This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
UAV Icing: Ice Accretion Experiments and Validation
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published June 10, 2019 by SAE International in United States
This content contains downloadable datasetsAnnotation ability available
Atmospheric icing is a key challenge to the operational envelope of medium-sized fixed-wing UAVs. Today, several numeric icing codes exist, that all have been developed for general aviation applications. UAVs with wingspans of several meters typically operate at Reynolds numbers an order of magnitude lower than commercial and military aircraft. Therefore, the question arises to what extent the existing codes can be applied for low-Reynolds UAV applications to predict ice accretion. This paper describes an experimental campaign at the Cranfield icing wind tunnel on a RG-15 and a NREL S826 airfoil at low velocities (25-40m/s). Three meteorological icing conditions have been selected to represent the main ice typologies: rime, glaze, and mixed ice. Each case has been run at least twice in order to assess the repeatability of the experiments. Manual ice shape tracings have been taken at three spanwise locations for each icing case. The liquid water content calibration was performed according to ARP5905 using the icing blade method. The tests have initially shown significantly higher water contents than anticipated, which could be traced to dimensional differences of the blade at Cranfield, as well as low flow velocities. This systematic error was resolved by simulating the droplet collection coefficients on the off-specification blade. In addition to manual tracings, photogrammetry and a handheld laser-scanner were used to capture the ice shapes. The results indicate that manual tracings are still the most efficient method, although there is potential in exploring the alternatives further. Additionally, numerical simulations with two icing codes, LEWICE and FENSAP-ICE, were performed on a rime and a glaze case. For rime, the simulations show a good agreement with the experiment, whereas the glaze case exhibits significant differences.
CitationHann, R., "UAV Icing: Ice Accretion Experiments and Validation," SAE Technical Paper 2019-01-2037, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4271/2019-01-2037.
Data Sets - Support Documents
|[Unnamed Dataset 1]|
|[Unnamed Dataset 2]|
- Siquig, A. , “Impact of Icing on Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Operations,” Naval Environmental Prediction Research Facility, 1990.
- Hann, R. , “Opportunities and Challenges for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) in the Arctic,” in 13th ArcticNet Annual Scientific Meeting, 2017.
- Peck, L., Ryerson, C.C., and Martel, C.J. , “Army Aircraft Icing Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory,” September 2002.
- Bragg, M.B., Broeren, A.P., and Blumenthal, L.A. , “Iced-Airfoil Aerodynamics,” Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 41(5):323-362, 2005, doi:10.1016/j.paerosci.2005.07.001.
- Szilder, K. and McIlwain, S. , “In-Flight Icing of UAVs - The Influence of Reynolds Number on the Ice Accretion Process,” SAE Technical Paper 2011-01-2572, 2011, doi:10.4271/2011-01-2572.
- Koenig, G.G., Ryerson, C.C., and Kmiec, R. , “UAV Icing Flight Simulation,” in 40th Aerospace Sciences Meeting & Exhibit, Reno, 2002, AIAA-2002-0812.
- Tran, P., Baruzzi, G., Tremblay, F., Benquet, P. et al. , “FENSAP-ICE Applications to Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV),” in 42nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 390-402, 2004.
- Szilder, K. and Yuan, W. , “In-Flight Icing on Unmanned Aerial Vehicle and its Aerodynamic Penalties,” Prog. Flight Phys. 9:173-188, 2017, doi:10.1051/eucass/201709173.
- Hann, R. , “UAV Icing: Comparison of LEWICE and FENSAP-ICE for Ice Accretion and Performance Degradation,” in 2018 Atmospheric and Space Environments Conference, AIAA Aviation, Atlanta, ISBN 978-1-62410-558-6, 2018, doi:10.2514/6.2018-2861.
- Hann, R. , “UAV Icing: Comparison of LEWICE and FENSAP-ICE for Anti-Icing Loads,” in AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum, San Diego, AIAA, 2019, doi:10.2514/6.2019-1286, ISBN AIAA 2019-1286.
- Williams, N., Benmeddour, A., Brian, G., and Ol, M. , “The Effect of Icing on Small Unmanned Aircraft Low Reynolds Number Airfoils,” in 17th Australian International Aerospace Congress, AIAC, Melbourne, 2017.
- Liu, Y., Li, L., and Hu, H. , “Effects of Ice Accretion on the Aerodynamic Performance and Wake Characteristics of an UAS Propeller Model,” in 2018 Atmos. Sp. Environ. Conf., 1-17, 2018, doi:10.2514/6.2018-3496.
- Aerospace Information Report , “Icing Wind Tunnel Interfacility Comparison Tests,” AIR5666, 2012.
- Battisti, L. , Wind Turbines in Cold Climates (Springer, 2015).
- Hammond, D.W. and Luxford, G. , “The Cranfield University Icing Tunnel,” in 41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 2003.
- Rohatgi, A. , “WebPlotDigitizer,” www.automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer, Feb., 2019.
- Habashi, W.G., Aubé, M., Baruzzi, G., Morency, F., et al. , “FENSAP-ICE : A Fully-3D in-Flight Icing Simulation System for Aircraft , Rotorcraft and UAVs,” in 24th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences, ICAS, 2004.
- SAE International , “ARP5905 Calibration and Acceptance of Icing Wind Tunnels,” Aerospace Recommended Practice ARP5905, 2015.
- Macklin, W.C. , “The Density and Structure of Ice Formed by Accretion,” Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 1962.
- Jones, K.F. , “The Density of Natural Ice Accretions Related to Nondimensional Icing Parameters,” Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 1990.
- Vargas, M., Broughton, H., Levy, P., Sims, J.J. et al. , “Local and Total Density Measurements in Ice Shapes,” J. Aircr., 2007.
- NATO RTO Technical Report 38 , “Ice Accretion Simulation Evaluation Test,” RTO-TR-038 AC/323(AVT-006)TP/26, 2001.
- Occipital Inc. , “Structure Sensor,” www.structure.io/structure-sensor, February 2019, Sep. 2003.
- AgiSoft , “PhotoScan Professional,” www.agisoft.com/downloads/installer, Feb. 2019.