© All Rights Reserved

3 views

© All Rights Reserved

- Propeller.cal
- 50438031-ittcst99
- P. Oltmann S. D. Sharma - Simulation of Combined Engine and Rudder Maneuvers
- Final Report (Final_edit)
- U66 Theory of Flight AM2
- Report
- Understanding Flight 2001 Appendex
- torque_v_hp_1b
- differentiation examples sort 433 answers
- American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics1 Effect of Longitudinal Ridges on the AerodynamicCharacteristics of an Airfoil
- Euler Solver
- 18Chudy
- Etd
- Physical Hovercraft Design
- Viewtenddoc.asp
- AIAA-2011-3846
- Moving Meshes
- Finite Element Method Mod-1 Lec-3.doc
- AE2020 Syllabus
- A 801293

You are on page 1of 14

June 2006

This document gives the theoretical aerodynamic formulation of QPROP, which is an analysis

program for predicting the performance of propeller-motor combinations. The same formulation

applies to the companion design program QMIL, which generates propeller geometries for the

Minimum Induced Loss (MIL) condition, or windmill geometries for the MIL or Maximum Total

Power (MTP) conditions.

QPROP and QMIL use an extension of the classical blade-element/vortex formulation, devel-

oped originally by Betz [1], Goldstein [2], and Theodorsen [3], and reformulated somewhat by

Larrabee [4]. The extensions include

• Radially-varying self-induction velocity which gives consistency with the heavily-loaded ac-

tuator disk limit

• Perfect consistency of the analysis and design formulations.

• Solution of the overall system by a global Newton method, which includes the self-induction

effects and powerplant model.

• Formulation and implementation of the Maximum Total Power (MTP) design condition for

windmills

Nomenclature

r radial coordinate B number of blades

R tip radius V freestream velocity

T thrust Ω rotation rate

Q torque u(r) local externally-induced velocity at disk

P shaft power v (r) local rotor-induced velocity at disk

η̄ overall efficiency W (r) local total velocity relative to blade

β (r) local geometric blade pitch angle cℓ (r) local blade lift coefficient

φ(r) local flow angle (= arctan(Wa /Wt )) cd (r) local blade profile drag coefficient

α(r) local angle of attack (= β − φ) λ advance ratio (= V /ΩR)

Γ(r) local blade circulation λw (r) local wake advance ratio (= (r/R)Wa /Wt )

T ′ (r) local thrust/radius ρ fluid density

Q′ (r) local torque/radius µ fluid viscosity

( )a , ( )t axial, tangential velocity components a fluid speed of sound

1 Flowfield velocities

1.1 Velocity decomposition

Figure 1 shows the velocity triangle seen by the blade at some radius r. The axial and tangential

components of the total relative velocity W are decomposed as follows.

Wa = V + ua + va (1)

Wt = Ωr − ut − vt (2)

q

W = Wa2 + Wt2 (3)

1

vt

va

W v ut

W

ua

Wa u

V

φ φ

Wt Ωr

Figure 1: Decompositions of total blade-relative velocity W at radial location r.

All velocities shown in Figure 1 are taken positive as shown. Typically, va and vt will be

positive for a propeller with positive thrust and torque, and negative for a windmill which will

have negative thrust and torque. The externally-induced ut will be negative if it comes from an

upstream counter-rotating propeller, and zero if there is no upstream torque-producing device.

The tangential velocity vt , or “swirl”, is associated with the torque imparted by the rotor on the

fluid. It can also be related to the circulation on the rotor blades via Helmholtz’s Theorem. The

total circulation on all the blades at radius r is BΓ(r), and this must be completely shed on the

blade portions inboard of r. Hence, this is also the half the circulation about a circumferential

circuit in the rotor plane at radius r

1

2πr v̄t = BΓ (4)

2

BΓ

v̄t = (5)

4πr

where v̄t is the circumferentially-averaged tangential velocity. The factor of 1/2 in equation (4) is

due to the circuit seeing semi-infinite rather than infinite trailing vortices, as shown in Figure 2.

The circumferential-averaged tangential velocity v̄t and the velocity on the blade vt are assumed

to be related by q

v̄t = vt F 1 + (4λw R/πBr)2 (6)

The square root term becomes significant near the axis, and the modified Prandtl’s factor F becomes

significant near the tips and accounts for “tip losses”.

2

F = arccos e−f (7)

π

B r 1

f = 1− (8)

2 R λw

r r Wa

λw = tan φ = (9)

R R Wt

In this modified F , the usual overall advance ratio λ = V /ΩR of the rotor has been replaced by the

local wake advance ratio λw . This is more realistic for heavy disk loadings, where λ and λw differ

considerably. The fact that λw varies with radius somewhat does not cause any difficulties in the

formulation.

2

1

2 BΓ

Γ

Using the empirical relation (6) in (5) gives the final relation between the local circulation and

local tangential induced velocity relative to the blade.

BΓ 1

vt = p (10)

4πr F 1 + (4λw R/πBr)2

The axial induced velocity then follows with the assumption that v is perpendicular to W

Wt

va = vt (11)

Wa

which is correct for the case of a non-contracting helical wake which has the same pitch at all radii.

This assumption is strictly correct only for a lightly-loaded rotor having the Goldstein circulation

distribution, but is expected to be reasonably good for general rotors.

It’s useful to note that relations (10) and (11) are purely local. In effect, the circulation argument

shown in Figure 2, together with the approximate Prandtl tip factor F , have been used in lieu of a

Biot-Savart integration over the entire wake. The latter would have related the local vt and va to

the overall Γ distribution, and thus introduced a considerable complication.

2.1 Local lift and drag coefficients

The propeller geometry and velocity triangle are shown in Figure 3.

The local angle of attack seen by the blade section is

α(r) = β − φ (12)

Wa

= β − arctan (13)

Wt

which then produces some local blade lift and profile drag coefficients.

cℓ = cℓ (α,Re,Ma) (14)

cd = cd (α,Re,Ma) (15)

3

cl

W φ

W

α

Wa φ cd Wa

c

β

φ φ

Wt Wt

Figure 3: Blade geometry and velocity triangle at one r location.

This lift coefficient also determines the corresponding local blade circulation.

1

Γ = W c cℓ (16)

2

Given some blade geometry c(r), β (r), blade airfoil properties cℓ (α,Re,Ma), cd (α,Re,Ma) for each radius,

and operating variables V and Ω, the radial circulation distribution Γ(r) can be calculated for each

radius independently. This is performed by solving the preceding nonlinear governing equations

via the Newton method. Rather than iterating on Γ directly, it is beneficial to instead iterate on

the dummy variable ψ, shown in Figure 4.

vt

va

v

1

2U

W ψ

Wa ut

U Ua

ua

Ut u

U V

Ua

Wt Ut

Ωr

Figure 4: Velocity parameterization by the angle ψ.

This ψ parameterizes all the other variables as follows. The convenient intermediate velocity

4

components Ua , Ut , are the overall velocities imposed on the rotor, excluding the rotor’s own

induced velocites va and vt .

Ua = V + ua (17)

Ut = Ωr − ut (18)

q

U = Ua2 + Ut2 (19)

1 1

Wa (ψ) = 2 Ua + 2U sin ψ (20)

1 1

Wt (ψ) = 2 Ut + 2U cos ψ (21)

va (ψ) = Wa − Ua (22)

vt (ψ) = Ut − Wt (23)

α(ψ) = β − arctan(Wa /Wt ) (24)

q

W (ψ) = Wa2 + Wt2 (25)

Re(ψ) = ρW c/µ (26)

Ma(ψ) = W/a (27)

It is useful to note that with the above expressions, v and W are inscribed in the circle in Figure

4, and hence are always perpendicular regardless of the value of ψ.

The circulation is also related to tangential induced velocity via the Helmoltz relation (10).

Again parameterizing everything with ψ, we have

r Wa

λw (ψ) = (28)

R Wt

B r 1

f (ψ) = 1− (29)

2 R λw

2

F (ψ) = arccos e−f (30)

π

4πr q

Γ(ψ) = vt F 1 + (4λw R/πBr)2 (31)

B

Finally, the Newton residual is the cℓ –Γ relation (16) recast as follows.

1

R(ψ) = Γ − W c cℓ (α,Re,Ma) (32)

2

A Newton update of ψ

R

δψ = − (33)

dR/dψ

ψ ← ψ + δψ (34)

will then decrease |R| in the next Newton iteration. The convergence is quadratic, and only a few

iterations are typically required to drive R to machine zero.

The simplest analysis case of the rotor has a prescribed velocity V , and also a prescribed rotation

rate Ω or advance ratio λ. We might also modify all the blade angles by a constant,

5

where βo is the baseline twist distribution, and ∆β is the radially-constant specified pitch angle

change. Each of these parameters can be set a priori, and the analysis proceeds as described above.

However, in many situations it is instead necessary to specify the overall rotor thrust or torque,

or perhaps specify some torque/speed relation for a driving motor. In this case, either V , Ω or ∆β

will be treated as an unknown. For design calculations, we wish to find the blade chord c(r) and

blade angle β (r) distributions, again to achieve a specified thrust or torque. So c and β must then

be treated as unknowns.

In the present approach, the analysis and design cases are treated conceptually in the same

manner. The local circulation is treated as a parameter-dependent function of the form Γ(r;V,Ω,β,c),

and any of its four parametric derivatives may be required for the analysis or design case.

∂Γ

ΓV (r) ≡

∂V (Ω,β,c)=const

∂Γ

ΓΩ (r) ≡

∂Ω (V,β,c)=const

∂Γ

Γβ (r) ≡

∂β (V,Ω,c)=const

∂Γ

Γc (r) ≡

∂c (V,Ω,β)=const

We first note that the residual R defined by (32) is a function of not just ψ, but also the four

parameters being considered. A physical solution requires that R remain at zero for all cases,

R(ψ;V,Ω,β,c) = 0 (36)

which implicitly defines the ψ (V,Ω,β,c) function. The actual value of ψ is obtained numerically from

(36) by the Newton iteration procedure described previously. Its parametric derivatives are then

derived by setting the variation of R to zero, since (36) must hold for any physical perturbation.

∂R ∂R ∂R ∂R ∂R

δR = δψ + δV + δΩ + δβ + δc = 0 (37)

∂ψ ∂V ∂Ω ∂β ∂c

∂R/∂V ∂R/∂Ω ∂R/∂β ∂R/∂c

δψ = − δV − δΩ − δβ − δc (38)

∂R/∂ψ ∂R/∂ψ ∂R/∂ψ ∂R/∂ψ

The variation coefficients on the righthand side of (38) are seen to be the derivatives of ψ (V,Ω,β,c).

∂ψ ∂R/∂V

= − (39)

∂V ∂R/∂ψ

∂ψ ∂R/∂Ω

= − (40)

∂Ω ∂R/∂ψ

∂ψ ∂R/∂β

= − (41)

∂β ∂R/∂ψ

∂ψ ∂R/∂c

= − (42)

∂c ∂R/∂ψ

With these, the parametric derivatives of any converged quantity can now be computed via the

chain rule. For example, the circulation and its parametric derivatives are computed as follows.

4 q

Γ(ψ;V,Ω,β,c) = vt F (πr)2 + (4λw R/B)2 (43)

B

6

∂Γ ∂Γ ∂ψ

ΓV = + (44)

∂V ∂ψ ∂V

∂Γ ∂Γ ∂ψ

ΓΩ = + (45)

∂Ω ∂ψ ∂Ω

∂Γ ∂Γ ∂ψ

Γβ = + (46)

∂β ∂ψ ∂β

∂Γ ∂Γ ∂ψ

Γc = + (47)

∂c ∂ψ ∂c

Parametric derivatives of other required quantities

are obtained by this same approach. Although the blade angle variables are defined to be βo (r)

and ∆β, only the one β-derivative is needed for both, since from (35) we see that ∂/∂β = ∂/∂βo =

∂/∂∆β.

After the Newton iteration procedure described previously is performed for each radial station, the

overall circulation distribution Γ(r) is known. This then allows calculation of the overall thrust and

torque of the rotor as follows.

As shown in Figure 5, the blade lift and drag forces are resolved into thrust and torque components

by using the net flow angle φ.

dD dL

dL

φ dT

W W

Wa Wa

φ dD dQ / r

Wt Wt

Figure 5: Blade lift and drag resolved into thrust and torque components.

1

dL = B ρW 2 cℓ c dr (48)

2

1

dD = B ρW 2 cd c dr (49)

2

dT = dL cos φ − dD sin φ

1

= B ρW 2 (cℓ cos φ − cd sin φ) c dr (50)

2

7

dQ = (dL sin φ + dD cos φ) r

1

= B ρW 2 (cℓ sin φ + cd cos φ) c r dr (51)

2

From the velocity triangle in Figure 5 we see that

W cos φ = Wt (52)

W sin φ = Wa (53)

so the thrust and torque components can be alternatively expressed in terms of the circulation and

net velocity components.

dT = ρBΓ (Wt − ǫWa ) dr (54)

dQ = ρBΓ (Wa + ǫWt ) r dr (55)

cd

where ǫ = (56)

cℓ

The local efficiency is

V dT

η = (57)

Ω dQ

V cℓ cos φ − cd sin φ

= (58)

Ωr cℓ sin φ + cd cos φ

V Wt − ǫWa

= (59)

Ωr Wa + ǫWt

which can be decomposed into induced and profile efficiencies.

η = ηi ηp (60)

1 − vt /Ut

ηi = (61)

1 + va /Ua

1 − ǫWa /Wt

ηp = (62)

1 + ǫWt /Wa

In the limits V /ΩR → 0, ǫ → 0, and with ua = ut = 0 (no externally-induced velocity), the efficiency

reduces to

1

η → (63)

1 + va /V

which exactly corresponds to the actuator disk limit, even for arbitrarily large disk loadings.

The total thrust and torque are obtained by integrating (54) and (55) along the blade.

Z R X

T = ρB Γ (Wt − ǫWa ) dr ≃ ρB Γ (Wt − ǫWa ) ∆r (64)

0 r

Z R X

Q = ρB Γ (Wa + ǫWt ) r dr ≃ ρB Γ (Wa + ǫWt ) r ∆r (65)

0 r

The simple midpoint rule is used for the integral summations. The overall efficiency is then

VT

η̄ = (66)

ΩQ

8

3.3 Parametric derivatives

In order to drive an analysis solution to a specified thrust or torque, their values defined by (64) and

(65) must be considered to be functions of the form T (V,Ω,∆β), Q(V,Ω,∆β). Their derivatives, which

are required for Newton iteration, are obtained by implicit differentiation inside the summations,

and by using the previously derived parametric derivatives of Γ, Wa , and Wt . For example, for the

V -derivatives of T and Q we have

Xh i

TV = ρB ΓV (Wt − ǫWa ) + Γ (WtV − ǫWaV − ǫV Wa ) ∆r (67)

r

Xh i

QV = ρB ΓV (Wa + ǫWt ) + Γ (WaV + ǫWtV + ǫV Wt ) r ∆r (68)

r

cdV cℓ

where ǫV = − ǫ V (69)

cℓ cℓ

The Ω- and ∆β-derivatives of T and Q are computed in the same manner.

In order to drive a design solution to a specified thrust or torque, their values defined by (64)

and (65) must be considered to be functions of the form T (β,c), Q(β,c). Their β- and c-derivatives,

which are defined for each radial station, are obtained simply by taking the one summation term

for that radius, e.g.

h i

Tβ = ρB Γβ (Wt − ǫWa ) + Γ Wtβ − ǫWaβ − ǫβ Wa ∆r (70)

4 Analysis

The analysis problem is to determine the loading on a rotor of given geometry and airfoil properties,

with some suitable imposed operating conditions. The unknowns are taken to be Γ(r), V , Ω, ∆β.

The constraints on Γ(r) are always the Newton residuals defined previously by (32) at each radial

station.

1

Rr (Γ(r)) = Γ − W c cℓ (32)

2

The three residuals which constrain the remaining three variables V , Ω, ∆β will depend on the

type of analysis problem being solved. Some typical constraint combinations might be:

1) Specify velocity, RPM, pitch:

R1 (V,Ω,∆β) = V − Vspec

R2 (V,Ω,∆β) = Ω − Ωspec (71)

R3 (V,Ω,∆β) = ∆β − ∆β spec

2) Specify velocity, RPM, torque (find pitch of constant-speed prop to match engine torque):

R1 (V,Ω,∆β) = V − Vspec

R2 (V,Ω,∆β) = Ω − Ωspec (72)

R3 (V,Ω,∆β) = Q − Qspec

9

3) Specify velocity, pitch, thrust (find RPM to get a required thrust):

R1 (V,Ω,∆β) = V − Vspec

R2 (V,Ω,∆β) = ∆β − ∆β spec (73)

R3 (V,Ω,∆β) = T − Tspec

4) Specify RPM, pitch, thrust (find velocity where required thrust occurs):

R1 (V,Ω,∆β) = Ω − Ωspec

R2 (V,Ω,∆β) = ∆β − ∆β spec (74)

R3 (V,Ω,∆β) = T − Tspec

The three chosen residuals are simultaneously driven to zero by multivariable Newton iteration.

−1

δV R1

∂(R1 , R2 , R3 )

δΩ = − R2 (75)

∂(V, Ω, ∆β)

δ∆β

R

3

If R3 is either a T or Q constraint, its Jacobian matrix entries are already known from the para-

metric derivatives of T (V,Ω,∆β) or Q(V,Ω,∆β), computed as described previously.

5 Design

The design problem is to determine the geometry of a rotor which matches specified parameters,

typically R, V , Ω, and either T or Q. The blade airfoil properties are also specified. The two un-

knowns at each radial station are taken to be β (r) and c(r), which therefore requires two constraints

to be imposed at each radial station. One such constraint, used for all design cases, is simply a

specified local lift coefficient.

Rr1 = cℓ − cℓspec (76)

For the second constraint, different options are used depending on the type of design problem being

solved.

In this design case, the local induced efficiency is required to be radially constant, and equal to

some initially-unknown value η̄. Setting ǫ = 0 in equation (59) gives a suitable expression for the

induced efficiency for this constraint.

V Wt

= η̄ (77)

Ωr Wa

Rr 2 = η̄ Ωr Wa − V Wt (78)

The design residual (78) has introduced η̃ as one additional unknown. This in effect controls the

overall propeller load, since a large thrust or torque typically implies a small induced efficiency,

and vice versa. Therefore, a suitable constraint for η̃ is to impose a specified thrust or torque.

Rη = T − Tspec (79)

or Rη = Q − Qspec (80)

10

Since Ω is assumed to be given, specifying Q is equivalent to specifying the shaft power P = ΩQ.

Imposing Rr1 = 0 and Rr2 = 0 at each radial location, together with the one additional Rη = 0,

will give a propeller with a Minimum Induced Loss (MIL). Such a propeller will have the maximum

possible overall induced efficiency for its radius and operating conditions. It is the analog of the

elliptically-loaded wing, which has a spanwise-constant induced-drag/lift ratio.

The MIL design residual (78) is applicable to a windmill, provided cℓ (r), and T or Q are set negative.

This will give a windmill with the most shaft power for a given tower load, or the minimum tower

load for a given shaft power.

An alternative design objective for a windmill is to simply maximize shaft power, regardless of

the tower load. Actuator disk theory predicts that in the limits λ → 0, ǫ → 0, the maximum (most

negative) shaft power is

8

Pmax = − ρV 3 πR2

27

In the presence of profile and swirl losses, the actual power will be less than this. It is of great

interest to maximize the power in the presence of these losses.

With a specified Ω, maximizing P is equivalent to maximizing the torque Q. Because all the

radial blade stations are assumed independent, it is sufficient to maximize the differential torque

dQ. From equation (55), and the Γ–vt relation (10) we have the following.

q

2

dQ = ρ vt (Wa + ǫWt ) 4π r F 1 + (4λw R/πBr)2 dr (82)

Figure 6 illustrates how this dQ varies for the inviscid case, with vt negative as for a windmill. The

product dQ ∼ vt Wa clearly has an extremum at an intermediate loading. Since all the quantities in

the dQ expression above are parameterized by ψ, we can extremize dQ by setting its ψ–derivative

to zero, taking the log first for algebraic simplicity.

q

2

ln(dQ) = ln vt + ln (Wa + ǫWt ) + ln F + ln(4π r ρ 1 + (4λw R/πBr)2 dr) (83)

= + + = 0 (84)

dQ vt Wa + ǫWt F

∂( )

where ( )′ ≡

∂ψ

In practice, both F and ǫ are very nearly independent of ψ, so that F ′ ≃ 0 and ǫ′ ≃ 0. Also, from

(20), (21), (23) we have

1 1

Wa′ = 2U cos ψ = Wt − 2 Ut (85)

Wt′ = − 12 U sin ψ = 1

2 Ua − Wa (86)

1 1

vt′ = 2U sin ψ = Wa − 2 Ua (87)

Wa − 12 Ua Wt − 1

2 Ut − ǫ(Wa − 21 Ua )

Rr2 = + (88)

Ut − W t Wa + ǫWt

11

C

B

vt

A

er

ell dQ ~ vt Wa

op mill

pr n d

wi

windmill propeller

ψ Wa

ψ

A

C

A B C

max B

windmill

torque & power

Figure 6: Three different windmill loadings. The windmill torque and power are maximum at

loading B.

By taking the usual blade geometry variables β (r) and c(r) as unknowns, and driving the residuals

(76) and (88) to zero at each radial location, produces a windmill with a Maximum Total Power

(MTP). Both T and Q are a result of this calculation, and a total load constraint such as (79) or

(80) in the MIL case is not required here.

We now consider designing a windmill which intentionally delivers less power than the theoretical

maximum at point B in Figure 6. Such a “moderated” optimum is point B’ in Figure 7.

dQ va

ψ ψ

B’

va

B’ v’a

dQ

B dQ’

Figure 7: Moderated sub-optimum windmill power at point B’. Axial velocity gradient va′ is used

to normalize nonzero dQ′ .

This moderated optimum is selected by specifying some nonzero value for the local fractional

12

torque gradient dQ′ /dQ. Because a suitable value is not easily determined a priori, it is implemented

to be a specified multiple of a reference gradient. A convenient choice for this reference is va′ /va ,

since va′ varies little over a significant range of ψ values, as can be seen in Figure 7. This reference

ratio is readily evaluated from equation (20) and (22).

va = Wa − Ua = − 12 Ua + 1

2U sin ψ (89)

1 1

va′ = 2U cos ψ = Wt − 2 Ut (90)

dQ′ /dQ

= K (91)

va′ /va

where K is a constant which specifies the degree of deviation away from the optimum. With

substitutions for dQ′ /dQ and va′ /va , equation (91) is recast as an alternative residual which replaces

(88).

Wa − 21 Ua 1

− ǫ(Wa − 21 Ua ) Wa − Ua

" #

Wt − 2 Ut

Rr 2 = + − K (92)

Ut − Wt Wa + ǫWt Wt − 12 Ut

The constant K = O(1) is set by the designer. Choosing K = 0 recovers the true maximum power

case, while choosing K > 0 gives progressively smaller power values.

The advantage of a moderated optimum stems from practical reasons. Because the torque Q

and the power P = QΩ are stationary with respect to K, the loss in available power scales as

P − P0 ∼ K 2

where P0 is the maximum power at K = 0. In contrast, the thrust T (or tower load) and typical

blade chord c differences change linearly with K.

T − T0 ∼ K

c − c0 ∼ K

Figure 8 shows these variations quantitatively for a typical windmill. Choosing K = 0.2, for

instance, will incur only a 2.3% power penalty, but will give 8.5% smaller tower load and blade

chords. The smaller tower load is likely to give the windmill a higher maximum safe operating

windspeed, so that the moderated-optimum windmill may actually produce more time-averaged

power if maximum safe winds are occasionally encountered. Alternatively, for a given tower load or

windmill material cost, the moderated-optimum windmill can have a slightly larger diameter and

hence actually produce more power. It is therefore certain that the moderated optimum may be

better than the true fixed-diameter and fixed-windspeed optimum, when overall system costs and

other operating considerations are taken into account.

References

[1] A. Betz. Airscrews with minimum energy loss. Report, Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Flow

Research, 1919.

[2] S. Goldstein. On the vortex theory of screw propellers. Proceedings of the Royal Society, 123,

1929.

13

1

P / P0

0.9

T / T0

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

K

Figure 8: Variation of power P and thrust T with power-moderating constant K, for four-bladed

windmill with V /ΩR = 0.125. Blade chord ratio c/c0 is nearly equal to T /T0 .

[4] E.E. Larrabee and S.E. French. Minimum induced loss windmills and propellers. Journal of

Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 15:317–327, 1983.

14

- Propeller.calUploaded bybadppl
- 50438031-ittcst99Uploaded byMas Elabsawy
- P. Oltmann S. D. Sharma - Simulation of Combined Engine and Rudder ManeuversUploaded byjdmorap
- Final Report (Final_edit)Uploaded byEugene Tan
- U66 Theory of Flight AM2Uploaded byYannis
- ReportUploaded byAishwar Ravichandran
- Understanding Flight 2001 AppendexUploaded byNayot Tientong
- torque_v_hp_1bUploaded byNik Tsufia
- differentiation examples sort 433 answersUploaded byapi-241619704
- American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics1 Effect of Longitudinal Ridges on the AerodynamicCharacteristics of an AirfoilUploaded byTufan Kumar Guha
- Euler SolverUploaded byzero lift
- 18ChudyUploaded byhitesh_tilala
- EtdUploaded byAlireza Intel
- Physical Hovercraft DesignUploaded byPaulPrateek
- Viewtenddoc.aspUploaded byukal
- AIAA-2011-3846Uploaded bySoumalyaSSinha
- Moving MeshesUploaded bySP
- Finite Element Method Mod-1 Lec-3.docUploaded byPSINGH02
- AE2020 SyllabusUploaded byadam g
- A 801293Uploaded bysyed
- AEROFOOIL.pdfUploaded byEva Dewsbury
- 36th WEGEMT Summer School on Manoeuvering and Manoeuvering DevicesUploaded bychandran
- AIAA.pdfUploaded byLIVYA
- Numerical,%20Wind%20Tunnel,%20and%20on%20Track%20Study%20of%20Monash%202002%20Aero%20Package.pdfUploaded byAbhishek yadav
- The Project Gutenberg eBook of Boys' Book of Model Boats, By Raymond Francis Yates.Uploaded byRohit Sharma
- propellerUploaded bychip02
- Us 6471157Uploaded by155
- Propellers. Inboard Propellers and Speed Calculation Marine Engines 2.1L 16LUploaded byanon_844391780
- Using Fluent to Modeling 2D Subsonic Flow over a NACA 2412 Airfoil at AOA=4deg.pdfUploaded byEleni Douvi
- Agitation and MixingUploaded byketh duane tagactac

- FEA Interview Questions Module 1Uploaded bysandeshlikes
- Flight Performance of Fixed and Rotary Wing AircraUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- aerospace-04-00045.pdfUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- Lynxmotion Simonk Esc GuideUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- ansys tutoUploaded byசெல்வ குமார்
- 5_LongitudinalStatic#2BA158.pdfUploaded byNeetu Sharma
- Andrew Hendricks Avl Aero CoefficientsUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- AVL ReportUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- Flight Path StabilityUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- CAR 21Uploaded byRahul Chowdari
- JBLADE v17Uploaded byAlvin Anthony
- Qip Jp 06 Diffusers & NozzlesUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- Michigan ZESTT Structural Report 21 Jun 10Uploaded byAlvin Anthony
- Son Dip on ThesisUploaded byFatoom Hashim
- nozzle designUploaded byramkumar121
- NozzlesUploaded byAnonymous VKv75qe98
- Aircraft Performance Estimation MethodsUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- Paper 36Uploaded byho-fa
- Wear2Uploaded byAlvin Anthony
- scilabpdf.pdfUploaded byJulio Contreras
- Chpt5ModalFrequencyResponse.pdfUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- UAV AutoPilotUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- Huntsman LY5052Uploaded byAlvin Anthony
- Tim TaraUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- Ansys 12 TutorialUploaded bynarender_kumar
- UntitledUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- Sizing of Wing Flaps and Control Surfaces Sept 2010 ReleasedUploaded byAlvin Anthony
- AVL User GuideUploaded bynandan1988

- E302 SamartinoUploaded byJohn Meg Samartino
- StrutUploaded bycpsankar
- NX Nastran User's GuideUploaded byphymucs
- Thermal Physics Lecture 16Uploaded byOmegaUser
- lab 4Uploaded byKin Pearly Flores
- Chapter 05 7e GlossaryUploaded byRenato Soriano
- hmt ppt1Uploaded byDrAneesh Somwanshi
- experimentUploaded byAmrinaAkmal
- PaperUploaded bylclk
- Best Solver for Impact ProblemsUploaded byprincedrdo
- Effects of Unbalanced Hydrostatic and Seepage ForcesUploaded byRyan A. Ramirez
- MSC ADAMS SOLVER.pdfUploaded bymilind9897
- ME2151 ENGINEERING MECHANICSUploaded byamsk24_24
- Doplers EffectUploaded byANshul Sharma
- Strength of MaterialUploaded bywww.bhawesh.com.np
- Syllabus SYDE282Uploaded bycartoon_nate
- Análise de Desempenho de HélicesUploaded byThiago Barros
- Manual of Steel DesignUploaded bySejowan Haque Tomal
- Introduction to CavitationUploaded byMadhav Reddy
- Lateral-Torsional Buckling of Steel Beams with Open Cross SectionUploaded byp18000
- Shimpo STH SeriesUploaded byElectromate
- atoms family powerpointUploaded byapi-169639475
- UNI 10011-88Uploaded byBruno Manzetti
- Design of Transmission Systems 2 MarksUploaded bysrajapraty
- Meyer Peter Muller (1948)Uploaded byAndre Prakoso
- 1. Drill String Design BHA Design1Uploaded byMohammadFaisalQureshi
- Estimated S-n Curve for Nodular Cast Iron - A Steering Knuckle Case StudyUploaded bySergio Pluchinsky
- 15 Angular Momentum-ProblemsUploaded byMichael Kevin Yang
- CPL ATGUploaded byHari Halan
- ShearUploaded byqaiserkhan001

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.