0
Research Papers

Parametric Study of a Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Ingestion Into a Business Jet Size Fan Assembly Model

[+] Author and Article Information
Troy Lyons

Gas Turbine Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
The Ohio State University,
Columbus, OH 43235
e-mail: lyons.480@osu.edu

Kiran D'Souza

Gas Turbine Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
The Ohio State University,
Columbus, OH 43235
e-mail: dsouza.60@osu.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received July 6, 2018; final manuscript received December 11, 2018; published online January 10, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Theodore Brockett.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 141(7), 071002 (Jan 10, 2019) (10 pages) Paper No: GTP-18-1456; doi: 10.1115/1.4042286 History: Received July 06, 2018; Revised December 11, 2018

This work investigated the damage severity of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) ingestion into fan models of a midsized business jet engine. The ingestion of the quadcopter UAV model into the fan was carried out in ls-dyna. The material models used for the quadcopter and the fan were previously validated, and the fan's durability was simulated through simulated bird ingestions. The results of this work show that UAVs will cause significantly more damage than birds due mostly to the hard components typically used in motors, batteries, and cameras. Particular parameters of the ingestion studied include the phase of flight of the plane, impact location and orientation, and fan blade thickness.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Heimbs, S. , 2011, “ Computational Methods for Bird Strike Simulations: A Review,” Comput. Struct., 89(23–24), pp. 2093–2112. [CrossRef]
Sinha, S. K. , Turner, K. E. , and Jain, N. , 2011, “ Dynamic Loading on Turbofan Blades Due to Bird-Strike,” ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power, 133(12), p. 122504.
Howard, S. A. , Hammer, J. T. , Carney, K. S. , and Pereira, M. J. , 2013, “ Jet Engine Bird Ingestion Simulations: Comparison of Rotating to Non-Rotating Fan Blades,” NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH, Report.
Song, Y. , Horton, B. , and Bayandor, J. , 2017, “ Investigation of UAS Ingestion Into High-Bypass Engines—Part 1: Bird vs. Drone,” AIAA Paper No. 2017-0186.
Schroeder, K. , Song, Y. , Horton, B. , and Bayandor, J. , 2017, “ Investigation of UAS Ingestion Into High-Bypass Engines—Part 2: Parametric Drone Study,” AIAA Paper No. 2017-0187.
D'Souza, K. , Lyons, T. , Lacy, T. , and Kota, K. R. , 2017, “ Volume IV—UAS Airborne Collision Severity Evaluation—Engine Ingestion,” The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Code of Federal Regulations, 2011, “ Aeronautics and Space, Art. 33.76,” Vol. 1, Federal Aviation Administration, National Archives and Records Administration's Office of the Federal Register, Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC.
Liu, M. B. , and Liu, G. R. , 2010, “ Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH): An Overview and Recent Developments,” Arch. Comput. Methods Eng., 17(1), pp. 25–76. [CrossRef]
FAA, 2017, “ FAA Releases Updated Drone Sighting Reports,” Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC, accessed July 17, 2018, https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=87565
Andrews, T. M. , 2017, “ A Commercial Airplane Collided With a Drone in Canada, a First in North America,” The Washington Post, Washington, DC.
Olivares, G. , Gomez, L. , de los Monteros, J. E. , Baldridge, R. J. , Zinzuwadia, C. , and Aldag, T. , 2017, “ Volume II—UAS Airborne Collision Severity Evaluation—Quadcopter,” National Institute for Aviation Research, Washington, DC, Report http://www.assureuas.org/projects/deliverables/a3/Volume%20I%20-%20UAS%20Airborne%20Collision%20Severity%20Evaluation%20-%20Structural%20Evaluation.pdf.
Cairns, D. S. , Wood, L. A. , and Johnson, G. , 2016, “ UAS Airborne Collision Severity—Projectile and Target Definitions,” Montana State University, Bozeman, MT.
Sengoz, K. , Kan, S. , and Eskandarian, A. , 2015, “ Development of a Generic Gas-Turbine Engine Fan Blade-Out Full-Fan Rig Model,” The George Washington FHWA/NHTSA National Crash Analysis Center, Washington, DC.
Goyal, V. K. , Huertas, C. A. , and Vasko, T. J. , 2013, “ Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics for Bird-Strike Analysis Using LS-DYNA,” Am. Trans. Eng. Appl. Sci., 2(2), pp. 83–107. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258630574_Smooth_Particle_Hydrodynamic_Approach_for_Bird-Strike_Analysis_Using_LS-DYNA
Barber, J. P. , Taylor, H. R. , and Wilbeck, J. S. , 1978, “ Bird Impact Forces and Pressures on Rigid and Compliant Targets,” Airforce Flight Dynamics Laboratory, Dayton, OH, Report https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/dashboard/searchResults/titleDetail/ADA061313.xhtml.
Wilbeck, J. S. , 1978, “ Impact Behavior of Low Strength Projectiles,” Air Force Materials Laboratory, Dayton, OH, Report https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a060423.pdf.
McCarthy, M. A. , Xiao, J. R. , McCarthy, C. T. , Kamoulakos, A. , Ramos, J. , Gallard, J. P. , and Melito, V. , 2004, “ Modeling of Bird Strike on an Aircraft Wing Leading Edge Made From Fibre Metal Laminates—Part 2: Modeling of Impact With SPH Bird Model,” Appl. Compos. Mater., 11(5), pp. 317–340. [CrossRef]
Livermore Software Technology Corporation, 2017, “LS-DYNA Keyword User's Manual: Volume 2,” Livermore Software Technology Corporation, Livermore, CA.
Flanagan, D. , and Belytschko, T. , 1981, “ A Uniform Strain Hexahedron and Quadrilateral With Orthogonal Hourglass Control,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 17(5), pp. 679–706. [CrossRef]
Livermore Software Technology Corporation, 2018, “LS-DYNA Theory Manual,” Livermore Software Technology Corporation, Livermore, CA.
Vintilescu, I. V. , 2009, “ Explicit Finite Element Modeling of Multilayer Composite Fabric for Gas Turbine Engine Containment Systems Phase II—Part 4: Model Simulation for Ballistic Tests, Engine Fan Blade-Out, and Generic Engine,” Honeywell Engines, Washington, DC, Report.
Buyuk, M. , 2013, “ Development of a Tabulated Thermo-Viscoplastic Material Model With Regularized Failure for Dynamic Ductile Failure Prediction of Structures Under Impact Loading,” Ph.D. thesis, The George Washington University, Washington, DC. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PhDT.......251B
Hammer, J. T. , 2012, “ Plastic Deformation and Ductile Fracture of Ti-6Al-4V Under Various Loading Conditions,” Master's thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/pg_10?0::NO:10:P10_ETD_SUBID:77447
Haight, S. , Wang, L. , Bois, P. D. , Carney, K. , and Kan, C.-D. , 2016, “ Development of a Titanium Alloy Ti-6Al-4V Material Model Used in LS-DYNA,” George Mason University, The George Washington University, NASA Glenn Research Center, Washington, DC, Report http://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/tc15-23.pdf.
Pereira, J. M. , Revilock, D. M. , Lerch, B. A. , and Ruggeri, C. R. , 2013, “ Impact Testing of Aluminum 2024 and Titanium 6Al-4V for Material Model Development,” NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH, Report https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20130013684.pdf.
Seidt, J. , 2010, “ Plastic Deformation and Ductile Fracture of 2024-T351 Aluminum Under Various Loading Conditions,” Ph.D. thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Zukas, J. A. , 1980, “ Impact Dynamics: Theory and Experiment,” U.S. Army Research and Development Command Ballistic Research Laboratory, Aberdeen, MD, Report.
Rajan, S. , Mobasher, B. , Vaidya, A. , Zhu, D. , Fein, J. , and Deivanayagam, A. , 2014, “ Explicit Finite Element Modeling of Multilayer Composite Fabric for Gas Turbine Engine Containment Systems, Phase IV,” Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, Report http://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/TC13-37.pdf.
Pereira, J. M. , and Revilock, D. M. , 2009, “ Ballistic Impact Response of Kevlar 49 and Zylon Under Conditions Representing Jet Engine Fan Containment,” J. Aerosp. Eng., 22(3), pp. 240–248. [CrossRef]
Cowper, G. , and Symonds, P. , 1958, “ Strain Hardening and Strain Rate-Effects in the Impact Loading of Cantilever Beams,” Brown University, Arlington, VA, Report.
Code of Federal Regulations, 2011, “ Aeronautics and Space, Art. 33.75,” Vol. 1, Federal Aviation Administration, National Archives and Records Administration's Office of the Federal Register, Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC.
Cordasco, D. , and Emmerling, W. , 2015, “ Turbofan Engine System Safety of a UAV Ingestion Hazard,” Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC, Report.
Lawrence, C. , and Carney, K. , 2001, “ Simulation of Aircraft Engine Blade-Out Structural Dynamics,” NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH, Report https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20010068555.pdf.
Ohio Supercomputer Center, 1987, “Ohio Supercomputer Center,” Ohio Supercomputer Center, Columbus, OH, http://osc.edu/ark:/19495/f5s1ph73

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The Hopkinson bar experiment by Barber et al. [15] being modeled in ls-dyna using a SPH bird model. Pictured is the 600 g bird given an initial velocity of 270 m/s colliding into an aluminum bar. Close-up of the SPH bird model and end of the aluminum bar (a) before and (b) during impact.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

The Hopkinson bar experiment by Barber [14] being modeled in ls-dyna using a SPH bird model. Pictured is the 600 g bird given an initial velocity of 270 m/s colliding into an aluminum bar.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Dimensions of the bird

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison of the simulated and experimental force ratio at normal incidence

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

The quadcopter is shown with key components and materials: (a) the full quadcopter, (b) the motor, (c) the camera, and (d) the battery. The case of the quadcopter consists of a polycarbonate material.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Averaged displacement on the surface at the motor impact for various blade meshes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Generic FASM of a midsized business jet, from the (a) front and (b) back

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Durability test with the thin blade geometry and a 1.85 kg bird model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

The accumulated failure strain, Dcr, plotted for each element of the FASM from a 1.85 kg bird ingestion: (a) thin bladed fan and (b) thick bladed fan

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

The initial positions for the quadcopter simulations. The radial distance from the tip of the nosecone to the center of mass of the quadcopter was 0.42 m for the vertical position in part (a). The radial distance from the tip of the nosecone to the center of mass of the quadcopter was 0.34 m for the horizontal position in part (b), with the exception of simulation ID 2 in Table 1 which had a radial distance of 0.28 m.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Time evolution of the baseline simulation (ID 1 in Table 1), where the quadcopter traveled at 92.6 m/s (180 kn) and struck near the tip of the thin bladed fan operating at 8500 rpm. Each photo was taken 0.32 ms apart during the simulation.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

In (a) a fan blade impacts a hard body (a quadcopter motor from simulation ID 1 from Table 1) and the quadcopter motor is shown to cause severe damage, with the accumulated failure strain shown in (b). Blades that avoided the motors, and to a lesser extent the camera and battery, were damaged less severely.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

The accumulated failure strain, Dcr in the baseline simulation (ID 1 from Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

The accumulated failure strain, Dcr in the inner radius simulation (ID 2 from Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

The accumulated failure strain, Dcr from the thick blade geometry simulation (ID 3 from Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

The accumulated failure strain, Dcr from the alternative UAV orientation simulation (ID 4 from Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

The accumulated failure strain, Dcr from the 2000 rpm simulation (ID 5 from Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

The accumulated failure strain, Dcr from the 6000 rpm, larger translational velocity, simulation (ID 6 from Table 1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

The accumulated failure strain, Dcr from (a) motor component simulation, (b) camera component simulation, and (c) battery component simulation (ID 7, 8, and 9 from Table 2, respectively)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

The accumulated failure strain, Dcr, plotted for each element after the ingestion of a bird with the same mass as the quadcopter (IDs 10 and 11 from Table 3): (a) thin bladed fan and (b) thick bladed fan

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In