AIAA SciTech Forum 10.2514/6.

2019-1370
7-11 January 2019, San Diego, California
AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum
Distribution Statement A: Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

Achieving Automated Rotor Track and Balance through use

of Active Trim Tab and Pitch Control Rod Technologies

Patrick Reilly1, Joseph Roucken2, and Jeremy Sheldon3

Sikorsky Aircraft, A Lockheed Martin Company, Stratford, CT, 06614, USA

Joseph Szefi4

Invercon, LLC, State College, PA, 16801, USA

and
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

Dr. Thomas Auspitzer5

ZF Luftfahrttechnik GmbH, Calden, Germany

Performing manual main rotor track and balance (RTB) of helicopter rotors is an
expensive and time-consuming task. Multiple test flights across different regimes often
produce a track and balance solution effective at all ground and flight conditions but optimal
at none. The opportunity to save time and money, while maximizing vibration reduction,
makes automated RTB a particularly attractive endeavor. For the past five years, Sikorsky
Aircraft worked with the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and
Engineering Center’s Aviation Development Directorate (ADD), ZF Luftfahrttechnik GMBH
(ZFL), and Invercon, LLC, to develop a flight-ready system capable of automating and
optimizing RTB. To reach this goal, the Autonomous Sustainment Technologies for Rotorcraft
Operations (ASTRO) Rotors program focused on combining active trim tab and pitch control
rod technologies with an active vibration feedback control system. This paper provides an
overview of the ASTRO Rotors program, outlines the work completed to date, discusses
development of pitch control rod and active trim tab technologies, and demonstrates the
effectiveness of combining an active vibration control system with these technologies to
primarily reduce fixed-system 1/rev vibration, along with 2/rev and 3/rev vibration, during
ground and flight conditions.

Acknowledgments
This research was partially funded by the Government under Agreement No. W911W6-13-2-0006. The U.S.
Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding any
copyright notation thereon. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should
not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Aviation Development
Directorate or the U.S. Government.

1
Engineer, Dynamics and Internal Acoustics
2
Staff Engineer, Noise, Vibration, and Harshness (NVH)
3
Manager, Mechanical System Diagnostics
4
President
5
Manager, Research & Development Rotor Components (IVVR), Globalization and Product Development

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

Copyright © 2019 by Lockheed Martin Corporation. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.
 I. Nomenclature
ASTRO = Autonomous Sustainment Technologies for Rotorcraft Operations
ACU = actuator control unit
ADD = U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center’s Aviation
Development Directorate
DOC = direct operating cost
HUMS = health and usage monitoring system
IVHMS = integrated vehicle health management system
PTT = pneumatic trim tab
PCR = pitch control rod
RTB = rotor track and balance
SPR™ = Smart Pitch Rod

II. Introduction
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

Helicopter main rotor track and balance (RTB) is performed to minimize main rotor vibration, which for the
purposes of this paper includes 1, 2, and 3 per revolution vibrations, when helicopter blades are replaced, repaired in-
situ, or when vibration levels are not acceptable. It is also performed to compensate for imbalances caused by blade
paint and surface material erosion or damage, play from wear occurring in pitch rod and damper end bearings, unequal
moisture retention in blades, “creep” or damage to the trailing edge tabs, and as part of scheduled and unscheduled
maintenance. The current manual (RTB) system used on modern helicopters suggests adjustments to the rotor system
to produce an acceptable level of cockpit and cabin vibration throughout all ground and flight regimes. However, these
adjustments are necessarily a “compromise” since the adjustments must be fixed to the same values throughout the
flight. The single combination of these fixed adjustments cannot produce optimal vibration reduction for all ground
and flight conditions. Thus, after several RTB flights, the aircraft is tuned to produce acceptable, but not optimal,
vibration levels.
The main rotor tuning procedure, shown in Figure 1, is expensive because it often requires multiple flights, as
stated above, to provide Health and Usage Monitoring System (HUMS) (IVHMS on the UH-60M helicopter) data for
three separate adjustments: 1) blade pitch control rods, 2) blade trailing edge tabs, and 3) hub balance weights.
Although the HUMS RTB system currently on the UH-60M has reduced the maintenance burden of the aircraft by
eliminating the need to install ground based RTB equipment and by supplying reliable PCR, tab, and hub balance
mass adjustments to the maintenance personnel, the process is still iterative.
For a four bladed rotor, manual adjustments may be needed on up to four PCRs and trim tabs on four blades. At
least two flights are usually required, but often, more flights are needed depending upon the “initial conditions” of the
blades, i.e., blade-to-blade differences and the initial track. The number of flights also depends upon the skill and care
of the maintenance personnel; mistakes in applying the numerous adjustments are common due to delicate adjustments
that are sometimes required. Eliminating the need for dedicated RTB flights should significantly lower direct operating
cost (DOC).

Apply PCR Adjustments

Stenciled on Blade (Pre-track)

100% NR Ground run

Change PCR to Out Flat pitch to 100% NR
achieve Track Of
Typically 1-2 Loops Limit
Measure Track 100% NR
0% NR
Apply Hub
Out
Of Weights
Measure Ground Vibration
Limit Typically 1-2 Loops
100% NR Fly: Hover, 80kts,
120kts, 145kts, Vh 0% NR
Change PCR,
Tabs, and Hub Out
Weights per Of Collect HUMS RTB vibration and
Limit track data
HUMS solution
100% NR
Typically 3-4 Flights
Land Apply Hub
0% NR
Weights
Out
Of Typically1-2 Loops
Measure Ground Vibration Limit
0% NR
0% NR
09405-V1-002G

Figure 1. Conventional rotor track and balance process is time-consuming

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

2
 III. Solution
In a U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center’s Aviation Development
Directorate (ADD) and Sikorsky Aircraft funded effort named Autonomous Sustainment Technologies for Rotorcraft
Operations Rotors (ASTRO Rotors); the team is designing, fabricating, and demonstrating a system that breaks this
paradigm via automatic and continuous in-flight 1, 2, and 3 per revolution vibration minimization. The program
objective is to develop an automatic rotor track and balance system that eliminates the need for the legacy manual
RTB process. The ASTRO Rotors system, shown below in Figure 2, consists of three components:
1) Automatically adjustable active main rotor pitch control rods (PCRs)
2) Automatically adjustable active main rotor blade trailing edge pneumatic trim tabs (PTTs)
3) Closed-loop RTB controller mounted in the fuselage
A prototype automated hub balancer was also developed as a replacement for the current manual hub weight
adjustments. However, early in the program a cost benefit analysis showed the advantages of the prototype hub
balancer could not overcome its weight and complexity. Development work on the subsystem was stopped and this
subsystem will not be discussed herein.
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

The active pitch control rods (PCRs) are developed by ZF Luftfahrttechnik GmbH (ZFL) based on their existing
53G helicopter pitch control rod design (Ref 1). The automated trim tabs, developed by Invercon LLC, are
pneumatically actuated trim tabs (PTTs). The PTTs were externally retrofitted, without structural modifications, to
main rotor blades during the ADD-Sikorsky Multi-Role Rotor (MRR) program in 2017. The RTB controller was
developed by Sikorsky and is responsible for generating optimal PCR and PTT position commands based on fixed-
frame vibration feedback.

Figure 2. ASTRO Rotors Automated RTB System

Sikorsky views the ASTRO Rotors system, shown in Figure 2, as the next step in main rotor RTB methodology
and technology evolution. This system enables RTB adjustments to be applied automatically thus avoiding
maintenance errors and providing optimal main rotor vibration reduction for all ground and flight conditions. The
main rotor Auto-RTB system is an improvement to the way an aircraft is maintained with benefits extending from
crew comfort to aircraft wear-and-tear (Ref 2 and Ref 3). Main rotor Auto-RTB is expected to reduce DOC by
decreasing aircraft out of service time due to vibration, more specifically reducing (or eliminating altogether) time
required to minimize unacceptable vibration via the current manual process. The automated RTB adjustments
performed by the system will help realize the following benefits:
1. Reduced time to return an aircraft to service after both scheduled and unscheduled maintenance by
eliminating dedicated RTB flights.
2. Reduced unscheduled maintenance by keeping the aircraft in-service via automatically maintaining
low 1/rev, 2/rev, 3/rev vibration from the following sources: a) normal wear on blades and
mechanical controls, b) blade paint erosion, c) blade moisture intrusion, d) minor blade damage.
3. Extend in-service time since the system actively adapts RTB controls to maintain low rotor (1-3 per
rev) vibrations.
For future, higher speed aircraft, main rotor Auto-RTB may be an “enabling” technology. As forward airspeed
increases, blade-to-blade manufacturing variations result in increased vibration levels. The current, manual RTB
approach may not be able to reach even currently accepted vibration specification levels throughout the extended
operational range. In this case, the main rotor Auto-RTB system may become an enabling technology for the next
generation of high-speed helicopters.

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

3
 The primary goal of the ASTRO Rotors program is to successfully demonstrate automated RTB in a flight test.
During the first few years of the program, each of these subsystems was designed, built, and bench-tested individually;
and for the first time in 2017, the three subsystems were integrated into Sikorsky UH-60L rotor blades, and tested on
Sikorsky Aircraft’s Experimental Whirl Test Stand.
The individual technologies and to date whirl test results are detailed in the following sections. Future flight plan
and path forward are summarized in the final section.

IV. Auto-Pitch Control Rod (Auto-PCR)

Sikorsky partnered with ZF Luftfahrttechnik GmbH (ZFL) to adapt their existing CH-53G Smart Pitch Rod
(SPR™) technology for the UH-60 PCRs. The SPR™ is an electro-mechanical actuator with an integrated Actuator
Control Unit (ACU), which replaces the original PCR and provides the controlled low authority, low bandwidth
adjustment capability required for the in-flight RTB applications being explored by the ASTRO Rotors program.
ZFL was granted an R&D contract from BAAINBw (Federal Office of Bundeswehr Equipment, Information and
In-Service Support) to develop, fabricate and flight test an In-Flight Tuning (IFT) system for the CH-53G. As
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

described above, one core component of this In-Flight Tuning system is the SPR™. Together with the other
components (developed, qualified, and built under the lead by ZFL) this flightworthy system provides the desired on-
board adjustment capability for in-flight RTB. This R&D program was completed by the successful flight tests on a
CH-53G helicopter see Figure 3. For further details on the results see references 1 and 4.

Figure 3. CH-53G IFT System with six SPRsTM installed between the swashplate and pitch horn (left) and
CH-53G Test Aircraft during an IFT test flight (right)
Prior to the start of the ASTRO Rotors program, ZFL and Sikorsky conducted an in-depth trade study on the
options of adapting the SPR™ technology, specifically the design of the CH-53G SPR™ for flight testing (F/T) on
the UH-60 platform. Different design solutions were derived and evaluated with respect to the technical risk, costs,
and schedule. The design finally chosen was based on the unmodified core components (in terms of the actuation
hardware and control software) of the qualified and flight tested CH-53G SPR™. The major mechanical design
changes for the adaptation can be summed up as follows, and as shown in Figure 4:
▪ modified spindle nut to interface with the legacy UH-60 upper rod end
▪ new lower adaptation link to install the legacy UH-60 lower rod end and to match the longer nominal
overall length of the legacy UH-60 PCR
▪ modified lower housing to connect the adaptation link to the CH-53G SPR™ core module.

Figure 4. Rendering of the main components of the UH-60 F/T version of the SPR™

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

4
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

Figure 5. F/T version of the SPR™ for UH-60 (here shown without the legacy rod ends)
The actuation mechanism of the SPR™ consists of a spindle drive actuated by an electrical brushless DC motor.
The absolute position of the spindle (equivalent to the length of the SPR™) is measured by internal sensors and is
controlled by the ACU. The ability of the SPR™ to know its absolute position is important for maintaining proper
autorotation rotor speed. In addition to tracking SPR™ position, the ACU monitors the operation of the SPR™ and
provides health and status data to the RTB controller via a RS-485 protocol, based on the SAE Aerospace standard
AS5394. With this interface, the RTB controller also controls each PCR independently by commanding absolute
position set points.
The position controller on the ACU minimizes the position error between the commanded position received by
ACU from the RTB controller and the actual position measured by the integrated sensors of the SPR™. The control
accuracy of the ACU’s autonomous position control is better than 0.012 mm. The adjustment rate is limited by the
ACU software to 0.2 mm/s while the nominal adjustment rate under external loads demonstrated in bench and flight
tests within the CH-53G R&D program is in the order of 0.12 mm/s. To avoid back driving, the auto-PCRs feature
integral mechanical hard stops to limit actuator travel within safe limits.
The flight test SPR™ for the UH-60 by design matches the same basic properties of the legacy UH-60 PCR in
terms of aircraft installation and the manual length pre-adjustment. In addition the CH-53G SPR™ Core Module
provides an active in-flight length adjustment range of 1.32mm (min-to-max length). Although this range is more than
adequate to noticeably reduce vibration levels, the current active range is less than is ultimately desired for a true
production variant.

V. Auto-Pneumatic Trim Tab (Auto-PTT)

Invercon, LLC developed a revolutionary new type of on-blade actuation for rotor blade active surfaces that is a
radical departure from traditional design concepts. The Invercon actuator adds negligible blade weight and is powered
using an inherent on-blade, centrifugally-developed pressure differential. In Figure 6, a schematic illustrates the basic
physics behind the concept. By utilizing the large rotor centrifugal acceleration to generate on-blade air pressure
differentials for actuation, the need for high electrical power in the rotating frame and heavy, outboard actuators is
eliminated. Typical operation involves a set of microvalves at the blade root that control air flow into and out of actuating
diaphragms located at some outboard location via externally (or internally) mounted pneumatic microtubing that traverses
the blade spanwise. A pneumatically actuated tracking “wedge” can then be actively adjusted to provide RTB adjustments
in flight, as illustrated in Figure 7. By controlling the pressure levels in these tracking wedges, the tab deflections can be
finely tuned and ultra-low aircraft vibration can be achieved under any ground or flight condition. In addition, once a
desired tracking adjustment has been made, the root mounted valves can be closed, yielding an optimal wedge angle
locked in place without using power. The resulting active system is an actuation approach which adds no outboard active
elements that can fail under extreme acceleration, uses extremely little power (microwatts when tuning wedge angle),
adds negligible blade weight, and can be surface mounted so no blade structural modifications are necessary when
retrofitted.

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

5
 Figure 6. Schematic of Invercon’s centrifugally generated pressure differential concept for actuation
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

Figure 7. Example Retrofit Design of PTT

For the 2017 whirl test of the prototype PTT system, pneumatic tabs were installed over the existing, outboard
aluminum trim tabs on a set of UH-60L blades. Tab designs were similar to those shown in Figure 7. Miniature Hall
sensors on the aluminum tabs in conjunction with small magnets embedded in the PTT cover plates were employed
to measure tab deflection. Additionally, miniature pressure sensors were installed in the actuating diaphragms to
monitor PTT inflation and deflation. Analog sensor signals were sent directly through the hub slip ring to a fixed
frame dSPACE controller which calculated appropriate control signals to the root-mounted microvalves to maintain
commanded tab deflection angles. Therefore, the whirl test system was an entirely analog feedback control system,
where the purpose was to experimentally validate PTT performance.
Sikorsky and Invercon are applying lessons learned from the initial PTT whirl test to the design of UH-60M blades
to be used for flight test. First, Invercon has designed and fabricated a digital controller co-located with the root-
mounted microvalves. The digital controller communicates with the RTB controller via a CANbus protocol and
utilizes a microprocessor to maintain tab positions commanded from the fixed frame. Additionally, the flight test rotor
will consist of UH-60M blades which have both inboard and outboard PTTs, as shown in Figure 8. The flight test PTT
implementation will not only provide more vibration control authority but will also utilize a robust digital control and
communication scheme.

Figure 8. Auto-Trim Tab Main Rotor Blade Location

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

6
 VI. RTB Controller
The auto-PTT and auto-PCR technologies described above are fully enabled by the ASTRO RTB controller. The
primary goal of the RTB controller is to reduce 1/rev, 2/rev and, 3/rev rotor imbalances caused by blade dissimilarity.
The controller does this by acquiring vibration data and generating optimal actuator commands based on a fully
adaptive control algorithm with Advanced RTB Control Laws. To further understand how the RTB controller works,
a high-level system architecture drawing for the flight test configuration of the RTB controller is shown below in
Figure 9, followed by a detailed description of the controller’s functionality.
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

Figure 9. RTB controller system architecture

The RTB controller is physically represented by a dSPACE real-time prototyping system. This system consists of
a rack-mounted chassis outfitted with processing cards to handle algorithmic calculations and interface cards capable
of analog and digital communications. For development testing of the system, a host laptop is connected to the
dSPACE system to create a real-time user interface with the RTB Controller. For the upcoming flight test
configuration, 10 accelerometers, located throughout the UH-60M cockpit and cabin, will provide analog vibration
data to the RTB controller. 1/rev and 25/rev main rotor tach signals will also be recorded by the controller and used
in a Fourier analysis to determine the harmonic content of the accelerometer vibration data. The processed data is then
passed into the RTB controller’s vibration reduction algorithm. With the goal of eliminating fixed system 1/rev
vibration (as well as 2/rev, and 3/rev imbalances), the RTB control algorithm determines commands for each auto-
PCR and auto-PTT, which are transmitted to the actuators via a CANbus digital communication network. A digital
translator is used to convert the CANbus data stream to the 9 bit RS-485 protocol required to communicate with the
auto-PCRs. Both digital busses pass through a slipring to interface with the actuators on the rotating side of the system.
In addition to calculating and commanding quasi-steady control adjustments to each auto-PCR and auto-PTT, the RTB
controller is also responsible for constantly monitoring error, status, and position state of each actuator.
Although the RTB controller has not yet been flight tested, variations of its vibration reduction algorithm were
tested extensively in previous Sikorsky programs and are productionized as part of Sikorsky’s proprietary Active
Vibration Control (AVC) systems. The core vibration reduction algorithm (shared between the RTB controller and
each of these other systems) functions by identifying vibration sensitivities for each control actuator and adapting
these sensitivities to accommodate for changes to the plant system. These sensitivities, along with control/sensor
weightings and the current vibration state, are used to calculate output actuator commands that optimize ride quality
in accordance with Sikorsky Aircraft Advanced RTB Control Laws. The ASTRO Rotors implementation of this

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

7
 vibration reduction algorithm has shown success in all bench testing and whirl testing performed to date. Results from
the most recent whirl test are shown below in Section VII.

VII. Whirl Testing

Since the ASTRO Rotors flight test is scheduled to take place midway through 2019, the results and conclusions
presented in this paper are derived from the Q4 2017 whirl test that took place on the Sikorsky Main Rotor Whirl
Stand (MRWS), see Figure 10. Testing was performed with prototype PTTs installed on four UH-60L test blades,
auto-PCRs connected to each blade, and the RTB controller operating in the control room. The primary test goal was
to reduce risk for the flight test program by verifying blade flutter stability and structural integrity, and by
characterizing the performance of the auto-RTB system and each of the individual subsystems.
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

09405-V1-016G

Figure 10. Sikorsky Main Rotor Whirl Stand

The hub, blades, auto-PCRs, and auto-PTTs were all instrumented. Critical sensors were monitored on a safety of
flight computer during stability testing and envelope expansion. Prior to evaluating the auto-RTB system’s
performance, the rotor system was manually balanced. The rotor was also flown to a variety of flight conditions to
ensure that stability would be maintained throughout testing and that the PTTs and PCRs would remain structurally
intact. Flight conditions included both high and low collective and cyclic pitch inputs as well as overspeed testing up
to 115% NR. Throughout the envelope expansion, each of the subsystems remained operational and the rotor was
stable. The addition of the prototype PTTs to the trailing edge of the blades proved to have a minimal impact on the
blade’s pitch moment slope, which is traditionally used as an indicator of blade stability. After demonstrating the rotor
system was structurally sound and stable throughout the flight envelope, open-loop testing of the RTB controller was
performed to exercise each auto-PCR and auto-PTT to their maximum limits, ensuring that DNE exceedances were
not produced. Open loop testing was also used to evaluate the effect of the auto-PCR and auto-PTT adjustments on
fixed system 1/rev vibration and blade track.
To characterize track sensitivity of the auto-PTTs, each tab was incrementally commanded to its maximum and
then minimum position, with blade track being measured at every step. The resulting track sensitivity plot, depicting
track excursion vs. degrees of angular tab deflection at flat pitch for each of the four PTT blades, is shown below in
Figure 11.

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

8
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

Figure 11. Prototype auto-PTT blade track sensitivities compared with manual trim tab track
sensitivities at flat pitch.
The dashed green line in Figure 11 represents the average track sensitivity obtained by making manual adjustments
to a traditional UH-60L trim tab. The four PTT deflection sweeps are represented by the red, black, blue, and yellow
data points. Even though the PTT is capable of a tab deflection range ~4x greater than the production UH-60L tab, its
track sensitivity (inches of track excursion per degree of tab deflection) is only ~25% of the traditional tab. As a result
the PTT requires more tab deflection to achieve the same overall authority as the traditional tab. The PTT position
sweeps shown in Figure 11 were repeated at a high collective flight condition (12 deg), which produced identical
results, verifying that trim tab track sensitivity is unaffected by rotor collective.
The auto-PCRs were designed to have the same track sensitivities as the manual UH-60 PCRs. This was verified
during the whirl test using the same procedure as the auto-PTTs. Each auto-PCR was incrementally commanded to its
maximum and then minimum position, with blade track being measured at every step. This resulted in the track
sensitivity plot shown in Figure 12.

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

9
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

Figure 12. Prototype auto-PCR blade track sensitivities compared with manual PCR track sensitivities at
flat pitch.
The dashed green line in Figure 12 represents the average track sensitivity obtained by making manual adjustments
to a legacy UH-60 PCR. The four PCR deflection sweeps are represented by the red, black, blue, and yellow data
points. This open-loop RTB controller testing verified that the auto-PCR has the same track sensitivity as the
traditional PCR. The PCR position sweeps shown in Figure 12 were also repeated at a high collective flight condition
(12 deg), which produced identical results, verifying that PCR track sensitivity is unaffected by rotor collective.
After successfully completing open loop testing of the RTB controller, several closed loop test cases were
evaluated. To demonstrate the RTB controller’s fixed-system 1/rev vibratory load reduction capabilities during whirl
testing, rotor imbalances were intentionally created by commanding the auto-PTTs and auto-PCRs away from their
known balance positions. Feedback 1/rev vibratory load was calculated from a side force load cell in the fixed frame
of the whirl stand, directly below the rotor head. After rotor imbalances were intentionally created, the RTB controller
was allowed to adjust the PTTs and PCRs, removing the imbalance and returning the rotor to a low-vibration state.
An example of one of these imbalance cases for the auto-PCRs is shown below in Figure 13.

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

10
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

Figure 13. Time history of auto-PTT positions, auto-PCR positions, and fixed system 1P vibratory load
during an RTB controller vibration reduction attempt using closed loop control of PCRs only with the rotor
spinning at flat pitch.
The three plots contained within Figure 13 are time histories of the auto-PTT positions, the auto-PCR positions,
and the fixed-system 1/rev vibratory load. For this case, the auto-PTTs were commanded to their known balance
positions while the auto-PCRs were initially commanded to their maximum or minimum positions. This created a
fixed-system 1/rev load imbalance of ~300 lbs. The RTB controller was then allowed to calculate and command
optimal positions for the PCRs in an attempt to reduce the 1/rev vibratory imbalance. When the RTB controller’s
closed loop control mode was initiated, it steadily and continuously adjusted the active PCR positions, successfully
reducing 1/rev fixed-system vibration by ~65%. Since the load cell that was used for calculating fixed system 1/rev
vibratory load is primarily used for measuring thrust on the whirl stand, it is designed to measure loads several
magnitudes higher than the RTB imbalances created during whirl testing. Further reduction of 1/rev vibratory load
may have been possible with supplementary open loop control adjustments or additional optimization of closed loop
control parameters, but these actions were not performed due to the low resolution of the load cell used for vibration
feedback.
When a rotor imbalance was created using the auto-PTTs, a similar vibration reduction result was achieved. Figure
14 shows an example of one of the auto-PTT closed loop control cases.

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

11
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

Figure 14. Time history of auto-PTT positions, auto-PCR positions, and fixed system 1P vibratory load
during an RTB controller vibration reduction attempt using closed loop control of PTTs only with the rotor
spinning at 12 deg of collective.
For this case, the auto-PCRs were commanded to their known balance positions while the auto-PTTs were initially
commanded to their maximum or minimum positions. This created a fixed-system 1/rev load imbalance of ~1000 lbs.
This imbalance was significantly larger than the auto-PCR imbalance shown in Figure 13 because the rotor was
operating at 12 deg of collective, rather than flat pitch. After seeding the imbalance, the RTB controller’s closed loop
control mode was initiated and it steadily and continuously adjusted the auto-PTT positions, successfully reducing
1/rev fixed-system vibration by ~65%.
Another difference worth noting between the test cases shown in Figure 13 and Figure 14 is the amount of time it
took for the RTB controller to converge to a solution. In Figure 14, the converged solution was reached within 5
seconds while the auto-PCR closed loop test case took 75-90 seconds to converge. The convergence time differs
between these two cases because of a difference in the RTB controller rate weighting, which essentially acts as a gain
value for the RTB controller. Throughout the whirl test, different combinations of rate weightings and control/sensor
weightings were tested to help characterize the optimal settings for the RTB controller. In the example shown in Figure
14. Time history of auto-PTT positions, auto-PCR positions, and fixed system 1P vibratory load during an RTB
controller vibration reduction attempt using closed loop control of PTTs only with the rotor spinning at 12 deg of
collective., the control weightings were not fully optimized, which prevented the RTB controller from achieving even
greater 1/rev vibratory load reduction.
Once closed loop control test cases were successfully completed for the auto-PCRs and auto-PTTs individually,
several test cases were performed using both subsystems simultaneously. One of these cases is shown below in Figure
15.

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

12
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

Figure 15. Time history of auto-PTT positions, auto-PCR positions, and fixed system 1P vibratory load
during an RTB controller vibration reduction attempt using closed loop control of PCRs and PTTs with the
rotor spinning at flat pitch.
For this case, the red and blue auto-PTTs and all four auto-PCRs were initially commanded to their maximum or
minimum positions. This created a fixed-system 1/rev load imbalance of ~600 lbs. After seeding the imbalance, the
RTB controller’s closed loop control mode was initiated, and it steadily and continuously adjusted the auto-PTT and
auto-PCR positions, successfully reducing 1/rev fixed-system vibration by ~85% to less than 100 lbs.
The whirl stand testing proved that the ASTRO Rotors auto-PTTs and auto-PCRs were as effective at making blade
track adjustments as traditional trim tabs. The test also demonstrated that the RTB controller was capable of adjusting
active trim tab and PCR positions from a suboptimal rotor balance condition to reduce fixed-system 1/rev vibratory
load by ~85%. Even greater vibration reductions are expected during flight testing because of higher resolution
accelerometers to be used for feedback control.

VIII. Conclusion
The ASTRO Rotors system builds upon multiple programs to combine critical technologies to enable automated
main rotor RTB. The system components have already shown their effectiveness in subscale and full scale whirl tests.
These technologies will ultimately help reduce the cost of maintaining and operating helicopters, while simultaneously
offering low levels of vibration across all ground and flight regimes that have been unachievable to date.
The team will continue building upon past successes as the program continues. Currently preparations are being
made for testing the system on an UH-60M, including refinements of the PTT for application to the UH-60M main
rotor blades. As mentioned above, the main updates are integrating digital control and installation at both inboard and
outboard tab locations. The RTB controller is being updated to digitally communicate to the PTTs. The automated
PCRs require no further modifications for testing.
The ASTRO Rotors system components will undergo safety-of-flight testing prior to a fully integrated whirl test in
early 2019 at the Sikorsky Engineering Main Rotor Whirl Stand (MRWS). Subsequent to testing at the MRWS, the
system will be installed into a UH-60M aircraft for flight testing at the ADD Ft. Eustis, VA flight test facility
culminating in a flight test of the system to demonstrate and evaluate system effectiveness. During the flight test, the
Auto-RTB system will be challenged by a variety of 1, 2, and 3 per rev-causing anomalies to test the ability of the
system. Modest amounts of blade damage and paint erosion or irregularities in the blade surface caused by small

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

13
 impacts will be simulated by small hub imbalances and blade anomalies introduced using small elastomeric wedges
on the blade trailing edges. In addition, the system will be subjected to manual null PCR adjustments to seed 2/rev
vibration. Each of the automatic subsystems will be tested together as well as separately to clearly quantify their
compound and individual benefits in vibration reduction.

References
[1] Arnold, Fuerst, Hartmann, Hausberg, Flight Testing of an In-Flight Tuning System on a CH-53G Helicopter,
Presented at the AHS 70th Annual Forum, Montréal, Canada, May 20–22, 2014.
[2] Ballentine, Erin L, Miracle, Adam D, et al “Return on Investment: Analysis of Benefits of the Implementation
of Elastomeric Wedges as Vibration Control on the Apache (AH-64D) Aircraft,” AHS Airworthiness, CBM, and
HUMS Specialists’ Meeting, Huntsville, AL, Feb 11-13, 2013.
[3] S. Ventres and R. Hayden, "Rotor Tuning Using Vibration Data Only," in American Helicopter Society 56th
Annual Forum, Virginia Beach, 2000.
[4] Arnold, Fuerst, In-Flight Tuning System for the CH-53G helicopter, Presented at the 41st European Rotorcraft
Forum, Munich, Germany, September 1–4, 2015.
Downloaded by IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY on January 9, 2019 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2019-1370

© Copyright 2018 Lockheed Martin Corporation

14