Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Project challenge -- Dust diverter for landing helicopters — Parallax Forums

Project challenge -- Dust diverter for landing helicopters

LoopyBytelooseLoopyByteloose Posts: 12,537
edited 2013-04-22 23:31 in General Discussion
Even in the military, this is a big problem. As the helicopter comes in to land on unknown terrain, dust can be picked up and reduce visibilty to zero.

So the challenge is how to really divert all the dust and regain visibility. I suspect that a minature turbo jet engine blasting forward and down from over the cockpit might do the trick. But of course, the additional thust would have to be offset to retain stability.

Is this or something else a viable solution? You might even get a military contract if you come up with the right idea.

Comments

  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2013-04-16 09:56
    I'm sure Sir Dyson is working on that.
  • Duane DegnDuane Degn Posts: 10,588
    edited 2013-04-16 10:47
    Have the helicopter dump a bunch of water before landing. No more dust, just mud.

    I read a sci-fi book in which a form of ice (a specific crystal structure) was developed which stayed solid up to near boiling temperatures. It was intended to solve the mud problem in the military. It ended up destroying the earth by having the oceans freeze solid.
  • LoopyBytelooseLoopyByteloose Posts: 12,537
    edited 2013-04-16 10:49
    Are you referring to Ice-nine?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice-nine
  • Dave HeinDave Hein Posts: 6,347
    edited 2013-04-16 10:49
    Sky crane.
  • Duane DegnDuane Degn Posts: 10,588
    edited 2013-04-16 11:58
    Are you referring to Ice-nine?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice-nine

    Yep. That looks like the one. Kind of a strange book.

    Edit: I couldn't remember the name of the book. "Ice Nine" seemed like as good of a name as any. On closer reading of the Wikipedia article I see you were naming the type of ice not the book. Apparently the book is called "Cat's Cradle". I still think it was a strange book.
  • CuriousOneCuriousOne Posts: 931
    edited 2013-04-16 12:29
    Equip it with large, deployable parachute and land with engines shut off.
  • NWCCTVNWCCTV Posts: 3,629
    edited 2013-04-16 12:54
    If memory serves me correctly I watched a program on Discovery channel that said the military now uses a combunation of Laser and GPS so the dust is no longer an issue as they land without having to actually see where they are going.
  • FranklinFranklin Posts: 4,747
    edited 2013-04-16 12:57
    Cut the engines and use the antigravity pods, DUH.
  • SRLMSRLM Posts: 5,045
    edited 2013-04-16 13:27
    NWCCTV wrote: »
    If memory serves me correctly I watched a program on Discovery channel that said the military now uses a combunation of Laser and GPS so the dust is no longer an issue as they land without having to actually see where they are going.

    I suspect that the issue here isn't so much knowing where the ground is, but where the enemy combatants are. Presumably, during a dust storm they could sneak up closer to a helicopter that is deploying troops.
  • NWCCTVNWCCTV Posts: 3,629
    edited 2013-04-16 13:34
    That's what gunners are for. For one, choppers land at an LZ that has usually been scouted. Enemy can easily be detected even at night with FLIR. The only possibility would be that the enemy forces are on the outside perimeter of the LZ as choppers do not land in tree lines. The force of the dust bowl created by a landing chopper is powerful enough to keep them away.
  • teganburnsteganburns Posts: 134
    edited 2013-04-18 03:56
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-S5uj3jJS6Q ->> Heli dust simulation

    It seems like water is the main use currently for un-preped areas, other wise polybinder before landing temporally. (http://www.fs.fed.us/t-d/pubs/html/98571319/98571319.html)

    Didn't know this was such a big problem for aviation in general http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownout_(aviation)

    I will sleep on this one... *hhmmmmmm??*
  • lardomlardom Posts: 1,659
    edited 2013-04-18 07:06
    Air movement over a plane wing is more horizontal. Perhaps the top of the rotor blades could deform to create lift more like a vacuum effect to offset some of the downward thrust. The beauty of a helicopter is that it can land anywhere. I say invest in goggles and dust masks!
  • User NameUser Name Posts: 1,451
    edited 2013-04-18 07:46
    Nature abhors a vacuum. When the rotor blades (or your little jet engine) blow air out of an area, other air has to replace it. The most convenient air is usually the air just displaced. Little wonder that the existing solutions (no pun intended) are to stabilize the dirt and not to invent a magical dust diverter.
  • teganburnsteganburns Posts: 134
    edited 2013-04-19 16:05
    Ok here is my best idea so far...

    So i was thinking about the jet like blower below or on the sides of the copter but that seems to add a lot of weight.

    But what if you were able to angle the propeller of the copter up and increased engine speed to compensate for lack of propulsion.

    This would drastically increase the airflow and thus blowing away the dust while the copter is at a higher altitude.

    Then angle the propellers back to their original position reducing the airflow/ pressure.

    This would definitely reduce the amount of dust/ debris and increase visibility very quickly.

    Plausible? Good idea? Add-ons?
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2013-04-19 22:23
    The volume and velocity of the air moved down is what provides lift to the helicopter so changing that without doing something else to compensate will not help. Blowing the dust away from a higher altitude will not work in very dusty environments like the desert. Another problem is the turbulence of the air flow which causes the dust to move upwards and in towards the rotor rather than blowing away.

    The only idea I could come up with was a deploy-able skirt around the bottom of the helicopter that would create a laminar air flow that would blow the dust outwards and away from the helicopter. This would create some downwards drag which would have to be compensated for by increasing rotor speed, which might make it more effective, or impractical.
  • prof_brainoprof_braino Posts: 4,313
    edited 2013-04-20 07:29
    I would have thought that a barometric pressure sensor sensor would give a rough idea of altitude, and ultrasonic sensors would find the distance to the ground even through dust.

    Armed with that, could a computer execute an "autopilot landing"? It might not be the smoothed, but it might be better than crash.

    Is "instrument landing" even possible, or is a copter just too touchy?

    The dust diverted idea is giving me a headache, it seems the volume of air needed to blow the dust away is bigger than the copter can produce in the first place, and the equipment would be bigger angain than the copter as well.
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2013-04-20 10:31
    Barometric pressure does give a rough idea of altitude. Unfortunately it's a little too rough to go by alone since weather conditions can make the indicated altitude of a location vary by several 10's of feet or more.

    I don't think an "autopilot landing is possible out in the wild. Instruments might be an aid for the pilot but not adequate for a computer to perform the landing.

    Blowing the dust away might (stress on the might) be possible and the equipment could be as simple as an air inflated skirt that diverts the downwards air flow from the rotor to a horizontal flow. When the helicopter gets close to the ground now the air flow becomes a swirling dust filled torus surrounding the helicopter.
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2013-04-20 10:31
    Barometric pressure does give a rough idea of altitude. Unfortunately it's a little too rough to go by alone since weather conditions can make the indicated altitude of a location vary by several 10's of feet or more.

    I don't think an "autopilot landing" is possible out in the wild. Instruments might be an aid for the pilot but not adequate for a computer to perform the landing.

    Blowing the dust away might (stress on the might) be possible and the equipment could be as simple as an air inflated skirt that diverts the downwards air flow from the rotor to a horizontal flow. When the helicopter gets close to the ground now the air flow becomes a swirling dust filled torus surrounding the helicopter.
  • jonesjones Posts: 281
    edited 2013-04-20 21:11
    Way back in the 1970s I was a USAF helicopter mechanic and spent a lot of time on military helicopters (Sikorsky HH-3Es). Even back then they had radar altimeters, but the resolution wasn't adequate to provide all that much help in landing. As for the aerodynamics, don't forget that the same airflow that kicks up the dust, or even worse, the snow (there's typically more of it) is what is holding the aircraft up and providing control. Change the airflow and you change the balance of forces that's keeping the beast in a stable descent. It might be nice if you could somehow guarantee that the air being forced downward by the rotor disk didn't just curl around to be sucked back in the top, but no one has figured that out. There's a similar problem even worse than lousy landing visibility called vortex ring state where that same phenomemon can cause a loss of lift that can lead to a crash. The way you'd normally arrest a descent is by pulling collective, but in this case doing so just makes the problem worse and falling out of the sky is even less desirable than having to land blind. The manufacturers would dearly love to do away with that problem but to my knowledge it's still a potential gotcha.

    One of the big problems isn't just putting the thing onto a flat surface. Most pilots are good enough not to have much trouble doing that regardless of visibility, and if the surface is flat they can often carry a bit of forward airspeed to touchdown that puts the worst of the junk behind the cockpit. What really gets you in a low-vis situation is obstacles you can't see. Rocks, stumps, posts, cables, etc. that are hiding in the muck will ruin your day if they're in the wrong place. At some point there may be some sort of radar imaging to get a clear view of the LZ through the crud, but I've not heard of any such thing being made. When you're using airflow to support tens of thousands of pounds of helicopter, trying to finesse that airflow to avoid kicking up dust/snow/debris isn't likely to work. Seeing through it has a lot more potential, so I'd concentrate on that if you really want to try to come up with something.
  • jonesjones Posts: 281
    edited 2013-04-20 21:30
    kwinn wrote: »
    Blowing the dust away might (stress on the might) be possible and the equipment could be as simple as an air inflated skirt that diverts the downwards air flow from the rotor to a horizontal flow. When the helicopter gets close to the ground now the air flow becomes a swirling dust filled torus surrounding the helicopter.

    Driving the airflow radially outward with a skirt means that the airflow moving down through the rotor disk will hit the skirt and apply a downward force on it, reducing the net lift. Driving the airflow radially outward will also reduce the pressure that builds up under the helicopter when the air is compressed between the rotor and the ground, which is called ground effect. Helicopters have two performance specs that are very, very important: the power to hover in ground effect and the power to hover out of ground effect which is much higher. Usually you don't attempt to lift something so heavy you can't hover in ground effect. There are exceptions to that, but doing so is dicey since if something happens so that you can't maintain forward airspeed you WILL settle into the ground. Anyway, if you do anything to reduce ground effect you will seriously reduce the hover performance of the aircraft, and that will mean you can't carry as much weight in cargo, as a sling load, etc. That one's thus a non-starter.
  • lardomlardom Posts: 1,659
    edited 2013-04-21 08:36
    Quote by jones
    What really gets you in a low-vis situation is obstacles you can't see. Rocks, stumps, posts, cables, etc. that are hiding in the muck will ruin your day if they're in the wrong place.
    Consider this idea even if it is a stretch. Anaglyph 3D takes advantage of the brain's ability to interpret the image offset in stereoscopic vision as depth.
    It should easy for a computer to process a stereographic image offset into a graphical (2D) form. It could use 3D modeling which is different from the recreation of 3D depth.
    I thought we had technology that could see through "muck" but even if the resolution is low the addition of stereoscopic image processing, (my phrase), should get us closer.
  • jonesjones Posts: 281
    edited 2013-04-21 09:32
    I hadn't thought about such things in a very long time, and not surprisingly, the military is working on it. Google DARPA Sandblaster to get an idea of what they're up to. Apparently what's causing the most problems these days is lateral drift during low-vis landings causing rollovers. Some articles discussed inertial sensors and some GPS info being used to provide an indication of drift, but the holy grail is to be able to see through the dust or even an autoland capability. Without obstacle detection I'd be somewhat wary of that, but it would still be a huge improvement.
  • John AbshierJohn Abshier Posts: 1,116
    edited 2013-04-21 09:38
    Engineer stakes (a metal post), best 6 foot range air defense weapon in the world.

    John Abshier
    Former helicopter pilot
  • John AbshierJohn Abshier Posts: 1,116
    edited 2013-04-21 09:38
    Engineer stakes (a metal post), best 6 foot range air defense weapon in the world.

    John Abshier
    Former helicopter pilot
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2013-04-22 10:45
    jones wrote: »
    Driving the airflow radially outward with a skirt means that the airflow moving down through the rotor disk will hit the skirt and apply a downward force on it, reducing the net lift. Driving the airflow radially outward will also reduce the pressure that builds up under the helicopter when the air is compressed between the rotor and the ground, which is called ground effect. Helicopters have two performance specs that are very, very important: the power to hover in ground effect and the power to hover out of ground effect which is much higher. Usually you don't attempt to lift something so heavy you can't hover in ground effect. There are exceptions to that, but doing so is dicey since if something happens so that you can't maintain forward airspeed you WILL settle into the ground. Anyway, if you do anything to reduce ground effect you will seriously reduce the hover performance of the aircraft, and that will mean you can't carry as much weight in cargo, as a sling load, etc. That one's thus a non-starter.

    Well, I did stress the "might", and it should not be necessary to divert all or even most of the air to radial flow. The air flowing down has to move horizontally once the helicopter gets close to the ground so it might be possible to have a small amount of horizontal air flow prevent the turbulence that causes the dust swirls.
  • teganburnsteganburns Posts: 134
    edited 2013-04-22 23:31
    Also remember if this is military you have the problem of an ambush during a brownout...
Sign In or Register to comment.