1.

INTRODUCTION:
The first step of a propeller design date backs to 1493 when Leonardo Da vinci attempted a devise for a vertical flight. Though this helicopter (see fig 1) flying principle was never put to a reality, it dealt with the theory of helical airscrew similar to propulsion of modern day propeller. [1]

Fig 1: Helicopter rotor. Frank Ross (1953), Helicopter rotor. Flying Windmills. [Online] Available at st <http://www.aviastar.org/history/index.html> Accessed on 01 Dec 2010

The propeller acts in similar fashion to a helical screw driven through solid medium to propel through air. It was not until numerous experiments that took from 1700s to early 1800s century lead to the conclusion of straightened airscrew blades for more propulsive efficiency. Jean Baptiste was the first to design a hot air balloon driven by propellers to lift into the skies of Paris in 1783. However, the development of hot air balloons did not progress for long, owing to lack of directional control and the potential fire hazards of the gases involved. Attempts for powered flight were made during the late 18th century but none met success until in 1903 when Wright brother flew the first engine driven propeller aircraft. [2][3]

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 1

2. EVOLUTION OF PROPELLERS PITCH CONTROL SYSTEMS:

The propellers were no different from the aerofoil used to generate lift in airplanes, so efficiency of propeller in design and construction were paramount importance for the optimum aerodynamic performance in flight. Unlike in wings, Lift that produced by the propeller aerofoil is considered as the thrust that propels the aircraft forward. If the angle of attack were the same from the root to the tip of the blade, the root would have a negative angle of attack and the tip would stall due to the increase of rotational velocity across the blade from root to tip. Solution soon came with the innovation of twisted blade configuration by Polish scientist, Stefan Drzewiecki in 1900. This design essentially helps blade to work at the optimum angle of attack at all its working sections (see fig 2 & 3) and keeps uniform distribution of lift across the blade, eliminating undue bending forces on the blade. [4] [17]

Fig2: Twisted Blade. Shaun.D (2010), Twisted Blade, NMIT. [Online] Available at < nd http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=6976> Accessed on 02 Dec 2010

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 2

Fig 3: Aerodynamics forces. Shaun. D (2010), Aerodynamic Forces, NMIT [Online] Available at < nd http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=7214 > Accessed on 02 Dec 2010

FIXED-PITCH PROPELLER
Early propellers were fixed pitch; they possess optimum operation characteristics only at a particular speed and RPM. So its always a compromise between climb or cruise performance. Inconsistent engine RPM due to varying torque from different flying conditions on the propeller blades were shortcomings of such designs, so operation of the engine in its optimum design configuration were never achieved. This also led to awful lot of work to pilots keeping the engine RPM constant. [8]

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 3

 VARIABLE-PITCH PROPELLER
It was not until in 1871 the French scientist named J. Croce-Spinelli made the proposal for a variable pitch propeller mechanism by using hydraulic pressure for higher aerodynamic performances. They could broadly classified two types, i.e. ground adjustable and controllable pitch propeller. The ground adjustable being the simplest of all, requires merely mechanical adjustment of the pitch by ground tools. Adjustment only be done on ground and often require disassembling of propeller blades from the hub (see fig 4). Such an adjustment is always biased for optimum performances in either of climb or cruise phase of flight. For instance, blade angle (High) positioned for cruise phase will impede the acceleration during takeoff by reducing Max engine RPM from increasing torque and hence the need for more runway at takeoff. [5][6]

Fig 4:Ground adjustable Propeller Shaun. D (2010), Ground adjustable Propeller, NMIT [Online] Available at < th http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=8655 > Accessed on 5 Dec 2010.

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 4

By the end of World War I, it was soon realized the need for further improvement on mechanism of variable pitch propellers for high speed flying at high altitudes. This necessitates the operation of In-flight adjustable propeller blades that could be manipulated by the pilot. The first type is the two-position variable propeller which changed to either fine or course pitch. The mechanism usually operated by single acting propeller actuation driven by hydraulic pressure. This only pressurizes at one end of the piston and reseats to its original position by the help of spring forces on releasing the oil pressure. This cause linkage connected to the offset actuating pins (see fig 5) machined at the butt of each blade to move. This gives the counter rotation of the blades and hence the desired pitch. By opening the valves to the pressure port or to the return port fine pitch adjustment for takeoff configuration or course pitch for cruise phase is accomplished.[7]

Pins

Fig 5: Pitch Mechanism Author Unknown (2010), Pitch Mechanism. McCauley. [Online] Available at < http://www.mccauley.textron.com/prop/prop-tech/pg02var-ptch.html > Accessed on 04th Dec 2010

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 5

 CONSTANT SPEED PROPELLER:

Following the World War II, automatic pitch control propellers were soon developed. This extended to operate an optimum blade angle for all flying condition and enables extracting of maximum thrust over wide range RPM and airspeed combinations. This essentially lowers the specific fuel consumption in flight. Hence, the operation became cheaper and efficient. [8] The mechanism involved hydraulically or electrically operated means of actuation. It utilizes a governor to maintain the selected RPM by the propeller lever. The governor consists of a speeder spring and a rotating flyweight attached to the driveshaft driven by the engine. The opposite forces produce by these components causes the movement of the pilot valve to change the oil flow in or out of the piston chamber. (See fig 6). This helps in slowing down an over speeding propeller and vice-versa. The reason for low pitch angle for takeoff is to maintain optimum angle of attack while achieving a High rpm output of the propeller. This configuration however changes to courser position at cruise phase to gain a reduced engine rpm for fuel saving while maintaining a maximum thrust. [17]

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 6

Fig 6: Governor Assembly. Tammer. L, Lippetti D (2010), Governor Assembly. CFI. [Online] Available at < http://www.lainesite.com/PDFs/cs_prop_basics.pdf > Accessed on 05th Dec 2010.

GOVERNOR OPERATION:
The direction of piston valve movement determines the direction of flow in or out of the piston. The movement of the piston valve is governed by which of the opposing forces produced by the flyweight and speeder spring takes precedence over the other (see fig 7). When the engine RPM is operating at the selected RPM setting, the centrifugal forces acting on the flyweight are balanced out by the opposing speeder spring and hence pilot valve forms a hydraulic lock and locks the blade angle in its position. The governor is then said to be on-speed. However, when the engine RPM increases above the selected RPM, governor senses an over speed condition. This result an increasing centrifugal force on the flyweights to overcome the speeder KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514 Page 7

spring tension and causing the flyweight tilt outwards. Raising the pilot valve open to the pressure lines and thereby moving the piston overcoming the spring pressure to increase the blade angle. The increase in angle of attack of the propeller blades increases the aerodynamic drag (more torque), thus lowering the RPM. During under-speed condition of the governor works exactly opposite. The loss of speed by the propeller causes the speeder spring tension to overcome the losing centrifugal force of the flyweights, driving the flyweights inwards. Thereby pushing pilot valve downwards and draining the oil to the oil sump. This lowers the oil pressure in the piston chamber and causes the spring force to push the piston aft and reduce the blade angle. This reduces the potential aerodynamic drag on the blades and increases the RPM accordingly. In both under and over speed condition once desired RPM is achieved, the pilot valve returns to its neutral position and locks the blade from any further movement. [9]

Fig7 : Governor Operation

Shaun. D (2010), Governor Operation. NMIT. [Online] Available at < th http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=7235> Accessed on 5 Dec 2010

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 8

Following diagrams (see fig 8) shows how propeller control lever could simulate a false overspeed or underspeed conditions to increase or decrease the RPM output of the propeller: Pilot selects higher RPM:
PROPELLER CONTROL LEVER

Pilot selects lower RPM:

Fig 8: Propeller control Lever-RPM selection

Tammer. L, Lippetti D (2010), Propeller Control Lever. CFI. [Online] Available at < http://www.lainesite.com/PDFs/cs_prop_basics.pdf > Accessed on 05th Dec 2010.

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 9

 HYDROMATIC PROP CONTROL: FULLY HYDRAULIC ACTUATION

The early-discussed mechanisms were pure hydro-mechanical in operation. They served an appreciable improvement in reliability and efficiency of variable pitch mechanism to conventional systems then. To meet the requirements of fast acting control systems of military jets for extreme maneuvers and accommodation of larger blades were only possible with the advent of hydromatic propeller developed by the Hamilton Standards in late 1930s. [10]

Fig 9: Hydromatic Dome Assembly.

Shaun. D (2010), Hydromatic Dome Assembly. NMIT [Online] Available at < th http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=7235> Accessed on 5 Dec 2010

The following mechanism uses fully hydraulically actuated piston to drive a piston rearward or forward within the propeller assembly, which causes the piston ram to move the cam rollers within two oppositely oriented cylindrical cam. One being outer cam is held fixed to the hub while the inner cam rotates. The movement of the ram piston rotates a bevel gear that is intermeshed with two other bevel gears located at

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 10

each blade butt. The movement of the piston is controlled by the governor and controls the blade angle (see fig 9).

DRIVESHAFT

Fig 10: Overspeed condition

Shaun. D (2010), Overspeed Condition. NMIT [Online] Available at < th http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=7235> Accessed on 5 Dec 2010

The operation is similar to the governor previously discussed. During overspeed condition the centrifugal forces exceeds the speeder spring and pulls the pilot valve upward(see fig 10). This uncovers port from the boost pump and pressurizes the inboard end of the piston and expelling the fluid from the outboard end, which drives the piston forward. The movement slides the cam rollers in the slots and converts the linear motion of the ram to rotary motion of the cylindrical cam. The bevel gears then drive the blades to higher blade angle and hence reducing the RPM.

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 11

DRIVESHAFT

Fig 11: Underspeed Condition

Shaun. D (2010), Underspeed Condition. NMIT [Online] Available at < th http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=7235> Accessed on 5 Dec 2010

It works exactly opposite how it worked in an overspeed condition. This time round, the pilot valve is forced downwards covering the port from the boost pump in the driveshaft and opening the drain port of the driveshaft (see fig 11). This drains the oil out from the inboard side of the piston and by the loss pressure cause the rearward movement of the piston. Thus, acceleration of the RPM is observed. [11]

Feathering Mechanism:
Feathering is a mechanism built-in to counter asymmetric drag caused by an engine failure in a multi-engine aircraft. This feature is in cooperated to prevent the occurring of a windmilling by the failed engine. Windmilling is a result of negative torque on the propeller blade trying to drive the dead engine by using airstream. This is caused by illusion on the governor sensing of a low RPM and driving to a fine

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 12

blade pitch (See fig 12). By doing so, it produces a negative thrust on the blades, hence an increase in drag.

Fig 12: Propeller Drag

Author unknown(2010), Propeller Drag. Pilot Outlook.com. [Online] Available at < th http://www.pilotoutlook.com/airplane_flying/propellers> Accessed on 5 Dec 2010

Therefore, full feathering propellers are always designed to decrease the blade pitch with increasing oil pressure, this essentially make the mechanism to drive to courser pitch following the loss of oil pressure from the failed engine. Feathering of blades drives the blade angle to 900 (see fig 13) and aligns the blades parallel to the airstream producing no thrust (lift) or drag. [12]

Fig 13: Feathered configuration

Shaun. D (2010), Feathered Position. , NMIT [Online] Available at < nd http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=7214 > Accessed on 02 Dec 2010

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 13

Operation Of Feathering:
During an engine failure, the oil pressure in the piston drops significantly and the spring pressure will overcome the loss oil pressure to drive the piston to the left(See fig 14). However, this force would not be enough to drive the blades to the fully feather position against increasing aerodynamic forces, so the extra force needed, comes from the added counterweights combined with the spring pressure.

Fig 14: Feathering Props

Shaun. D (2010), Feathering Props. NMIT [Online] Available at < th http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=7235> Accessed on 5 Dec 2010

In order to prevent feathering action during engine shutdown and causing unacceptable load for the starter motor on an engine start-up. The mechanism includes the centrifugal latching pins that engage into the piston grooves and prevent it from moving to the feathered position. The latching pins remains disengaged by the increased centrifugal force from high RPM. As the centrifugal forces decreases gradually with reducing RPM, the latch spring engages itself to the slotted piston grooves. Hence, stopping any further movement. [12] KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514 Page 14

Beta Mode:
Certain Turbo-prop aircraft are equipped with Beta Mode whereby the blade angle could be repositioned beyond the low pitch stop to negative angle of attack (see fig 15). This effectively makes the propeller work as reverse thrust which significantly reduce the landing strip and reduces the wear and tear of the brakes. This could only be activated only once the aircraft is on ground. [16]

Fig 15: Beta Mode

Shaun. D (2010), Beta Mode. , NMIT [Online] Available at < nd http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=7214 > Accessed on 02 Dec 2010

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 15

3. BLADE DESIGN EVOLUTION

In the past, propellers were made of wooden planks but did not last long in service due to nature of wood easily subjected to warps and cracks propagating through the wood grains. This involves all time monitoring of wooden blades in service before takeoff. The fact that density of wood is not uniform in its construction cause static and dynamic unbalance of the propellers during its operation. The solutions came up with beginning of industrial revolution by using aluminum alloys for its construction. With aluminum, the design of blades to complex shapes to achieve optimum aerodynamic performance was made possible. [13] As the engines became more and more powerful over the years, there was equal need for efficient absorption of power produced by the engine. Increasing blade diameter to achieve the optimum power transfer wasnt an acceptable means of approach for the problem. This is due to increasing diameter was limited by the ground clearance and the onset shock waves at the propeller tips. Solution came up by increasing the number of blades with shorter diameter. This reduces the potential of an onset of shock wave and became preferable choice of design for high speed propeller aircraft. [14] Evolution took a further step with the advent of Blended Airfoil technology enhancing the efficiency of the propeller design (see fig 16). This propeller in cooperates different airfoils shapes progressively across the blade cross section and introduced a sweptback design at the tips to counter the shock wave formation. The delaying of shockwave formation by the sweptback design, lowers the transonic drag and reduces the noise induced. Tip of the airfoil takes the shape of a supercritical wing to achieve the characteristics mentioned above while the mid section is slightly

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 16

cambered to maximize the thrust at lower speed optimizing the cruise performance. [15]

Fig 16: Blended Airfoil Author unknown (2010), Blended Airfoil. Hartzell Corp. [Online] Available at < th http://www.hartzellprop.com/news.php?pr=209 > Accessed on 7 Dec 2010

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 17

4. REFERENCE:
1. Author unknown (2010), Lenardo da Vinci, [online] Available at < st http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/vinci.php> [Accessed on 1 Dec 2010] 2. Author unknown (2010), History of aircraft Propellers [Online] Available at < rd http://www.freeessays.cc/db/8/asp17.shtml> [Accessed on 3 Dec 2010] 3. Author unknown (2009), History of flight, [online] Available at < http://www.learning-tofly.com/history-of-flight.html > [Accessed on 2nd Dec 2010] 4. Shaun .D (2010), Propeller Theory. NMIT. [Online] Available at < http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=7214> th [Accessed on 5 Dec 2010] 5. Shaun .D (2010), Propeller Types and Classification. NMIT. [Online] Available at < http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=8655> th [Accessed on 6 Dec 2010] 6. Day. A (2010), Variable-Pitch Propellers. U.S Centennial of flight commission. [Online] Available at < http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Evolution_of_Technology/props/Tech14.htm> [Accessed on 3rd Dec 2010] 7. Author Unknown (2010)., Variable Pitch Propellers. McCauley. [Online] Available at < th http://www.mccauley.textron.com/prop/prop-tech/pg02var-ptch.html> [ Accessed on 7 Dec 2010] 8. Author Unknown (2010), Aircraft Propellers. Experimental Aircraft Info. [Online] Available at < http://www.experimentalaircraft.info/homebuilt-aircraft/aircraft-propeller.php> [Accessed on 3rd Dec 2010]

9. Tammer. L, Lippetti D (2010) Understanding Constant Speed Propellers. CFI. [Online]

10. 11. Available at < http://www.laine-site.com/PDFs/cs_prop_basics.pdf > Accessed on 05th Dec 2010. Duncan. (2010). The Hamilton Standard Hydromatic Propeller. [Online] Available at < th http://vectaris.net/id697.html> [Accessed on 5 Dec 2010] Shaun. D (2010). Propeller Control. NMIT [Online] Available at < http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=7235> th [Accessed on 8 Dec 2010] Author Unknown (2010). Propellers. Pilot Outlook. [Online] Available at < http://www.pilotoutlook.com/airplane_flying/propellers > [Accessed on 8th Dec 2010] Swain. D (2007). Disadvantages of Aircraft Made of Wooden Propellers. [Online] Available at <http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/418892/four_disadvantages_of_aircraft_propellers th _pg2.html?cat=15> [Accessed on 5 Dec 2010] Scott. J (2001). Number of Aircraft Propeller Blades. Aerospaceweb.org.[Online] Available th ay <http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/propulsion/q0039.shtml> [Accessed on 7 Dec 2010] Author Unknown (2010). Blended Airfoil Technolgy . Hartzell Corp. [Online] Available at < th http://www.hartzellprop.com/news.php?pr=209 > [Accessed on 7 Dec 2010] Shaun.D (2010). Beta Mode. NMIT. [Online] Available at <http://ecampus.nmit.ac.nz/moodle/mod/book/view.php?id=51647&chapterid=7237> th [Accessed on 8 Dec 2010] Author Unknown (2010), Basic Propeller Principles. FlightLearning. [Online] Available at th <http://www.flightlearnings.com/basic-propeller-principles-part-two/384/> [Accessed on 15 Dec 2010]

12. 13.

14.

15. 16.

17.

KINGSTON UNIVERSITY-K0827514

Page 18