y [Link]~

- CJ)~ { '5 +(r- ";) C:O~f3 ] ]

The obvious symmetry of the ROTOCHUTE in axial flight,

from a perturbation viewpoint, renders it unnecessary to
deriveATy and AMy in terms of the independent variables
and their derivatives. Instead, use can be made of the re­
lationships (which follow from symmetry).

_ dTy
ao y

where A - variable of interest.

Force and Moment Derivatives for Forward Flight

a"
aoc -_ t
in
( 8
IZ.
aT aH )
Ooc. - a~

ax _
()-"", -
I
in
(B
rz.
aT
a..u. -
aH)

a~

a"
oBl'z. -
_ I
m -
( c.
~IZ.
aT aH
a« +~ +
T)

*:: ;k
I

(B,~ ~~ .- g~ )
a l;
aO\ - my.
- ....L (_.2I.
·00<.
_ B aH
I'[Link].
)

~ I (aT & 9H )
a....u mu..ll - (),}l - I"Z. a"......

168

(- BI'L
aH
at + A..aY..
11. at-
)

l. == ...L (-ll_ ~
aa 6,'L + B I~ ~~ )
m \.(. dOC' g ""

aaMex.. :. LI y (_ -ZT B
I Z.
.a..r
acx. -'- :; r ~
T
.c;. a ex.
+ aM... act-. )
a a
OJ ; 0<..

Remarks of Appendix II regarding the derivation of angle

of attack derivatives are apropos.

169

/
x"u

HORIZON

z"w
mg

ROTOCHUTE (WITH TAIL) IN FLIGHT" SHOWING ANGLE RELATIONSHIPS

FIGURE 80

170

Automatic Stabilization Equipment

Longitudinal Equation of Motion

- I
1 + ,..'Z. 5
[ a BIL (e - e ) + a B,z.
ae Co 0'i
q
0L
]

where:

0.25 seconds

0.4

0.25

The Total Flight Spectrum

Introduction

In this section, the dynamic stability of the

ROTOCHUTE throughout the whole flight regime of interest,
including both axial and forward flight is analyzed. The
equations of motion are written (reference body axes) using
Euler equations of motion. Tail moment effects are included
in the analysis, but drag due to the tail is ignored (Refer­
ence Figure 80).

171

Analysis
Thus, the equations of motion are:

L F" ...±­
m (u. -to urt) ::. T SIN Brt. - H [Link] 6 f t. - mi 511'1 e - ~ v..l.p f

tn (Ur - u.~) =- r <.OS B,'Z. - H COS 8,1. + m$ [Link] e

2. My "-{

Iyi :::; H h cos B,l. - Th S'N f> ..z. + Mf -i- ~ eb5 b .n1.a...- M't

Small angle assumptions can be made. Then small dis­

turbance substitutions and the elimination of initial condi­
tions result in the perturbation equations in terms of partial
derivatives of Forces and Moments as follows:

F,c. : ~~w; t = :~/~CXI + ~~t~ A e,l. + ~;, A?

... at-
oX' AIL - (0 C.O~ e)A9 - f>fu. o A u..
D '0 0 m

. a~ oc ~
W"- lAo ~ = 00(+ AO(-F + a6t~ A 8 f z. + [Link] A.P-'

+ ~: ~t -(a 51N6o )A9

172
My:

where x .. LFX; z ... rFz; and M - I:M yo These are the right­
hand side of the original equations of motion.
Typically:

~~ - toe.. {T SIN 8 1z. - H c.o~ B,'L - m3 SIIII e - ~ u.'l.~ f }

~ :~ {TB,l. -H - rna e -! u.... @.f}
--

The equations are now in terms of angular and speed

variables with coefficients which are Force and Moment deriva­
tives o The derivations of these derivatives were presented
in detail for axial flight. For forward flight~ standard
helicopter methods apply.
Finally, by making the substitutions:

173

The following are derived:

a~
Jr=:. aD<, ~ 8 ..aE... ~
01:.; + a61"l. 1'1. + O.;f.C. M + at l' - (,(0 if
- (9 s:"ti)a - Tur

where the trim expressions are also expressible in terms of

partial derivatives and initial conditions:

174

All force and moment derivatives, and the trim functions

are calculated in terms of the advance ratio. The trim
functions are derived from a static analysis of the ROTOCHUTE
in which the tail configuration plays a prominent part
(Reference Static Equilibrium Equations).
Special Note:

STABLE

FIGURE 81

Of particular interest in analyzing the results is the

fact that the ROTOCHUTE body pitch attitude (8) is a feed­
back signal to the ASE. Since the problem was programmed
on the computer as a function of advance ratio, then the
feedback signal should be a single-valued function of ad­
vance ratio. It transpired that at ~<O.15 such is not the
case, as Figure 81 illustrates. However, for ~ > .15, the
advance ratio is satisfactory in this respect.

175

For this reason, sufficient control must be available,

with the existing control system, to overcome the hump in
the 8 -~ curve o Since the existing ROTOCHUTE lacked this
amount of control, a tail was added to supplement the con­
trol with a forward pitching moment o

+ (Tail Moment, M'"

-
... at the
trim point

176

APPENDIX II. STABILITY AND CONTROL ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

An analog computer program was performed for the purpose

of investigating the stability and control characteristics
of the KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE. Six rigid body equations of motion
were considered in the analysis. It was found that the auto­
pilot system was capable of stabilizing the ROTOCHUTE during
the glide and flare maneuver. However, on the basis of trim
considerations and autopilot gains, it was found essential
that the synchronizing links be disconnected during this
phase of operation. A satisfactory procedure for flaring the
ROTOCHUTE has been demonstrated. During this phase of the
analysis, the stability derivatives were programmed on the
analog computer as a function of advance ratio. Conclusions
are drawn relative to the dynamic characteristics of the
ROTOCHUTE with free-flapping blades and a semi-rigid rotor.

INTRODUCTION
During a typical mission, the ROTOCHUTE will initially
be traveling at high forward speeds during descent through
the atmosphere. At a predetermined altitude, the rotor will
be deployed and the ROTOCHUTE will decelerate with the longi­
tudinal body axis essentially aligned with the flight path.
Initially, the rotor is completely stalled, due to the high
inflow, and acts as a drag device. As the ROTOCHUTE deceler­
ates, the inflow decreases and the rotor becomes unstalled.
This phase of operation is known as the axial flight mode.
During this mode, no attempt is made to direct the flight
path except through the controlled deployment of the rotor.

After the ROTOCHUTE has decelerated to a sufficiently

low descent velocity, control is applied to the rotor and a
horizontal velocity is developed. As the forward velocity
of the ROTOCHUTE is increased to the nominal glide speed,
the vertical descent velocity decreases further, since the
rotor is aerodynamically more efficient in forward flight
than in axial flight. During the glide mode, the ROTOCHUTE
will be maneuvered into the desired landing area. A glide
path of 22 degrees with relation to the horizontal can be
expected from a configuration with an LID of 2.5.

177

The final mode is the flare and landing maneuver. The

flare maneuver is initiated by increasing the fuselage pitch
attitude by the application of aft rotor tilt. An incremental
increase in pitch attitude results in an approximate con­
stant deceleration along the flight path. The forward speed
should be arrested before ground contact and collective pitch
control applied to result in near-zero vertical velocity at
touchdown. The total time required for the flare and landing
maneuver could be on the order of 5 to 10 seconds.
The mission profile of the KRC-6 will include the three
flight modes previously discussed. The capability to maneuver
during the glide and flare will be provided through an auto­
pilot system. The autopilot commands will be transmitted
by radio from a ground control station. The autopilot will
provide the necessary stabilization of the ROTOCHUTE, with
the ground control station closing the navigation loop.

A. DYNAMICS DURING GLIDE AND FLARE

The initial design concept for the KRC-6 rotor used
synchronizing links to insure the uniform opening of the rotor
blades during deployment. These links were attached to each
of the four blades and restricted blade flapping relative
to the hub or control axis (al and bl). However, the ability
of the rotor to change coning angle (ao) was not affected.
The rotor flepping derivatives were calculated assuming the
blade had a root hinge restraint equal to the effective blade
flapping stiffness. Analog computer tests showed that the
ABE system, with proper control coupling, was capable of
stabilizing and controlling the ROTOCHUTE with this rotor con­
figuration. However, the system was very sensitive to changes
in gain and the system would become unstable if the advance
ratio increased substantially above the nominal glide speed.
Also, the longitud~nal and lateral trim required at the nominal
glide speed exceeded the design limits. With the semi-rigid
rotor, it was essential that the effect of non-~niform inflow
be included in the calculations. With a normal flapping
rotor, considering the effect of non-uniform inflow results
in increasing the lateral flapping angle (b l ). However, for
the semi-rigid rotor, this effect results in a longitudinal
hub moment which is much larger than that predicted if non­
uniform inflow is neglected.

179

A second design studied was one in which the synchronizing

links are released after the rotor is deployed. This system
has smaller steady-state hub moments and hence required less
control to trim. Also, while coupling is still present, due
to the large offset of the flapping hinges, the coupling is
much less than that experienced by the semi-rigid rotor.
Hence, the autopilot doesn't require coupling and is less sensi­
tive to changes in gain.
1. Equations of Motion
The motions of the ROTOCHUTE in space can be described
by six equations of motion if one neglects the rotor dynamics.
These equations define the force and moment equilibrium along
and about the X, Y, and Z axes. The equations of motion used
in the ROTOCHUTE analysis are referred to body axes, with
the X and Y axes aligned with the principal axes. As a re­
sult, there exists a steady-state value for angle of attack.
Also, since the ROTOCHUTE is in unpowered autorotation, the
nominal flight path is inclined downward and a steady-state
value for 8-«f is considered. Figure 82 presents a schematic.
of axes orientation.
The six-degree of freedom equations of motion and the
auxiliary equations for transforming from body rates to space
rates are as follows:

180

(I)

ol:r - ~ =-! (-I AU/n L c-oo@ -@ 4Un~ ceo 10)+ ~~A~

+ ~fL + n- £r + $p (fl-+.d A;~).,I- 84,sf

+ ~~/i! 8ra + ~r A/~ + ff e (3)

.,a.0 .::. aL A. d + oL f£ + 8L (a. - a;i!) + 8L fJ-

I a (Y. of afl a~ u afJ-
T aL /3f + 2.b r +- aL ,II1r. + ..2i:. G (4)
a'sf" (Jr 8AIi!. ae

i = ~ L1 ~T +~ "u- + ~ ~ 7- ~; (-pi- A~r)

r ~;"'fif' + Wi~ B/~ + ~ 9 (5")

r O
= aN
a~r
13. + aN ..c
r Sf' /
7- aN r
or (6)

®o = ~ GC'Q, Po- r [Link] ~o (7)

i = fJ 7- ~~ Po ~ ®o + r C40 to.:tAm, @o (8)

181

Where :

aa-
IX _ I
'in
(8 aT
I~ 8(1. -
8H)
()(j.

:~ =;J, (8 i!.H. - U. - 8fY:)

r
' ap. 8p ap.
HX:::.L (_ £!!. )
Bf m Sf
~=~ (-J%)
t;~fl)
I,: In (-81~ ~ -I- ~+ r)
i=;h(8'i! M- ~)

~=Jho (Ala ~)

~:s k o
(/lIZ ~)

§l:::. - ' M
8'1 mao 8f
1)= ,ju~o (~+ (lt fpAR 5-(; ~)

!jr= !w.o (f- at" ~ I'll~ 11 2St )

Zl;:..L.
ar MU (a"t t-I'.a
~ ,

Ii 51; ~)
o

M - I T

7Jlf/~ - /1/"0

182

SCHEMATIC VIEW OF ROTOCHUTE AXIS SYSTEM

FIGURE 82

178

8r
9f
=IfIll
L
o
1- iI. - 8
r ~
1J..H)
~ ~

a2 = k (- 8 ilL + A'I.2 BY)

-at "'''0 '1~ at ~ :10

, = -ko (- B/ iJ , + }l/i!~)

¥;.= ,hao f8/~ W+ A'2 f)

~/i!=n5uo (Ja-H +8 i! §)
'
~ - I Y
aifi~- ml4,

~
~B =-'
m"o (H- ilI..)
l- ~ 8/:2~ as

¥=.b(}Al;dft+~ ~)
8L = I (- 8Y + ~ ~)
~ Xx sa- aOI a~
;;."

Sj;=ix (J,. ~ + ~ ~-4 at ljLnR ~i-t)

~= ix (Jr ~+ ~ ~+Lt-at" If''2.fl2f12 5t)

~:. fx (-Lt;tl at" -£ ~ Q R St)

JiL
~/S
=-'-
Ix
~,. T

d'

1'9= i; ("rA'l! ~r ~ ~)
2!!l. = ..L. I- ?~r 8/5 2L
9tX .z#'- (tr
-t- "i aH -r at!Uu ~~/)
qtJ.. d' r 8()1... <JCi/ ~

183
(- ~r Bli! aT eJ!Mt. ~a,_ O.7'1-f P.n.2R~)
D.!l. = L
afi I" (f' ap + t7').,r ap
gfL +
8a, y.t /.
iML=.L ( - r jJ:f. + a.t!11JJ
~ z, 3- as Bal
aJb.)
at
~=..L (- 8!L+ ~ ~)
8f1 I;t l}r ¥ sa, api
it!. = L I~ mt + a.t:1IJ..L ~)
(J~ Zj- f"tFJ- as ~-aT!

f1,;o=J; (~B/~~-"j~ ~- J.t- T- ;!/:,~, ~)

.at2-L L -.8 ~ - M..+~ ~~
C9 - Icl {J,.. IS as ..,. Jr 88 aa,--afT}

n:: ~ (Jot- at: -'l-f1- 2 .IlZ IJZ s~)

~"4- (-.)~ at ffd2R St)
~: = ~ (-;}t at { I'- ftR St ..tot)

184

The above equations of motion assume constant rotor

speed. At advance ratios below approximately ~ = 0.20, the
collective pitch governor designed for axial flight should
prove effective in maintaining constant rotor speed. An in­
crease in rotor angle of attack results in a rotor torque
tending to increase rotor angular velocity. The governor
senses this speed increase and increases collective pitch
which reduces the incremental driving torque to near zero.
The rotor speed will vary through small limits, since an
error signal is necessary for any closed-loop governing sys­
tem. At higher advance ratios, this governing system becomes
ineffective due to a reversal in the slope of rotor driving
torque versus collective pitch. A quasi-static approach was
used to incorporate the effect of the rotor governor into the
equations of motion. The rate of change of collective pitch
versus angle of attack was calculated for constant angular
velocity. This ratio was then used to modify the angle of
attack deriv&tives. For example, the derivative with the
governing system operating was calculated as follows:

aM =(aM) +[Link] (9)

ooc.. aD\. e ae o~
2. Derivatives and Constants
In order to solve the equation of motion, it first is
necessary to evaluate the various stability derivatives and
constants. Table 5 presents a summary of the various deriva­
tives calculated for both the semi-rigid and free-flapping
rotors. The Burroughs E102 digital computer was used for
performing the calculations.
After investigating the dynamic characteristics of the
ROTOCHUTE with the semi-rigid rotor, the importance of each
of the various derivatives was evaluated. The results of
this investigation showed that only the inertia and gravita­
tion terms were of primary importance in the drag and side
force equations. Therefore, in the analysis of the free­
flapping rotor, a number of small derivatives were dropped.

185

mr=rr'tiYfrtfl'"f:!f!!l! '7mWn? m7*wer,rrmrWfWe.,urzwm'[Link]·y···rmtrwemrt!trmrtl:f,ff'It::T=="·"mlem···'·ZK"'tWSWlfw*··mwwriiffWMW't'sz·wmrwKi. :;"7;; mn

TABLE 5

STABILITY DERIVATIVES FOR KRC-6

(WITH AND WITHOUT FPEE-FLAPPING HINGES)

Semi-Rigid Rotor Free-Flapping Rotor

11­ 11­ 11­ 11­ 11­ 11­ II­ 11­

Derivative Units 0.20 0.16 0.13 0.08 0.02 0.15 0.10 0.05
2
g cos 8 0 ft/sec 31.87 32.16 32.07 31.49 30.94 32.16 31.49 30.94

dJc/ck ft/se~2 -8.388 -5.433 -5.320 -2.767 -1.469 -5.433 -2.767 -1.469

ory'a.­ ft/sec 2 -81.93 -68.04 -62.49 -57.12 -19.14 -31.02 -28.56 -9.56

~ ... ft/sec 0.718 0.901 0.914 0.884 0.769

} -1.552 -2.554 -0.650
-«-av. ft/sec 3.001 2.453 2.652 3.438 1.419

d,c/a~ ft/sec 0.779 1.0~7 1.098 1.138 1.348 ---­ ---­ ---­
ac;~ ft/sec 2 0.002 0.012 0.028 0.037 0.542 ---­ ---­ ---­
~8R. ft/sec 2 40.64 37.68 37.57 35.02 33.72 37.68 35.02 33.72

-­ ---­-­ ---­
axfcle -4.158 ft/sec 2 -11.39 -14.81 -13.16 -9.708 ---­
_.­
IX)
fn
a.
- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - ­
cos @o cos t. l/sec 0.325
-----­
0.422
---­
0.518
,-----­
0.828
- -----­
2.599
- -0.452
--­ 0.677
-,----­
1.350
• sin tto sin
IA.
I0 l/",ec -0.001 -0.0007 ...0.003 0.000 +0.02:' ---­ ---­ ---­
a'VaOC l,'sec -0.10:3 -0.160 -0.089 ...0.013 -0.118 ---­ ---­ ---­
av/a,.&. l:'sec -0.0::5 -0.220 -0.225 +0.180 0.000 ---­ ---­ ---­
a-t/a.,.. ::a(~ 0.0082 0.014 0.020 0.029 0.112 ---­ ---­ ---­
arIa" [Link] -0.0039 -0.0083 -0.012 -0.019 -0.061 ---­ ---­ ---­
i!1'fla/!l l/sec -0.057 -0.049 -0.048 -0.030 -0.014 -0.049 -0.030 -0.014

av/ar nlV! 0.0020 0.0020 0.0023 0.0020 0.0020 ---­ ---­ ---­
a~aAR. l/sec 0.330 0.422 0.593 0.844 2.700 0.422 0.593 0.844

CW/ae
--------------
l/sec -0.055
-----­
-0.321
1---­ ---­
-0.247
- - - - - ­ 1------­
+0.064 -0.635 ---­- - ­ -----_.­
1------­ - - ---­ ---­
1-----­
!•s i n i 0 cos 8 0
l/scc 0.010 0.041 0.034 0.000 0.081 ---­ ---­ ---­
!. sin 8 0
cos I.
I/sec -0.045 -0.007 +0.045 ...0.176 +0.751 ---­ ---­ ---­
TABLE 5 (Continued)

Semi-Rigid Rotor Free-Flapping Rotor

p- p- p- I'- Il- Il­ Il- Il-

Derivative Units 0.20 0.16 0.13 0.08 0.02 0.15 0.10 0.05

al/~ 1/sec -7.156 -2.091 -1.897 -1.064 -4.454 -4.505 -2.054 -0.720

a7/[Link]­ 1/sec -1.742 -2.878 -4.767 -14.556 +0.027 -2.262 -5.938 -18.25

oo/a1' Rad +0.0000 -0.0009 -0.0009 0.000 -0.0043 ---- ---- ----
al/ap Rad +0.0002 +0.0009 +0.0006 -0.0006 -0.0007 ---- ---- ----
a7{a"s 1/sec +0.0001 +0.0007 +0.0005 -0.0001 -0.0007 ---- ----- ----
az;aBn • 1/sec 7.149 2.083 1.884 1.048 4.441 4.490 2.024 0.684

al/aAn. 1/sec -0.0054 -0.0093 -0.0110 -0.0104 -0.0132 ---- ---- ----
_~a.§......._._
1/sec -3.750
--- _ . ­ ~ - - - - -' - - - - - - -1-----_.- ------ ' - - - -
-4.196 -5.247 -5.196 -23.942 ---- -_.- ----­
------­ '------ ----
'-- 1 / s e T ­
aJ.j~ -56.79 -10.94 -3.532 +1.219 -0.750 -6.176 -0.958 +0.391

al.{a,.c. 11sec 2 -21.69 -32.34 -28.6:: -24.01 0.000 -0.492 -2.842 -0.041

.... aLia... l/sec 4.558 4.684 4.705 4.711 4.810 +0.0969 0.1156 0.1230
(Xl
-J
dl.{ap 1/sec -2.882 -2.992 -2.997 -3.013 -2.966 -0.9639 -1.1109 -1.1725

al./iJ~ 1/sec 2 +0.648 -0.664 -0.910 -0.864 -0.313 +0.499 -0.223 -0.350

attc1,. l/see -0.034 -0.027 -0.0221 -0.0136 -0.0042 ---- ---- ----
2
9LJaA,l. 1/see 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 +15.106 19.097 21.037

aLlae
-------
1/see
-- -
2
- -
-33.35 -30.79 -17.95 +1.225 -5.184 ---- ---- ----
f------.- - - - - ­ - - - - - f - - - - . ­ - - - - - ------- -------- r------­
l/see 2aH/aClC.
89.41 22.19 16.30 7.796 1.495 -1.324 -0.473 +0.085

Ot¥a.u­ 1/see2 9.024 10.923 19.866 24.717 3.287 -1.769 -0.855 +2.726

aM/a.,. 1/see -2.985 -3.048 -3.054 -3.024 -2.957 -0.896 -1.061 -1.143

a'ap l/see -4.503 -4.644 -4.672 -4.691 -4.789 -0.037 -0.055 -0.0629

(}'¥a"a 1/see 2 -4.009 -3.655 -3.058 -1.846 -0.875 ---- ---- ----
1/see2
dMla6rt,. -104.3 -37.12 -31.23 -22.72 -16.42 -11.44 -18.44 -20.92
aM/ 1/see 2 ---- ­ ------- ----
- - - ae
47.60 48.26 49.39 45.72 14.25
----
a~/a...,~
~-----
1/see 2
- - - - - - ­ ' - - - - - ­ '--------­ I------
14.36 8.731 5.775
-- --
2.194
- -0.212
- - -----
8.731
'---- 1-----­
2.194 0.212

~A1/ap l/see -0.352 -0.275 -0.224 -0.137 -0.043 -0.275 -0.137 -0.043

8"Yar l/see -0.590 -0.460 -0.374 -0.231 -0.0.718 -0.460 -0.231 -0.0718

.•,._.•. u",_,-,."'"'."""""'''''~'''''''",,~>,O~'''''''-''-'_'''''"""'~" •.'~.~'ff,"'.''''.'~"-C c>.~.,".' "'.,0~.':"''''''''''~t",... 7~~.,1%A""';.'''~''rJ:f''~·',.,,..',~'''M;'¥''''''''''.'.':'':i;I",,,,,,'~~_'''''''''-~W}'''''.~I'~''~~\i!>'\.''''''~1~,,"S,:,!!";~'~,~'!('!'.'~tl'~f:!f!,!,.~r':,'!,~~""~'~~;'~:~I'~~"'·~I1:"'!';·":r-'''''

... "t".,",,:""\:')~"'!J'f·"1!'i{:'\"""'.Pii/'-.;:,<,~.,.<"'?C?}·i.\''ff;r; \'t:"f;'",,~""'·'.>:.'>j.-m~""':''','''':~'it''';.·,)c)~fi';'~-''~-·~~~ ·'-'!""~!;}~~-"·"'!i'.!'I!'Y·~~;";'S-',I'J""""'!t':"",~-i"··¥·-.'" "';/F'/!'i""-·"'7!ft'~-t~M~,~Y{:)m~~"'1!"":'r·"\%:~',~I!"-:"'VJ(i~·,,"NjYt;':' ....,'"~'l1·"'·~~~
The trim conditions for the free-flapping rotor are
presented in Table 6. The control trim required for the
semi-rigid rotor was much greater than that shown in Table 6.
For examp1e l at an advance ratio of ~ - 0.15 1 the control
required to trim the semi-rigid rotor was BIZ = 18.2 degrees
and A1Z - 7.0 degrees.

TABLE 6
TRIM CONDITIONS FOR THE KRC-6
WITH FREE-FLAPPING ROTOR

Advance Ratio
Variable Units ~ - 0.15 ~ = 0.10 J1 0= 0.05
a1 Rad 0.0293 0.0311 0.0174
b1 Rad 0.0283 0.0403 0.0179
ao Rad 0.0242 0.0320 0.0359

BIZ Rad 0.0919 0.0946 0.0515

A1Z Rad -0.105 -0.126 -0.0526
9 Rad 0.0384 0.0558 0.0698
A Rad 0.018 0.020 0.017
ar Rad 0.317 0.660 1.225
CT --­ 0.0093 0.0118 0.0130

188

The physical parameters which do not change as a function

of advance ratio are presented in Table 7.

TABLE 7
KRC-6 PHYSICAL PARAMETERS

Parameter Units Magnitude

W Lbs 256.3
m
Lbs-Sec 2 7.97
Ft

Ix Slug-Ft 2 46.0
Iy Slug-Ft 2 46.3
Iz Slug-Ft 2 6.5

It Ft 4.0

Zt Ft 2.4

zr Ft 2.7
R Ft 4.0
a l/Rnd 5.73

CT --­ 0.159
e --­ 0 113
0

nR Ft/Sec 475

Bo AUTOPILOT SYSTEM
The autopilot system in the KRC-6 consists of an atti­
tude gyro, a differentiation circuit for determining angular
rates, and electrical actuator for controlling the position
of the tilt hub o The pitch and roll commands will be trans­
mitted from the ground control station to a radio receiver

189

mounted in the KRC-6. A schematic of the stabilization sys­

tem is presented in Figure ea.

Pitch Conunand Electric ROTOCHUTE

from Ground Actuator
Control Station ~ 8 e ~A~ I KJ. t (61~lL ~ a
'<;Y I Ko I 'C;Y II +1"~S I BIz.
6c. l'L
Differentiator
I K S I
I 1+1:5 I
I I
I K, I

(a) Pitch Stabilization

Roll Command
from Ground Electric
Control Station Actuator ROTOCHUTE
"" <Pe I K
1"
Atl
H --&
1+1;5
(A I1)L iA.-z. <I>
~c
'<,>'
PL

Differentiator
Kfp5
l .. l"... S
I
K7 I
I I

(b) Roll Stabilization

SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF AUTO-PILOT SYSTEM

FIGURE 83

190
Since the ROTOCHUTE is inherently unstable, the auto­
pilot system is used for stabilization as well as for
maneuvering. As discussed later, the six-degree of freedom
equations of motion were set up on the 40-amplifier PACE
electronic type analog computer. Simulation of the ROTO­
CHUTE with both the semi-rigid and free-flapping rotor was
performed. It was necessary during the simulation program
to always have the auto-pilot system functioning due to the
dynamic instability of the ROTOCHUTE.
From Figure 83, it can be seen that the command vari­
ables are pitch and roll attitudes and not control displace­
ments. The equations which determine the longitudinal
control displacement are as follows:

(10)

E)-a c (11)

,. (12)

The above equations can be combined to yield the

following:

(13)

A similar equation exists for defining the lateral

control displacement. From the available components, it
was estimated that the following system time lagswQuld
be encountered.

-, 4
0.05 sec" differentiation lag

- I'3 ­ 0.25 sec - electric actuator lag

191

The ROTOCHUTE with the semi-rigid rotor was simulated

first on the analog computer. With this rotor~ strong aero­
dynamic and gyroscopic coupling was found to exist. At low
advance ratios (below ~ - 0.10)~ a positive pitch rate
caused the ROTOCHUTE to roll to the right due to gyroscopic
coupling. Howeve!~ at high advance ratios (above ~ - 0.10)~
the aerodynamic coupling became predominant through the
aLI a a derivative. As a resul t~ a positive pitch rate~ which
increased angle of attack~ caused the ROTOCHUTE to roll to
the left. Cross coupling the controls at high advance ratios
to reduce aerodynamic coupling tended to re-inforce the gyro­
scopic coupling at the low advance ratios. Through consider­
able experimentation~ an optimum system of control coupling
and system gains was found. The coupling derivatives and
optimum gains are presented in Table 8. These gains are
compared with those required for the free-flapping rotor.

TABLE 8
AUTO-PILOT COUPLING DERIVATIVES AND OPTIMUM GAINS
Semi-Rigid. Free-Flapping
Derivatives Units Rotor Gains Rotor Gains

~~~ deg/deg +0.75 +0.40

ae,J, deg ....0.25 +0.25

al' deg/sec
a6~L deg -0.03 ---­
a~t'Z. deg/sec

¥r deg/deg

deg
-0.75 -0.40

aA,J, -0.25 -0.25

oP deg/sec

~
deg
deg/sec
+0.03 ---­

~
ee
~
deg
+2.25 ---­
aA lt" deg +0.75 ---­
a~ deg/sec

192

It will be noted in Table 8 that the auto-pilot is less

complex for the free-flapping rotor configuration. Also,
the attitude feedback gain for the free-flapping rotor was
reduced by 47 per cent which improved the auto-pilot sta­
bility boundaries.
As a result of the decision to automatically disconnect
the synchronizing links after rotor deployment, the analog
computer simulation of the auto-pilot was concentrated on
the free-flapping rotor system. The effect of varying the
auto-pilot gains above and below the nominal values is pre­
sented in Figures 84 and 85. The response to a step command
in pitch is shown ifi Figure 84. It will be noted that the
ROTOCHUTE is stable over a wide region of rate and attitude
gains. The forward speed response (not shown in Figure 84)
to a step 9 c command shows a linear decrease as a function
of time. As a result, a control input as a function of time
is required to maintain trim conditions due to the change
in forward speed. With a constant 9 command, an increase in
error signal is required to increase the cyclic pitch con­
trol. This is evident from the following expression.

- dB,Ze (e -
aa <E> )
c.
+ <3611.
at tL
lTL
(15)

For a constant 8 c command and no pitch rate, the in­

cremental change in cyclic pitch with respect to pitch atti­
tude change is as follows.

(16)

Thus , as the forward speed changes, a change in pitch

attitude is required for the auto-pilot to generate a trim
control signalo An increase in gain will reduce the steady­
state error.
During the roll command maneuver shown in Figure 85, a
negligible speed change is incurred. As a result, the roll
attitude response reaches a steady-state value. The roll
response is stable for the complete range of gains considered
in Figure 85.

193

---- ---
---
.------- --- ..... - -
<H)-RAd.G.o,

0.00+-.....- - - - - - - - - ­

0.01

~ '" [Link]~~:;c"'~-~-5-~_;_; .===:;;;:­

.
-0.01 - - -...... __

j I I I j I I
o 4 8 12 o 4 8
T,me IV Sec T,me"" Sec

(a) Effect of Varying Attitude Gains (b) Effect of Varying

Rate Gains
EFFECT OF VARYING AUTOPILOT GAINS
(8c = .0175 rad, p = .15)

FIGURE 84
194
0. 0/ 1
@~ [Link] [Link]~----------­
0.0%

!~ RaJ 0.01
[Link]+~--------­

[Link]
8/~"", R4a [Link] ---------­

0.0/

-[Link]
I I I I I I
o 4- 6 o 4 8
TIme -- Sec

(a) Effect of Varying Attitude Gains (b) Effect of Varying

Rate Gains

EFFECT OF VARYING AUTOPILOT GAINS

(Ic = .0175 rad, ~ - .15)
FIGURE 85
195
C. ANALOO COMPUTER SIMULATION
The analog computer program was performed in three parts.
The first part considered the dynamics of the ROTOCHUTE with
free-flapping rotor blades. For the rigid body configuration
of six degrees of freedom, constant coefficients were used
during the analysis. The second area of this study was con­
cerned with the semi-rigid rotor. This case involved a high
degree of coupling between the lateral and longitudinal equa­
tions. The third part of the study concerned maneuvering
the ROTOCHUTE during a simulated flare maneuver. Six-degree
of freedom equations of motion with non-linear coefficients
were used on the analog computer during the maneuver simula­
tion. A successful technique for flaring the ROTOCHUTE during
the landing maneuver was developed.
1. Simulation With Free-Flapping Blades
The PACE electronic type analog computer was used during
the simulation studies of the ROTOCHUTE. Equations (1)
through (8) were solved for the highest order derivatives
and then each equation was integrated. The stability deriva­
tives in Table 5 were converted to machine. variables. This
involved transforming the real variables in terms of physical
units into machine voltages. It was necessary to estimate
the maximum expected range of the variables and these values
were used to calculate the scaling factor.
Perturbation responses were obtained at advance ratios
of ~ - 0.15, 0.10, and 0.05. The ROTOCHUTE responses to
both pitch and roll attitude commands are shown in Figures
86 through 91. As discussed in the preceding section, a
step pitch attitude command results in a linear drop off in
forward speed. Due to the speed derivatives, a change in
longitudinal control is required as the forward speed is re­
duced. The only steady-state input to the longitudinal con­
trol is through the attitude error signal 8 e • From Equation
(10) it CaD be seen that if BIZ is a function of forward
speed, then 8e must also be a function of forward speed. It
therefore follOWS from Equation (11) that for 8c equal to a
constant, 8 must also vary with forward speed. The fact
that 8 does not stay constant through the speed range is not
considered a serious problem, since in actual practice the
command can also be changed as a function of speed if de­
sired. In a simulated landing maneuver discussed later,
the ability to hold constant attitude is not critical.

196

5
yo
A..
.,v .meL ()-;--.~.....~~-~-+
SUo
S o;0l5 -'----'-.....I..-----'--+-~

.01 -r-....---r-....---r-.....,
,os.,-----,---r---r--r-----,
Al'l O,t::~"-....,~'-""'"-__-,~~-~-=t.;~-~~~---i=t
IfJ O+--+-+--+--t-"'"'t
rAd.. rwl
.0 I -'----'--'---'--'---' ~ 05~---'-""""""-l------+--

.05 .10

~:'~tttm

•
~n. o¥
0 0
!U.­
sec. ro.d..
-,OS -; 10

,01
6(>

:< ..
0 .1 0
.O~ rod..
-.0 I I
I "6 ..
II rad..
-.Q~ .10

o
...........
. 01 ........
: ..........
!~ . ~
\",
.........
roA ...........
-,0I

'-~-'------J - r - I-----, I I i I I I I i I I I I
o Z. 4 , 8 10 o 2. 4- 6 8 10 o Z. 4 " e 10
TIM e. - SE.c. TI r-1e. - ~E.c. TIMe.. - ~E.c...

KR9-6 RESPONSE TO A ONE-- DEGREE e COMMAND

().l = .15)

FIGURE 86

197

""­
""J
• ,Ol;~-.,....--......,...-.,....--......,...____r •Ot S:,.----,---.----.--r------.

0
',/\..
.Q.-.
8,~
~""-+--I--+--t
...~~;;;;II;;:;j;;;;;;;;;;;t;;;~
' ( . ,If\:ni
.Ql0l---+---+--+--+-I
0 ., 05 ..L--------'-_-'-----l.._-'--......J -;au ..J..-..--J-_---'-----.L_L----.J

. OS";---,---r------r--r----, •0 I ........--.---r----.---r-----,
. 05 -r----,--.,------,r--,----,
"'f­ AI'1. hon.-----+--+-~-t--1 ~
rad 0 +-----lo--+--1--+---t
SiE'"" ra4 0 t----+-+--+-~__i l1Ul 0 1---+---1----+---+-1
-.05 ~---'-_.l..----l-_.L.-..--J "f OI..L----L--'-----l..--'--....J -, OS ..L---J,_....L..._L---1----'

.o~....-......,...-~......,...-~-,
.M--.----.--....---.---.---. 01 0 ....---,--..,-------,--..------,
I .0\ - -f-+-----I---+--I---+ •
A....
YllA II ~ O-fb,,-t--..j--+--I---I ~ o+--+~~_+_-+--1
o __._--'--_.1..----'--_-'---' !.~
~ Of~-l--",--------l--",---------J

.0\ .01 ,10

e ge 'I
l>
rad,0 0
rd. raJ. -- -----
~Ol --:01 010

.01,...--.,.-.---.--,-----,

Bil
Ll.
Oi--+-+--+-+-~ .:£i.. 0+--+--+-+--1-...,
rlLCl ~ec.
.0 \ ~-l-_l----'--_",---------J -z, ..L----l._-+---------l_---l.------l
I
-.01
I I I I I I I I , I , I t I i i i f
o Z. 4 " e \0 o Z. 4. " eo 10 o t 4- & a 10
TIME. - ~£.c. TIM eo - ,sEC. TIM E: - SE.c.

KRC-6 RESPONSE TO A ONE-DEGREE I COMMAND

()l • • 15)

FIGURE 87

198

.0.5 .... ,05" .otf

•
~ Bl1
I"
or
'lld
~
-.OS
0

-­
ad
.L.
Sec.
-.Q5
0 'J

.rat.
Sec.
°
-.otS

,05 .01 .0;

"1­ 0
1/\ All ~
0
.!M rut. 0 rlld
i~
-:05 -.0' -.05

I
.All.
.OS',.----,---r----.--r-~

o
rad. at--, OS0 I--+---t--+--+-I
-.01 .....­ -­ 4----...._-'------J_--'-~

.01
e• .. .'O..,.......---.--r--r--~--,

ED l'Iu(. "" --f -­

.01 (
f
~O 1
I
) o+-*=+--"-+.-J­
~ 1+--+-+---+---+-----1 ~
11
OJL------".--+----'-~---l ~.O L .10 ..........---'_-L-----'L-...........------l

,01 .--.--.---r---.--, .0' -r---,---r-.........,~~---T

Ie o
.........
BIz. O-tf\....,...--lr---+--+--l
" U.
rlld. I-'-~----if---+--+-+-~ ra4 0 f---+--f---+--+-~
.........
-l. - ..........
·0 I +-------".---'-----'--"----' -,01 ..L----J._-'-_L----J..-----l fi. ..........
"-C:_ ...

r I f I , i -- o i , I i
" I
o L 4 , e. 10 o L 4 C. 8 \0 t 4 • 8 10
liME. - s~c. TIME - Sec. T\ME ­ ~c..

KRC-6 RESPONSE TO A ONE-DEGREE 9 COMMAND

()1 ~ .10)

FIGURE 88

199

...
"" - -
. DS • ·v..

." 11"\ e.& ~

--­ I--­
/
D!!0
sec fIj
-:05 -; 05

.01 "T"----.--,----,--,----, .0s­

A1'1.
-
-
~I\.-l---+--r---+-____l 13
o v
r0.4
[Link]
-:01 -l-----..L_--.1....-.l._-l--J -:0 S

,al, • ,o!). .10

t I
A,,,­ I\. O<.f
.01
I r!40 IV o
nd. .sec. yoA
0 11 -.05 -,10

.01 ....----.--....--.-,--r--....., .01 .10

e e~ ~

r-.4
o+-~-+-+--+---t 0 0
YaA 'tlld
- .01 -l-----l_~_ ........-l-----l -,0 I
-.10

.01
.01 -r--""'""T-or---r--Y--, Z
Ie () \.l
B'l I" 0
o+--+--I--l--+--t "etA 1 .£i
'(~Q. ~.Ol SIC.
1/ -1.
-; 0 I -l----l_~_~-l----I

iii I j I I i I I I I I I I , , I
o 2- 4 , e 10 o Z. 4 , e 10 o Z. 4 " t3 10
TIME. - 'IIee. TIME - .s~c. Tl....,e - SE;C.

KRC-6 RESPONSE TO A OBB-DEGREE I COMMAND

()1 a .10)
FIGURE 89

200

.,.
O+--+-­
r ..d
m: --+--1
-.tY1S -l.--..-....._~ ......
-

I
rad.
'O'I-m
0

-.01
•
An
.wAG
'O~1E
sec -.05
«~

"..cl
.1.0
.10

o
Em
0g 9e-
".,4,01
-.01

~IZ

nd.
.Olg .09
o
ie
TCld.
o
,01 ",01

I I r I I I I i I I I I
o 2... "" , oTIME
2. 4 " o 'Z. 4 "
TIMe - sec. - SEC. T/""E • ~'-

KRC-6 RESPONSE TO A ONE-DEGREE e COMMAND

()1 = .05)

FIGURE 90

201
.05 .OS .0
aI
• r r
"
I'll.
p.M
- sec.
1/\

nat.O ..
.0 to'
/ r-....
nul
-.~ -.os m: 0
../

·OS ....----.--,---...---,----, I 0;:

~~
1-- ~ +--+-+--+-+--+
11\ OL ...........

v .....
"-V
.....
.054----'--~-......-.l.-- \
-
-...

.IO,.......--r-,.--,-,--,

. O'F _ .. , . _--­
•01 ,r 1\
v r/)(
0'+--+'-'1---+--+--1
_ .
.....

o IJ _.1 O..l--~--l----'---'---....J

"°tttm

,01 -,----.,.-..,.----r---.,.--,
) 0 - ~.--
e·~ 0 +--+-~~......_ + _ i e~ 01-1--+-+---+--+---+
rid. r ~. . .. _ . . . • . . . .

-.01 ~--,---,----.....-~--, -.0\ -'---..L._~--L.._.l.----' -.10

.01 -r---r-..,.---r-T-"-' o-Y-;::;P;;;;:;:::j;;:;:;;;;;;oor---r--,

j . t-+-,r--+-t---+-t--1 u. 1-­ ...
an: r«.d. 0 ~OOO+--+---+---+---l -.01 -++-'-+--+--t---t---1
-If:/SK
o+--+-+--+-t--+
.......
..-. _. ---
-,0' ..L---'-_........---'-_~_
rU. tt"-t--;--t---t--1
-.Ol.L---J---'------'---'--­ 2 ~--J-_-l----'-_~_
..- ~.-

r---.--~--r-I --.,-.., I I I
o z.. ... ~ 8 10 o t. 4 " 8 10 o l. 4- l. 8 10
TlMi • [Link] TIIo'\~ • !J£.~ Tlt4E - Sf-Co

KRC-6 RESPONSE TO A .ONE-DEGREE I cor.:;.;AHD

()1 = .05)
FIGURE 91

202
At advance ratios of ~ - 0.15 and 0.10, the ROTOCHUTE
with the auto-pilot functioning is stable in all modes.
As previously shown, wide changes in auto-pilot gains do
not result in any instabilities. However, at an advance
ratio of ~ - 0.05, an instability in forward speed and
angle of attack is encountered with the six-degree of free­
dom linear equations. This can be seen in Figure 90.
This is a basic instability that cannot be controlled with
attitude and rate feedbacks. The origin of this instability
can be seen by examining the uncoupled longitudinal equa­
tions of motion. If a perfect auto-pilot is assumed, then
o
q - q - A 8 - O. For this case described, Equations (1),
(3), and (5) can be written as follows:

(17)

(18)

The determinant of the characteristic equation can

now be written.

=0 (19)
az s
aol-

An expansion of (19) results in a quadratic of the

following form.

203

Equation (20) is a second-order equation with a

spring constant equal to (9z/o a) (axial!) - (az/'cll!) (ax/aa).
In order for Equation (19) to be stable it is necessary
that the spring term be positive.. i. e. (az!aa) (ax/al!)::­
(azl3l!) (ax/aa). However.. at low advance ratios (I! - 0.05) ..
the (az/al!) derivative becomes large (see Table 5) and
the spring becomes negative. For the free-flapping rotor
at an advance ratio of I! - 0.05.. the roots of Equations (20)
are Al - +1.65 and A2 - -11.95. The positive real root re­
sults as a divergence in an~le of attack and speed. This
instability in speed and angle of attack.. with fixed pitch
attitUde.. is not serious in terms of physically landing
the ROTOCHUTE. As the ROTOCHUTE forward speed drops off ..
the large (9z/a~ ) derivative causes the lift to
decrease rapidly. The loss in lift requires an increase
in sink speed and a resulting increase in angle of attack.
The increase angle of attack causes more drag which further
slows the ROTOCHUTE and the divergence continues. During
the simulated non-linear flare maneuver.. discussed later ..
this divergence results in speeding up the flare near-zero
airspeed before the application of collective pitch (see
Figure 94). This instability may well be a characteris­
tic of autorotating helicopters at low airspeeds with fixed
collective pitch.
2. Simulation With Semi-Rigid Blades
Considerable lateral-longitudinal coupling was evident
with the semi-rigid rotor configuration. With reference to
Table 5.. it can be shown that the important coupling deriva­
tives are (aL!<) a) .. (aL/al!).. (aL/aq) .. and (3M/ap). At the
highest advance ratio considered during the simulation
(I! - 0.205) .. the influence of the (eLl8a) was particularly
important. A nose-up pitch command caused an increase in
rotor angle of attack. An increase in angle of attack then
generated a strong negative rolling moment. By cross­
coupling the auto-pilot commands .. it was possible to apply
the proper lateral control to balance this moment at I! - 0.205.
However.. since it was desired not to change the auto-pilot
gains as a function of advance ratio.. the same control
coupling existed at the lower advance ratios. This coupling
was in the direction to increase the roll excursions during
the speed drop off assoicated with the flare maneuver.
However.. the system was stable in pitch and roll throughout
the speed range.

204

Figure 92 presents the ROTOCHUTE response to a one­

degree step pitch attitude command at two different advance
ratios. The auto-pilot gains used during these simulations
are presented in Table 8. The gains were adjusted to favor
the higher ratio, since this corresponds to the advance
ratio used during the glide phase. The lower advance ratio
would be encountered during the flare transient before
landing. The flare maneuver is discussed in the following
paragraphs.
3. Non-Linear Simulated Flare Maneuver
During the non-linear simulation of the ROTOCHUTE, the
derivatives with significant variations with respect to ad­
vance ratio were programmed on function multipliers. The
servo-motors associated with the function multipliers were
driven by the advance ratio (~) voltage. With this setup,
it was possible to simulate flare maneuvers where large
speed variations were encountered. The semi-rigid rotor
derivatives were used during this analysis. With the ex­
ception of the ASE control inputs, the general characteris­
tics of this maneuver should also be true for the free­
flapping rotor.
Figure 93 presents a simulated flare maneuver. The
initial trim forward speed was 76 feet per second (~ - 0.16).
The technique used in performing the flare was to command
23-degree nose-up 8 command. Following this command, the
forward speed dropped off in a linear manner. At a forward
speed of about 8 feet per second, the attitude command was
removed. At this point, collective pitch should be applied
prior to touchdown. The complete maneuver was performed
in about nine seconds. The lateral ASE appears capable of
satisfactorily controlling roll attitude and heading during
this maneuver. Lateral commands could be applied, if
desired, to further reduce the roll excursion.
Figure 94 presents a plot of the trajectory profile
during the flare maneuver. The divergence in flight path
angle is apparent for t>6 seconds. The initiation of the
flare maneuver was at an altitude of 85 feet and required
a ground distance of 330 feet to arrest forward speed.
Again, the attitude command was for a 23-degree nose-up
pitch attitude.

205

- - - f' ;:I 0#205"

- - - - f' = OJ30
0
0

01
p- 5:f_oo:J~~~""'=IilI::::a_--------------

®,., ,.tJ,d
[Link] ---,..------­
0.01

0,00]
8,.- ro.a 0 I_"""'~c~::.z~~==-=-=-=-==-=-========-
",,- --
~ ;r
~==--

-[Link]

A'."'1'4 d [Link]
0.00S'

O-+-ri'!-~-.all::::lO""""----------------

------ --­
I I
8 /2. /6
Tlme-- Sec
RESPONSE TO A ONE DEGREE ATTITUDE COMMAND
(SEMI-RIGID ROTOR)
FIGURE 92
206
80

u ~~~ 40
o
t=::::-------------­
.6

.4
e rad

O~~-----------------

.1

BIZ rad 0fT-t--~~===::::::::;;:::t"""'!::....-_-------

-.1

.2l~
l! rad 0r---~-==~-----~----
-.2

.2

AIZ rad .1

O...L-+-I'-------------------­

.3

r rad 0
sec j
<:;;;;;;;7~
'--""

zc::=::;:ooo e:-=-------­
-.3

fi, rad
.2 J
0 -0-=----2-==>->-.,~O;;:::--~-6---8~~--·'"-

- •2 l-I_..J.-_.L-1_....1..-_.1....1_....L...-_L-I_.....L.-_1L..-----'-_
TIME - SEC

NON-LINEAR F~SPONSE TO A 23 DEGREE 9 c COW4AND

(FLARE SIMULATION)

FIGURE 91

207

/00

E-4 [Link]
Jl:4

I
~
~ """",
l'-'
0
00 ~40 ""''-.......
1-4
E-4
~ 20
"'-.......
"'-.......
()

80 12J) /60 zoo

"" 2'#0 280 no
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE - FT

TRAJECTORY PROFILE DURING FLARE MANEUVER

FIGURE 94

The ROTOCHUTE response to a 23-degree roll command is

shown in Figure 95. The directional control of the ROTOCHUTE
is obtained by means of roll control. The steady-state yaw
rate per roll attitude amounts to about ("f/i)s.s; 0 5 0

deg/sec/deg at ~ 0.16. For the roll command shown in

D

Figure 95, it would require about 16 seconds to perform 180

degree turn maneuver. With a rate of descent of 32 feet
per second, the total altitude lost during a 180-degree turn
would be about 510 feet or roughly 1000 feet per 360 degree
turn.
4 0 Comparison Between Free-Flapping and

Restrained Flapping Blades

In a valid comparison between the free-flapping rotor

and the semi-rigid blade rotor, both the static trim and
dynamic characteristics must be considered. Due to the
large longitudinal hub moment and relatively low control
power with the tilt hub, the control for trim is excessively
high for the semi-rigid rotor. A comparison between the
control required for trim for the free-flapping and semi­
rigid rotors is shown in Table 9 0

TABLE 9
COMPARISON OF CONTROL REQUIRED FOR TRIM AT ~ - 0 15
0

Configuration BIZ AIZ

Free-Flapping Rotor +5 0 3 degrees -6.0 degrees
Semi-Rigid Blade Rotor +18.2 degrees ~7.0 degrees

209

.2
e rad 0

-.2

.1

B1Z rad 0

-.1

.4

I rad .2
0

.2

.A1Z rad .1

0-+---=---------------­

.6

r rad 3
sec •
o-l-.-~---------------

4 rad
.2J
0 ~ e===:-:-.- ---­

.2 . ? f- t f_..J....-_r_~~le..
TIME - SEC
NON-LINEAE RE~PQNSE TO .A 23 DEGREE t COMMAND
(u • • 16)
FIGURE 95
210
Due to clearance restrictions, the hub of the KRC-6
does not have sufficient tra~lel f or trim using the semi­
rigid rotor.
The response of the KRC-6 to a one-degree pitch command
for both rotor systems at ~ - 0.15 is shown in Figure 96.
It will be noted that with the free-flapping rotor the roll
couples to the left. However, the roll coupling reverses
sign with the semi-rigid rotor. The reason for this can be
seen by examining the (aL/aa) and (aL/a~) derivatives in
Table 5. For the semi-rigid rotor, the following inequality
exists.

Therefore, a steady-state positive rolling moment exists

which causes a positive roll altitude.
For the free-flapping rotor, the following is true.

From Equation (22), it can be seen that the steady­

state rolling moment with the free-flapping rotor is nega­
tive. This results in a negative roll attitude. The key
derivative which experiences the largest change is the
(8L/a~) derivative.

The magnitude of lateral control required to laterally

stabilize the ROTOCHUTE is much greater with the semi-rigid
blades.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the analog computer studies discussed in the
preceding paragraphs, certain conclusions can be drawn.
First, the ROTOCHUTE is dynamically unstable during
the glide and flare modes without ASE. However, since an
auto-pilot is required for maneuvering the KRC-6, the feed­
back loops can be made to provide satisfactory artificial
stabilization.

211

- - - Semi-Rigid Rotor
- - - Free-Flapping Rotor

0.02 --~::--:-=-- - - - --­

8- Rad
0.01

O-+-ooi"-----------­

0.02

0.01
~ - Rad
- - -­

0.005

BIZ Rad 0 ---- - - - -

-0.005

0.005

AI Z Rad 0 - -- -- ------
-0.005

i
J) 4 8 12
Time Seconds

COMPARISON BETWEEN RESPONSE OF ROTOCHUTE

WITH SEMI-RIGID ROTOR AND FREE-FLAPPING ROTOR
(IL - 0.15)

FIGURE 96

212
Second, it is highly desirable to have the blades
free-flapping during the glide and flare modes of opera­
tion. This conclusion is based on both static trim and
dynamic stability considerations.
Third, a reasonable flare maneuver was performed by
holdlng anose-up pitch command of 23 degrees for nine sec­
onds. This maneuver was initiated at an altitude of 85
feet. The ROTOCHUTE was laterally stabilized with the ASE
within acceptable limits.
Fourth, during the aerodynamic analysis, it was essen­
tial that non-uniform inflow be considered. This conclusion
is particularly applicable to the semi-rigid rotor con­
figuration.
Fifth, with the free-flapping blades, the auto-pilot
constants can be varied through wide limits without en­
countering gain instabilities.

213 •
APPENDIX III. ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT DESIGN
A. AUTO-PILOT CONTROL SYSTEM
The stabilization and command input system for the
KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE was designed to incorporate electronic hard­
ware purchased for this purpose under Contract Number
AF33(616)-7544. A brief description of the electrical
characteristics of this equipment is presented in Table 10.
The optimum transfer function for the over-all auto­
pilot system was determined by an analog computer study
(Reference, Appendix II). In addition to providing the an­
ticipated response characteristics of a ROTOCHUTE employing
the optimum characteristics specified below J the report also
assures acceptable operation for variations in attitude gain
of +50 per cent and variations in rate gain of +40 per cent.

TABLE 10
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT GAINS
Maximum
Component Transfer Ratio Limits
Vertical Gyro o
Volts RMS +85 travel of
Pitch or Roll 0.206
deg 8 inner gimbals
Attitude

Learsyn Volts RMS +30 0 pitch and

(Servo Position 0.043 roll
Feedback) deg oc.

Tachometer
(Servo Rate 0.00067 Volts RMS
Feedback) deg oe/sec

Lear Servo Amplifier 0.218 volts RMS

Derivative Channel 800S Volts DC input
Volt RMS
KmS
TS+l

340 Volts DC
Kn - Proportional Volt RMS

0.13 Milliamps
Kz - Common Amplifier Volt DC

Command Input Maximum propor­

Directional Gyro 2.5 VRMS + A ¢J -2 5 0 tional signal
Resolver Output VRMS -A '/J

215

Pitch Stabilization (Free-flapping Rotor)

8 c ~'>. 8 e +..c Ke e e
Ko
-
'(,)'
-'<
)I

"'L
I+~S B,z.

K,S
I +'T:S

K3

AUTO-PILOT CONTROL SYSTEM BLOCK DIAGRAM

FIGURE 97

SYMBOLS
Fuselage attitude angle; angle between longi­
tudinal (pitch) axis and horizontal plane
Longitudinal tilt of no-feather axis (pitch
axis hub tilt) with respect to the y-z plane
d
q-ar Incremental rate change in angular position
about the lateral (roll) axis
c Servo command signal
e Servo error signal
L Response with first-order time lag

216

Optimum Gains and Time Constants

.. +0.40
deg
deg

- +0.25 deg
deg/sec

0.05 sec - differentiation lag

0.25 sec - selectric actuator

lag

The report further indicates that the same transfer

function applies to the roll stabilization channel and that
no cross-coupling of channels is required with a free­
flapping rotor system.

For simplicity, the subsequent discussion will utilize

only pitch attitude parameters, although the results are
equally applicable to roll attitude control (except as noted
herein).

The system incorporated is shown in Figure 98.

Optimization of the system is limited primarily by the

relationship:

constant. 'fuere:

minimum droop of control hub

caused by glide load force

8 max maximum pitch allowable prior

to derivative amplifier
saturation

217

ttl
ro
W
-!J
CI )(
~
::::C

Ot­
D
~

~
l ~
W
I­
::JCI ~ ~cQ W
C::.!::::J
WI­ dlC'l
~I
dtfl
~
J-Q
UllJ..
oJ
~
l­
::::c
~
0
lJ1U OJ ::I
a <:IV"! <..J
~~ <I
l- ~
ei
elL
-

r'l
c-J
r'\I
\..CJ
CI
::5': ~
-

0
u u
c3 cl
> > ~
u
... -+
a- l
co co
en
lLI
Ull-;

EI (JI
s:
-:::s:.
a...
~ ~
.lo.
0
::J
~
p::
==­
CJ
::cit­ I­ M
- ~

r-
0
r-
d CI
:::;:> V
I
~ U
~
+
r­-
CJ'"'I -+ (L
~

-+ I

'1
() ~-

~ 0'
:> ~

'Cf)
0
~ ~

(J

~
\J
a.>
218
The above relationship may be derived as follows.
From Table 10

(1) 8 max (Kg) (Kgr) - 0.218 VRMS

ABlZ ABlZ
0.25
q S 8

6BlZ Kg Kgr Km Kx
S 9 w--o = KL ~ ~

(2) - 0.25

From actuator characteristics:

at 1 m.a. quiescent clutch current:

Output Torque
Milliamp Input - m.a. - 4.2 (13.2) - 55.5 in/lbs
m. a.

- - 5.5

The original KRC-6 hub provided a total available travel

of +5.50 BIZ corresponding to a total actuator travel of
+300 oc::.. Kx then defined as the ratio: 5.50 BlZ/30 0 oc ­
0.182 deg/deg. Prior to actual vehicle tests, the nominal
hub moment anticipated during glide was 33 foot-pounds.
Thus:

(33) (12)
Toe - - 72 inch-pounds
5.5

Ai - ~
55.5 - 1.3 m.a.

219

(3) -
From (1) and (2) :
(4) 9 Max ... 0.218 Kg Km Kx ==
0.87 Km Kx
0.25 Kg Kl Kp Kn Kl ~ Kn

From (3) and (4):

6BIZ
8 Max
-
KzKm .1.3 Kx Kl Kp Kn
0.87 Kx Kl Kp Kn

~BIZ
8 Max -
Kz 1.5
Km

The maximum Kz Km product obtainable in the Lear

Servo Amplifiers is approximately (800) (.13) or 104 at low
input frequencies, thus:

[Link]
8Max ­ 0.0145

Setting 9 max at 50 0 , the droop resulting from anti­

cipated glide conditions was 0.72 degrees, or approximately
13 per cent of the total hub control available. The origi­
nal ASE gains were based upon a 8max of 50 0 and a glide
hub moment of 33 foot-pounds.
In flight data obtained from the first series of drop
tests indicated that a greater range of hub tilt was ad­
visable. Rework of the hub resulted in a new Kx of .33
deg!deg, corresponding to a total hub" travel of +10 0 BIZ'

220

In addition, hub moments approaching 200 foot-pounds

were recorded in the pitch channel during glide maneuvers.
The problem of redesign was compounded by the fact that
the maximum rated torque output of the actuator corresponded
to 125 foot-pounds of hub moment. Consequently, a second
servo actuator was placed in tandem in the pitch channel.
The latter actuator is controlled by a slave amplifier (Kz2)
connected in parallel with KZl. The final configuration
is reflected in Figure 99.
The system droop corresponding to a maximum hub moment
of 200 foot-pounds may now be calculated as follows:

T~ ==
(200) (12) ... 800 inch-pounds

.0. i co 1/2 800 ... 7.2 m.a. per actuator

55.5

7.2 Kx

From (4) and (5):

7.2 (Kx ) (Kl Kp Kn)

A BJ..z
9 Max

Since Kz Km ... 104:

ABIZ
eMax - 0.08

!
.~
Maintaining e max - 50 0 , the resulting droop corres­
ponding to a 200-foot-pound hub moment equals 4.0 degrees,
or 20 per cent of the total available hub travel.

221

~
en

L---8

t- ~
...J ~ ~
~ ~ <f) w
:2V ~
OCI a
-cfl :I
1-0 U
VI W Il-_ ____4>----+-------. CI
a~ I
Q..u.

+ 1­
o-.J
Cl.
a
I­
:J
G
-.J
W
:.d
2
C1
-+' I :I
U
I
u
t­
o..

222

The following system analysis reflects the incorpora­

tion of the +10 0 hub and tandem servo drive.
Attitude Rate of Change Input

0
Assume v4 max - 50
e1 max - 0.218 volts
then: 50 (Kg) (Kgr ) - 0.218 Kgr '" 0.0212

Km \
(-y;;-J.,..o -
( 8005
340 (Tm 5+1)
) T S
m­
0 ... 2.358

- oB1Z
a 58
... 0.25; 0( =
BIZ
Kx
... B1Z
.33

a5 8
00(, .. 0.75 Therefore: 00<.
08
= 0.755

or Kg Kgr Km ... 0.755 K1 Kp Kn

Kp - Kg Kgr
0.75 K15
•
Km
Kn
""
0.206 (0.0212)
0.75 (0.043)5
. 2.355

Kp - 0.318 volt
volt

Attitude Position Input

"" 0.4 or
_ 0.4

~ - 1.2

... K1 K
p
(1. 2)

Kgp ... (1.2) (.043) (0.318) _ 0.08 volts

- ­
0.206 volt

223

Command Input Requirements

The directional heading command inputs were designed
to meet two basic requirements. To provide adequate hub
control~ it is necessary that the command signal be capable
of dictating stop to stop travel of pitch and roll servo
actuators during normal glide maneuvers. During large
displacements of the longitudinal aXis~ it is likewise
necessary that the vertical gyro be capable of overriding
existing servo commands and returning the hub to neutral.
This requirement is necessary to prevent open-loop operation
which might cause inadvertent diving of the vehicle during
remotely-controlled flight. Consequently~ the maximum
command signal is set equal to 45 degrees of vertical gyro
displacement or approximately 75 per cent of maximum gyro
output. A command limiting circuit is incorporated in
pitch and roll servo channels to assure that this limit re­
mains constant regardless of gain variations in transmission~
receiving and resolving stages.
Rate Feedback Stabilization
To insure stability of the inner servo loop~ a minimum
rate feedback gain of approximately 0.00135 volts/deg ~ /sec
was required. Excessive feedback created an intolerable
lag in the over-all control system. For best results~ a
feedback gain of 0.002 was incorporated.
From Table 10: 0.00067
0.002/0.00067 3 volts
volt
A partial schematic of the preceding system for pitch
attitude control is presented in Figure 99. An identical
system is incorporated for roll attitude control with the
single exception that the over-all attitude rate of change
transfer AIZ/o~ has been increased to 0.375 deg/deg. The
latter gain increase resulted from the analysis of actual
flight performance data. The tandem servo concept~ initially
added to the pitch control system is now likewise used in
lateral axis control.
Control System Transfer Functions
The response of the control system to error signals q
and 9 are shown in Figures 100 and 101.

224

e, , ' J<m S
1 ", Ts+ I
r- L -..,

I Km 5 I

I I

IKn(T,+I) I

L ___ .J
-I
I

ec
-
Kc ~ Kn +
Kz KG.
S(To.S~J)
oc.

Kp
KL

Kr
SKt

e. Km S
Kn('r5~t)
oc
ec
Kc + Ge

ASSUMING Kn Kz. KC\. » KL Kp ; AT lOW FREQUENCIE.S

I
IF To... IS SMALL

Kp K L

KrKt 133

5 t­
--
(0.215tl)

SERVO SYSTEM TRANSFER FUNCTION

FIGURE 100
225
Be + ~ BI!. d@ @
Kc - Ge
Kx ,....--
d B,~

~
S
Km S+l

K9~P

TRr-nJSFER ~U~C,lO~5:

d BI~ _ ~_ ....;;;O~,4_ _
d ® - I -(0.27 S~I)

d BIZ _ ~ Kay ~m GeKx = 0,25

d 9. - V-.n (15 + I) (0,1 S+ \)(0.275+ \)

PITCH CHANNEL BLOCK DIAGRAM

FIGURE 101

226
B. ROTOR RPM TELEMETRY
Maximum accuracy in the rotor speed telemetry system
was achieved through the transmission of a bi-stable signal
activated by a pulse-type magnetic pickup assembly. Such
a signal is essentially independent of gain variations in
the codlng, transmission, and decoding systems; consequently,
the read-out accuracy is only a function of the input pulse
frequency and the period over which the output is averaged.
Thus,
K Where:
E ­

E ... Per cent error in average speed read-out

fp -... Pulse frequency
T Period of averaging
K - System constant
To minimize the error over a fixed averaging period
the pulse frequency must be maintained as high as possible
for any given rotor speed. A standard telemetry channel
has a cutoff frequency of 20 c.P.s., due primarily to
capacitors in the ground station emitter followers. In
normal operation, the emitter followers are supplied with
input pulses of 50 micro-second width and appropriate am­
plitudes at a rate of 250 samples per second. The average
level of the input pulses is stored in each emitter follower
to provide a semi-continuous output. Thus, at information
fequencies approaching 20 c.P.s., the filtering action of
the emitter follo,o'er becomes appreciable. The box-car de­
tector output, however, consists of short periodic samples,
and is capable of providing a theoretical accuracy of 100
per cent when employed to count square wave frequencies up
to 250/2 or 125 c.P.s.
The ROTOCHUTE design employs a four-tooth gear in the
rotor assembly to provide four pickup pulses per revolution
of the rotor. This arrangement provides accurate telemetry
up to speeds of:
(125)(60) or 3750 RPM
2

227
As described above, the pickup output is utilized to
trigger a bi-stab1e flip-flop, the state of which is
sampled by the data system (Each gear tooth provides a
positive and negative input pulse. The negative pulses
are suppressed, whereas positive pulses are amplified to
trigger the output flip-flop.) By employing a high gain
pulse amplifier, and clipping the resulting output pulses,
the flip-flop has been found to function properly for any
rotor speed above 20-30 RPM The circuitry employed is
shown in Figure 10~.
The ground station receiver is shown in Figure 103.
The input from the box car detector (the emitter follower
output has been deleted from this channel) consists of
positive and negative pulses. The number of similar pulses
occurring in each block is:
250
N - S n
where S - rotor speed in revolutions per second
n ~ number of teeth on rotor gear
As in the transmitter amplifier, the pulses are utilized
to trigger a flip-flop, but only a change in pulse polarity
will provide the necessary triggering. The square wave
output is differentiated by transformer action, and resulting
positive pulses are routed to an oscillograph and the RPM
display circuitry shown in Figure 104.
The function of the rotor RPM display circuitry is
to provide square wave output pulses of constant amplitude
and width when triggered by the signal described above. A
highly damped microammeter monitors the average loop current
generated by these pulses to provide an indication directly
proportional to rotor speed. Unlike circuits employed to
transmit and record the rotor speed signal, the read-out
circuitry is relatively sensitive to gain variations and
has been temperature-compensated from 50 0 F to l60 o F.
Periodic calibration is advisable.

228

AIRBORNE ncn'oR SPEED AMPLIFIER AND SHAPER

FIGURE 102
:',f~>"4.~~""!imilfjnxr WfltMf"t"ft7fiTtff'f4 'Wti:'r "WZWr ~"I'f~\li"K\i:t>lj.,'~~m"i§Witf'tf'_Jl.~·[Link]*±iri1r"'rN't)wmWftff'i®W'ff%¥r~'5Yttitf'?'ff ..tW"7t't""T'"t'?,..Wit'f"BTtt"" ',&-"t'trtJl¥%¥.,l:tiiij§'fC'·~'Tm·-e"Wemii¥C'"7Wd'!i"'"'@"mW"p '''pm "5' F'p"we?ft,ttl m:: 'f W fZZ!Ftl!lil'X

7.5K

Alk: 41l!:
410 Ie. ,SSle IlJL

illllil !JlIl l

-----mmI A.1MFD I ~(I

2U335
>>-----r1 1
IN483B(4)
l r-­
_ULU
tI.)
• '»
e,., ZM335
o

SK
6,Bt 220 t:.

.41

MI=D B.2.t:..

». ••• ---------------------+~.. .. »
K \2C-6 ROTOCI-IUTE
--", .. , -
ROT02
.. _-- ,"-------------_.,--------'----- - -
SPEELJ " . . ., , . - ..
_ _-~._-_._-------

(\t\·IPLI ~l E E g 5~~(\PE2:--------------------- 6ROU~:D S TClTIOU

FIGURE 103

.... Z.S VDC CD

» IVV''''''''''''T---..,..,--------.,
.4
® I 1 I L

-l.-...L» I
.01

....w SblllVZ

~
....L
- Re:»ISTANCE IN KIl
CAPACITANCE IN )!.:f

ROTOR SPEED READOUT

FIGURE 104
C. SEQUENCING LOGIC
The ROTOCHUTE sequencing logic is presented in Figures
105 and 106. Figure 105 represents the logic arrangement
utilized in aircraft bomb rack installations and is designed
for use in conjunction with 28-volt DC aircraft power dur­
ing vehicle delivery. Figure 106 is modified for use with
24-volt DC external supplies during vehicle delivery by
helicopter. In this case, the directional gyro is set on
the ground and left uncaged; gyro reference is thereby
maintained as the nOTOCHUTE rotates on the winch cable be­
low the helicopter prior to release. Due to the similarity
between the two logic diagrams, only the bomb rack in­
stallation circuitry will be discussed further.
Switch 1 is a handling switch which permits a fully
assembled ROTOCHUTE to be de-energized for storaGe. Switch 2
prevents activation of fin deployment aud collective flare
circuitry during system tests. Fuses PI, F2, aud F3 pro­
vide necessary electrical overload protection during system
check-out. All except FI are bypassed prior to take-off.
During the flight to the drop area, aircraft 28-volt
DC power serves three (3) functions:
(a) Provides primary power to ROTOCHUTE electronics
(b) Maintains sequencing circuitry in the de-energized
state through K-20
(c) Provides charging current to the ROTOCHUTE
battery
At the time of drop, the following sequence, described

in order of occurrence, is initiated:

1. ROTOCHUTE is released from bomb rack

(a) Aircraft power disconnected
(b) Battery power utilized
2. Drop lanyard detaches from ROTOCHUTE
(a) Firing pin on rotor deployment squib pulled,
initiating two or three second firing delay

232

<Oi [Link] Lr-1rJlfClIZD

S-W*'-3
I -- t310VDC
~
310UDC
r----­ -­
CLUTe 1-1
~UPPLY
i HO· +2~OVDC
I ~ 12S0VDC I
8~SUPPLY r=U_~_~_Qll~!kJ6TEST n~Jl '(
I ~ ~U-r-:1-C----;~---+~~ 115Vf-lC
I
I
+Z4U ---l±
DC­
I~UErcTEe i I: I I

IHQruD- 0
-----------!-L~r::~ , t24VDC
IUrtJb S~Oit2
ISLtJ. Y5~V·l O. • if I
u.o. 0

I I
)~
KW I
I // )
I ".
/

II
V~CnGf ~-­
i
0112.
GyeO //
I
SOL. . 00 1. D.*4 :
I

!Ge = ." .,,'

_ :,
~
l\)
t.)

~~fSiI/ ~
C4

III W
IlJPUT /./-.::,...A " :I
MU T·... I • •
- /

~
I iiO LL . F{ORE :
I -----
EJf'.I~.l'>.Q!8~5i0~
L RIVlIIJC, CI-IOI>JIUEL
5KIIJ K
( ICc 61900)
>~ COLL. FWI2£ -------,.---­
DI E'ECTIOllr-l L
~HJ DEPLOY­
I J MBJT SOL.

~
K kC
ROTOCHUTE
tJ
I

PQ\AJE~l-~~(li~ __&COLLECTtU~ ~LnKE COLL. FLC ICE

I L,t-J ITO lC.
C\\-2CUITR't
-_._----­ 0112 ECTIOlH::j L
FfD-~ELEZ5SE
BOfV1F
---._----"_._------
~~(lC\(
---_._,-.
IlISTD LLC\l"\Oru
_._---­
o

FIGURE 105

,r W7fEF 771 me =' mrr '. 5t1Mwm=rnrm'wte"1"mm'm 7'trm7YTtw:rttw"wW'T' TXH'mrn"Wrrm'!!!!ifWrUmmz Trw' iTer 11" me

.sW~3 ref{ DPDP Ln)JYDROS

,---­
I ~D.
I I
3\OUOC
CLUTC~
5U PPL '-/
I +310VDC

4 24lk.:1 ,~.t-------------I B+ SUPPL'-(

Z50UDC I ~Z~OUDC
jJl I l=USE OUeltJ6 TEST Q/.jLV
~J
I
,
I
~24U-=­
DC-=­
~ IISUAC
--,----~I~UEfCTEel
! i ! rli5UAC

~-l24UDC
I
I SWlt 2
~ U.O 0
I -~io-­
I I
I
1'.20 /' ""
I ""
I Die.
6'1'(20
I T.D-I
UllC(.)6£ -"'-"'-J
I 'SOl
I
..
tI:I
to)

i6C0
I
-t.
-=-
" ' : / 1~' ~i
COtllUnuD -
• I H· t
I
I
I
I
7" .LtJPUT k?~ L(.\'1' /
COll. FLf.1RE
9gJ!1'lJ60·U:I~
_ j

./
ca.L. f="L f-H2!=________ -
d
L_______________ rl12ltUC1 O-IA~.HJEL
5k:1~lKIZC.Q-i900) ---­ DI eECT10tVAL
l=l tv DEPLQ"'·
I I M~u1 sa...

~
K RC- 6 ROTO (\-lUTE
POWER ,LOGIC g COlLECTIUE FlA~E" ffi..L. ~ LCll(E
16tVITOl2
CIRCUITPY OleECTlotJAL
f-JELlCOPTEf2 IrJSTA LLf-\110t-J I="llJ IC£LEnSE

FIGURE 106

(b) Microswitch activated de-energizing K-20

1. Fl shorted out
2. Sequencing circuitry energized
3. Directional gyro uncaging solenoid
energized
3. ROTOCHUTE clears aircraft
(a) Squib fires - rotors begin to deploy
4. Rotor drag causes ROTOCHUTE to assume normal nose­
down descent attitude
1. Directional fins deployed through K-G
2. Collective flare circuitry armed
3. Directional gyro uncaging solenoid de­
energized
(b) Time Delay No. 2 closes ungrounding ASE in­
puts
5. Time delay relay No. 3 opens, removing power to
K-6 and fin deployment solenoid

Upon recovery, the entire system is de-energized by

the external handling switch.
D. COLLECTIVE FLARE CONTROL
The collective flare capability of the ROTOCHUTE is
controlled remotely from the ground station. Since the
collective flare can only be employed once during the
flight, the electronics involved must be protected from
erroneous firing signals. Such signals may appear in the
data system as a result of faulty FM reception, due either
to range or interference. The system employed is illustrated
in the logic diagrams, Figures 101 and 102. During the
initial phases of transportation and drop sequencing, the
firing circl1itry is de-energized. Activation occurs when
the ASE command circuitry is ungrounded. Two command
channels are required to complete the firing logic. The
first input, an arming command, energizes a 3-second time
delay relay. Following the latter interval, and if the
arming command is still present, the firing channel may be

235

)­
Cl:
~-­
UJ
~
W
-.J
Iii
t-
O
l1J
lJJ
0-1

~I

a
w
t­
::::>
I
u,
Of
b

cc

D.J
o
01­
LU CI
uH~
Cl..lI..J
V12
Uw
CIlD

236

activated to instantaneously fire the collective thruster.

Immediately following the thruster discharge, the horizontal
tail bolt cutter is fired, allowing the tail to release
and swing upward. This precautionary measure prevents the
tail from pitching the ROTOCHUTE forward once the rotor
has stalled.
E. AIRSPEED READ-OUT
During advanced vehicle flight tests, it proved ad­
vantageous to transmit flight path airspeed to the ground
control station as a visual control aid. A Science Asso­
ciates Wind Speed Detector (anemometer) Model 417 was
boom-mounted on the front of the flight vehicle. Airspeed
is sensed by an air-powered alternating current generator
working into a rectifier and filter to provide the necessary
proportional direct current input to the airborne telemetry
system. The applicable circuitry is shown in Figure 107.

237

APPENDIX IV. RE-ENTRY AND AERODYNAMIC HEATING STUDIES

A. RE-ENTRY
Two distinctive types of re-entry were considered:
unmodulated and modulated. In the first case, drag was held
constant while drag was varied in the second case.
1. Unmodulated Re-Entry
Expressions for unmodulated re-entry were developed
from the following basic expressions from Reference 3.

_ cLV/c!-t: _
8

The first equation may be re-arranged so as to yield an

expression for time.

Differentiation of the second equation with respect to

Y results in the following:

d... V = Ve 2.
e
1ft
P
n A
SIN e E e
l"'.
_D.V
w
r J
e
_ CQRA
2.
,efll SIN
ee; e-~'" eLY

Substituting this expression into the preceding expression

and re-arranging terms produce the following expression:

It was found that generalized plots could be achieved and

simplified if the following parameters are used:
.Y.::L i. Ve SIN 8E' W 51/1! BE
'IE 'Ye:' YE ' CpA

239
In terms of these parameters, the previously obtained
equations may be rewritten as follows:

~
I -,:3Y(~)
.:LV = e - • ( w 51N e, )
e J£
E. C.D A

_ t VE SIN e£::.
Ye f
I
~
y~ e ~
Jld
CpA Yeo
l""
( WSIIIII 8£ ) e-"V(i)£ d. (...Lv ) =
I
i
(~)-Id.
VI
(i )

In terms of these equation;], the CD A of the vehicle

remains constent during un1l1odulat6d entry lnto the atmosphere.
Consequently, the parameter VI sin eE / GDA also remains
constant for a givon entry.
The last equation may be integrated graphically to yield
altitude time histories for an r-:ntry vehicle with assumed
W sin eE / GDA ratios.

The deceloration history may be calculated from the

first basic equation. The pre~entation is simplified if it
is made in terms of a load factor in the para:ilAtric form
n/VE'l. sin 9E •

The basic equation may be re',"Jrt tten af, fellow"s:

~ e- ~YE (~.. )
n =_ 0 e -,sVe (:i) _ Po .9
.,,& e (!>(W~I",eE)
Ve" SINOl; 2lWt~leE) CDA

The ex"pl'ession is slulplifi6d if both sldc:~' Df the

equation ar6 squared, if logarlthnls for both sides of the
equation for V/VE are [Link], and thE:: results are re-arrant;;ed
and substituted into the expression ooin6 [Link];d.

240

The equation implies that the deceleration is a func­

tion only of speed and flight path angle for unmodulated
entry.
2. Modulated Entry
The initial phase of modulated entry is identical to
the unmodulated case up to the point where a desired maximum
deceleration is reached.
Then the rotor disc area is varied so as to yield con­
stant deceleration of an arbitrarily chosen value. Initially,
the disc area is decreased as the dynamic pressure increases
with density until maximum dynamic pressure is reached.
From there on, the disc area is increased until the rotor
is fully opened. At this point, the vehicle continues
along an unmodulated trajectory, decelerating at levels be­
low maximum.
The velocity at which the modulation is terminated,
i.e. rotor is fully opened, is of interest and is calcu­
lated as follows. From dynamic equilibrium: Wn .. 1/2 E> V2 COA.
this may be rewritten:

For constant deceleration:

where subscripts I and 2 denote conditions at the beginning

and end of modulation. This may be rewritten in terms of
previously chosen parameters.

The velocity is reduced as defined hy the following ex­

pression:
ng .o.t :a

241

This, when rewritten, yields the following:

Combining equations gives the following expression for

the initial and final points of modulation.

The rotor is fully opened for both the initial and final
conditions of modulated flight. Therefore, to satisfy
dynamic equilibrium for both conditions, dynamic pressures
must be equal.

aI ~&. v't.L. -
_I
Z.
{)
~I
VI L

or

or

or

The final equation for unmodulated re-entry also

satisfies the starting condition (Condition 1). If this
is substituted into the equation for initial and final
points of modulation and the resulting substituted into the
above derived equation, then the following results:

or
(OV'l.!Ve)~
'11/Ve
I

242

The expression may be be used to relate the final

velocity of modulated flight to the initial velocity.
The corresponding decelerations are given in Figure 19.
The required variation of Co to produce constant de­
celeration may be ca1cu1ed from the dynamic equilibrium
relationship. The expression for the total CD is:

n . W SIN eIE
VLI. SIN 6e A

Inasmuch as the total CD is the sum of the rotor CDR and

body CD, the coning angles must be based on:

CDR - Co 'fatal - CD
Body

The expression for the coning angle is:

~
CD R
B - arc cos
<T~
B. AERODYNAMIC HEATING
The gross problem is specified by the geometry of the
re-entrant body (ROTOCHUTE) and some initial conditions
(velocity and altitude) at re-entry into the earth's at­
mosphere. The ROTOCHUTE is assumed to be in axial flight.
The geometry is virtually that of a flat plate (or plates)
as shown in Figure 108. For simplicity, we can identify
the rotor blade with a flat plate rotating at an angular
speed no The coning angle is expressed by ~, and rotor'
blade span byi. A length 's is influenced by the presence
of a central body of radius r. The axis of the vehicle is
assumed to be always aligned with the flight path such
that axisymmetric flow fields are of interesto

243

CENTRAL BODY
SHOCK WAVE

~ENTRY PARAMETRIC RELATIONSHIPS

FIGURE 108

244

Over a major portion of the re-entry trajectory, the

flight Mach number will be quite large (4~15), and we can
expect (g s cos B) to be of the order of (M2 -1) -1/2 [= M-IJ
times the length of the central body. Customary re-entering
bodies have "slenderess" ratios of order unity. However,
even relatively slender central bodies, in view of the above,
imply that gs/ ~ <:: 1 for moderate coning angles. Thus, we
may reflect the disturbances induced by the central body.
It should be noted that such disturbances are appreciable for
perhaps only one-half the shock layer extent in any case.
The rotor blade ttsees" a stream in accord with its in­
clination, rotational speed, and coning angle. Velocities
along and normal to the span direction are the components
Vo sin B and V~ cos B, respectively, due to descent through
the atmosphere. If B is small, interest is in the resultant
of Va cos Band VR =. sHr + x cos B), the rotational com­
ponent. That is:

At an outboard section (r/x) <: 1 and the second term

may be omitted. But, (nx/vo)..v 0.1 for n~ 10 2 RPM, ~ ~ 50 feet,
and Vo'lid 5 x 10 3 FPS. Therefore, for small B, VR/Vo ~ 1.

At an inboard section, the above reduces to (r/x) ::> 1

+ (~.:)2.

and even with l' = 10 feet, the second term is small and
VR/~ = I.
It is, therefore, reasonable to restrict considerations
to that of a simple flat plate as representative of a general
section of a rotor blade as shown in Figure 109. A shock
will stand off in front of the blade for expected re-entry
velocities.

245

9
~
Q)
0

... 0
..
:>
oj !
)01:
r-f

rz1
!3
~

~
t-4
rae
z
rz1
I
rz1
~

246

Allen and Eggers have shown that the over-all heat

transfer to re-entry bodies may be evaluated in terms of a
skin friction parameter (r) representative of the specific
geometry involved. Their approach is used initially and
refined later as necessary. Let H be the heat transfer per
unit area so that:

•
H = h (Taw -Tw) is energy/area/time
is energy/area/length along
trajectory
since d~dt = -Vo sin eE, if Y is altitude and eE is the re­
entry angle. For large decelerations, gravity is negligible
and a = eE throughout the trajectory.
The heat transfer coefficient, h, adiabatic wall tempera­
ture, Taw, and surface temperature, Tw, are all functions
of position along the trajectory insofar as they depend upon
Mo, Reynolds number, and heat capacity (or cooling system)
of structure o For simplicity, however, assume Reynolds
analogy
h

for the Stanton llumber, Sx, and skin friction coefficient,

Cf. Further, in terms of a recovery factor, f,

~ -1
Taw
2
so that
Taw -Tw To -Tw + 2"" -
'¥-l r Mo
2
To ~ ,...
1-1 r M 2 To
"
(for large Mo)
-r~
V 2
~
~ Cp
If Q is the over-all heat transfer to the geometry, then the
rate of over-all heat transfer to the vehicle per length along
the trajectory is:

247

t ­
:-
V
ff'..A
4 SIN e~

where A is the surface area and F represents the details of

the local flow field for the vehicle as it affects the heat
transfer.
In order to eliminate the local influence implied by
~o and Vo, the Allen and Eggers assumption of an isothermal
atmosphere is used. If the drag coefficient is constant,
then:

VO = Ve: el(p { - Z ~PS~N~£ e-

/3Y 1 V {2me~Y(- ~~) JJ.-z..
= E Cp P Vi.t A

m being the mass in slugs and A the reference area for CD •

Thus,

An important consequence is that Inaxi~um dQ/dY is

equivalent to maximum deceleration, which (if Y--O) occurs
at:
.L k
y= 13 CpBA
IS m SIN e~

and is c:l Vo
cl:t. _
i
In fact:

248

Total heat transfer requires integration over the flight

path from entry to impact" or:

1co~
o
dQ elY : -D,
1e-
QC)
o
"'1 0 e-'sY
e" D roe
,
D
dY;;::: --zfJ e a. dl = -~
,- 0 Z.
J e D,t.
d.e
I

where

D2
-
(CrlA)(
W
PoS )
t9 ~ltoJ 6,

Thus:

Or finally:

Q (~~~) {i- (VE~-VO~) ~

- (fAF)(&)ts(VE~-Vo~)
is the total heat input during the descent. The results of
this equation are shown graphically in Figure 110. Clearly"
the energy exchange represents the change in kinetic energy
of the vehicle from entry to "impact" (note that Vo ... VE e D z/2
for Y - 0) weighted by a proportionality constant:

r AF
2CnA

The heat transfer may be reduced (for a given kinetic energy

change) by reducing the recovery factor" r" and thus the
temperature :e,otential (Taw -Tw)" or by reducing the "skin
friction"" FA" relative to the drag" CnA" forces. If W/CnA
is assumed to be 15 pounds per square foot" and 2B/E>og = 0.00119
llpsf, then for the extremes of re-entry angles:

249

1. 0 ~----..,...----- --T------­
i

•8 ~----+-~---+------

•6 ~----I-----+--~--r__---_l
I

,I

,
I

----;-----l----+-~-----,
,
: I

.2
.. ------i-- ------+.­

O ....... ---l. -.:-.............; --..1i_

o 2 4 6 8

Q (Fl'-LBS) ][ lO~
Vi [iF s] ~ r

TOTAL HEAT INPUT DURING RE-·ENTRY

FIGURE 110

250

exPf- 1
0.01788 sin 6 E
1= (0.00370)
1

.. {[Link] 00 (OE = 10 0 )
0.003 70 (OE .. 90 0 )
In either case:

.I1f: (V:-V:> :. ~ [1- (~: tJ ,.. mil

i.e. the final (impact) kinetic energy is negligible relative
to the entry value.
On the basis of preliminary design considerations, the
above can be used to indicate the severity of the thermal
problem for assumed blade sections, dimensions, and materials.
Clearly, step by step computations are necessary for a final
design. In so doing, two other viewpoints are of special
interest: (1) the average rate at which heat is transmitted
to the entire surface, and (2) the most severe rate at which
heat is transferred locally.
The first of these is:

•
+ Jf if dA .. + If e)A

1/4 r F
-
eo Vo
:3 ..
and has its maximum value of:
. B
(Havg ) max 0=

at the altitude Y - [Y max over-all]

heat transfer
E V
and speed Vo = ell' VO max over-alll ell..
[ hea t transf'er J

251

The second rate of interest occurs at the stagnation point

and can be written in terms of a Nusselt number

Nu (d - some characteristic length)

Where K is to be specified for a given geometry (e.g. for a

sphere, stagnation point, K - O. 934 ~ r 2/5 and Re - ~o Vo 0'~QNJ' •

Thus,

If now,

and so

where - . I/.
K... =
;I
I
2.
K-rK
,lIl.. ( 1<
"'"aWl' Cso
)( r ) ..
2. C p

This heat transfer rate has a maximum

·
H/l41'lK -
_K
3 3
4
e 90'
(W)
CpA Ve '3 SIN as-
at the altitude y - max over-alll + t
rylheat + ..tn 3
transfer J
VE
and speed Vo = e = rV o max over-alll e"'.3
l/,-
~eat transfer J

252

In Figure 111, a plot of the trajectory appears in an

altitude-velocity plane for two extreme entry angles with
(W/CDA) - 15. Superimposed are locii for:
1 0 Stagnation temperature (see e.g. NACA TN 4150)
2 0 Separation of real gas regimes according to
presence of different air components behind
shock
3 0 Maximum over-all heat transfer/ft. alt.
4 0 Maximum average heat transfer rate
50 Maximum local heat transfer rate (stag o pt.)
Descent times from entry are also noted, as well as
molecules mean free path for the altitude.
It may be concluded that peak heating occurs well into
the dissociated gas region o In this respect, the earlier
discussion is conservative insofar as it neglects the natural
heat sink implied by such processes. Rigorously, corrections
for Va~ 10,000 FPS should be considered.
The locii are primarily determined by the velocity Va.
Thus, the smaller entry angle implies peak heating at higher
altitude where less dense air is present and the heat input
is reduced (i.e., F is smaller)o This is a consequence of
the fact that the parameter (W/CDA) sin 8E governs the frac­
tion of kinetic energy absorbed 1n descent to a given alti­
tude. Lesser values for the parameter imply faster de­
celerations (i. e. a relatively "light 0' body) An over-all
0

conclusion must consider the descent time which is longer

for the "light" body and may, thereby, result in greater
heat transfer.

253

30 .------r-----.-------l--- I
I
I

25~-_-_+----~-V-E-~-~:~OO- ~~I-----J FPS

I
N [Link]
DISSOCIATION
01. o
~ 20 RE&ION If z. ==-2N-+----}-+-~
I

~ Oa.
><
N2,
>c
.
l!III 15

E-t
"'~"
-<

10

5L----------.
o
. . .- ----J---_.. . .
5 10 15 20
--'25
VELOCLTY, V X 10-3

RE-ENTRY VELOCITY-ALTITUDE RELATIONSHIP

FIGURE 111

254

Figure 112 shows the original configuration and over­

all dimensions of the KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE Test Vehicle at the
beginning of the air drop test series. The final modified
configuration at the conclusion of the test series is
presented in Figure 113. A general arrangement of the
final configuration is shown in Figure 114.

The following summarizes the major differences between

the initial configuration and the final modified version:

Original Final

Gross Weight, Pounds 275 315

Rotor Diameter, Feet 8 10

Disc Loading, Lbs/[Link]. 5.5 4.0
Rotor Solidity .159 .127

Governed Tip Speed, FPS 475 430

Hub Tilt, Degrees

Forward 11 16
Aft 4 5
Hight 4 10.5
Left 11 10.5

Vertic~l Fin Area, Sq. Ft. .85 3.20

Horizontal Tail Area, Sq. Ft. 0 3.75

Rotor Disc Area, Sq. Ft. 50.2 78.5

B. STRUCTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA

I. Blades and Grips

The blades were designed for maximum flatwise bending

[Link] occurs during the opening cycle at approximately 400
RPM, and is maximum at a 22-inch radius. The inboard
eud of the blade, the grip, and the attachment to the hub
were designed for centrifugal force at an overspeed condi­
tion of 1700 RPM.

255

77 T zrw'urzZ'''ww;;'rwl:lW,wmrrcrsrzmW%'tfmCtW,mzt'itWtZmt%'fti@'ft'fuerfft''''fV'7VWWYO~:t""'$ m: l '- . . ~ .. '" ,~,_~,. ,",_. __ ""

l- 41~ 6 -,

~ ..

12 10.7
L __
'·'-1 END VIEW

16 I- g .1
24
t
1-
- " - - 72.5
·122.3

----It .
2.9
-,
I

-r
l\:> i
(11
,
en
:­ 25.5
11 1 .r 1 .
14 14
.

4.25
[
I
/ ~t ~L·~LL~ ,j
~.
~~ 1'4 '~:-_:"::.; . ::c:''::~."t< ."J:~:.., _.'~4;.",.", - • . :"~"!J(__ ~'::'":f

SIDE VIEW

KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE DIMENSIONS (ORIGINAL CONFIGURATION)

FIGURE 112
--1~---1-
10.7
r
____ J 18
_________1­
I
l
,..-- --- 36
__ i <>
24
HORIZONTAL TAIL
END VIEW
- 124 ------------

to
CTI . . ,\--'1- 62 - - - ­ r- 2•9
-.;J

29.5 r.
14 -T 14
I
-! [---4.5
: - ----- --- ----­ =1 Jj
- ,;
~+ _ _ 4-~ __ • __
···1. ,~
~=-i~=~----
SIDE VIEW

KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE DIMENSIONS (FINAL CONFIGURATION)

FIGURE 113

_ •.__._ .• .,-. ".'.. ,"' ,...,O- ' ",....._ " " '!l!1:. _ _ 'll.~"'('...(.~_j;.i~'l~~oo:«,~""'r-·~·,~~;<t~~<'!'l~"1\'¥.~!.'"~~~_i~ ..¥~'J'-C!
'¥,,'!;.~"''''_''f'''''
•.''/,,~~_'''''-. _
FOLDED

COLLECTIVE FLARE ROD

I,
I •

c:?: SYNCHRONIZER RODS

GOVERNOR SPRING HOUSING

TILT GIMBAL ~_.~;:~~~~~

....---~~~~Il
------,CONTROL SPIDER
:...---TAIL (RETRACTED)
,)

BOMB RACK SERVOS

LUGS

~
GLIDE PATH
P

TAIL DEPLOYED
(GLIDE)
BATTERIES
COMPARTMENT

KRC-6 ROTOCHUTE TEST VEHICLE

AN'I'ENNAE
FIGURE 114
258

2. The hub was designed as a ring with in-plane bending

due to the centrifugal forces from the blades.
3. Controls
(a) The pitch control links were designed for the
centrifugal forces at 1700 RPIl.
{b) Hub tilt control rods were designed for maximum
output torque of the control servos.
(c) Collective pitch flare controls were designed
for the output of the thruster unit. Shock loading was
given consideration J but accurate prediction was difficult.
As a result J the system was re-inforced after ground firing
tests.
4. The hub to body attachments were designed for a 30-G
axial inertia force assumed during the opening cycle phase.
Initial estimated vehicle gross weight of 256 pounds and
a body weight of 172 pounds were userl for the designs.
5. The body unit was designed for shear and bending
for a 10-G force imposed by an estimated ejection force of
2600-pounds. A secondary design condition was considered ­
a 5-G side force with the vehicle suspended on the bomb
shackle attachments.
6. The nose cone was originally designed as an energy
absorption device to limit landing impact vertical accelera­
tions to 30 G t s.
The alighting gear struts were designed for a 4.0~
loarl perpendicular to the ground with the vehicle resting
on the nose and any two struts.
C. WEIGHT DATA
The following tabulation shows calculated weights
for the lllajor groupings of the test vehicle in its original
configurations.

259

TABULATION - CALCULATED WEIGHT

ITEM WEIGHT - POUNDS

GROSS WEIGHT 278.1

ROTOR GROUP 67.2

Blades 14.6
Hub 3.8
Shafting 48.8

BODY GROUP 55.0

Basic
Secondary
Provision
ALIGHTING GEAR
CONTROLS
AVIONICS M~D BATTERIES

Do SYSTEM DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS

The design specifications and ratings for the various
units of the flight vehicle remote control and telemetry sys­
tem are summarized in the following tabulation o

260

SYSTEM DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS

(KRC-6 TEST VEHICLE)

POWER REQUIREMF~TS

Airborne System Up to 30 amps, 28 volts DC

Ground Station Up to 30 amps, 28 Yolts DC

RADIO LINK
Ground Transmitter Power output up to 35
watts at frequency of 410 me
Airborne Transmitter Power output up to 4.5

watts at frequency of

232.9 me
CONTROL COMMAND CHANNELS
Number
2 Proportional Up to ± 2 vo 1ts DC
4 Switching "On" +2 Yolts DC, "off"
-2 volts DC
TELEMETRY CHANNELS
14 Channels Will accept up to 1: 2 volts
DC input signals

AC input signal data may be transmitted by use of

appropriate demodulators. Six channels presently

are provisioned with such demodulators.

SERVO CONTROL OUTPUTS

Output Torque Rating (Max.) 675 pound-inches

Output Arm Angular Travel 60 degrees

Output Arm Length (Max.) 2.25 inches

261