See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304956179

The evolution of helicopters

Article in Journal of Applied Physics July 2016
DOI: 10.1063/1.4954976

CITATIONS

READS

176

4 authors, including:
Sylvie Lorente

Adrian Bejan

Institut National des Sciences Appliques de

Duke University

219 PUBLICATIONS 4,480 CITATIONS

691 PUBLICATIONS 28,046 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

letting you access and read them immediately.

SEE PROFILE

Available from: Adrian Bejan

Retrieved on: 30 September 2016

The evolution of helicopters

R. Chen, C. Y. Wen, S. Lorente, and A. Bejan
Citation: Journal of Applied Physics 120, 014901 (2016); doi: 10.1063/1.4954976
View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4954976
View Table of Contents: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/jap/120/1?ver=pdfcov
Published by the AIP Publishing
Articles you may be interested in
The evolution of airplanes
J. Appl. Phys. 116, 044901 (2014); 10.1063/1.4886855
Helicopter Toy and Lift Estimation
Phys. Teach. 51, 310 (2013); 10.1119/1.4801367
Micropropulsion and microrheology in complex fluids via symmetry breaking
Phys. Fluids 24, 103102 (2012); 10.1063/1.4758811
A Lagrangian subgrid-scale model with dynamic estimation of Lagrangian time scale for large eddy simulation of
complex flows
Phys. Fluids 24, 085101 (2012); 10.1063/1.4737656
Invited Article: Time accurate mass flow measurements of solid-fueled systems
Rev. Sci. Instrum. 79, 101301 (2008); 10.1063/1.2982492

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 5.1.65.194 On: Sat, 30 Jul 2016
14:31:20

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS 120, 014901 (2016)

The evolution of helicopters

R. Chen,1 C. Y. Wen,1 S. Lorente,2 and A. Bejan3,a)
1

Department of Mechanical Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong
Universit
e de Toulouse, INSA, 135 Avenue de Rangueil, 31077 Toulouse, France
3
Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, Duke University, Durham,
North Carolina 27708-0300, USA
2

(Received 12 April 2016; accepted 17 June 2016; published online 1 July 2016)
Here, we show that during their half-century history, helicopters have been evolving into geometrically similar architectures with surprisingly sharp correlations between dimensions, performance, and body size. For example, proportionalities emerge between body size, engine size, and the
fuel load. Furthermore, the engine efficiency increases with the engine size, and the propeller radius
is roughly the same as the length scale of the whole body. These trends are in accord with the constructal law, which accounts for the engine efficiency trend and the proportionality between
motor size and body size in animals and vehicles. These body-size effects are qualitatively the
same as those uncovered earlier for the evolution of aircraft. The present study adds to this theoretical body of research the evolutionary design of all technologies [A. Bejan, The Physics of Life:
The Evolution of Everything (St. Martins Press, New York, 2016)]. Published by AIP Publishing.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4954976]

I. INTRODUCTION

Earlier work with the constructal law has shown that it is

possible to predict and correlate the speed-mass data of all
animals (insects, birds, mammals, fish, and crustaceans),
including airplanes, athletics, and inanimate flow systems.15
All these designs of movement on the globe evolve. Airplanes
do not evolve by themselvesthey evolve as a duo, with the
humans who design them and use them. Evolving along with
the flying animals is the human and machine species.
The history of airplanes illustrates in our lifetime the
evolutionary design of all fliers, animal, and human made, as
they move on earth: farther, faster, more efficiently, and with
greater lasting power (sustainability). Recent work has shown
that the evolution of airplanes is predictable from the constructal
law of design and evolution in nature.1,6 The main features of
aircraft evolutionary design predicted from the constructal law
are the speed, engine size, fuel load, range, and aspect ratios
(wing span vs fuselage length, wing profile, fuselage profile).
The same theory accounts for the alignment of 1950 aircraft
data in Gabrielli and von Karmans chart of specific power vs
speed,7,8 which along with the broader method of evolutionary
design continues to be of interest in the aircraft literature.914
The constructal law further predicts the time arrow of the
change from propellers to jets, in the same way that for animal
design it predicts the change (and the increase in movement
complexity) from swimming to running and, finally, flying.
In this new article, we report a new domain where the
constructal law manifests itself as the evolution of vehicle
technology. We show that the classical alignment of helicopter designs can be anticipated based on the constructal law,
and that it can be added to the grand evolutionary design of
animal and vehicle movement on the globe.
a)

Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail:

[email protected].

0021-8979/2016/120(1)/014901/7/$30.00

The current findings can also be applied to foreseeing

evolution of the emerging Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
(UAVs). Starting from the last decade, the UAVs are gaining
rapid popularity, which is attributed to the rapid advance and
maturing of information technologies and autonomous
capabilities.15,16 Many military and civil endeavors have
served to showcase the potential of UAVs, such as aerial
photography and selfie, border surveillance, highway traffic
monitoring, wildfire management, agricultural chemical
spraying, and other disaster response needs. An UAV, either
rotorcraft or fixed-wing vehicle, is operated without pilots
and does not carry any passengers. Nevertheless, the navigation is still the controlled body with the power source, which
uses the dynamic lift and thrust based on fundamental
aerodynamics.17
II. EVOLUTIONARY TRENDS

We start with the dimensions and performance data of helicopter models during their 60-year history (Table I). The data
are collected from Ref. 18 and the Type Certificate Data Sheet
of FAA and EASA. Figures 14 show at first glance that during the evolution of helicopter technology, very sharp correlations have emerged between design features and body size.
Each of Figures 14 display the helicopter data of Table I
with two symbols. The black circles indicate military helicopters. The empty circles are for the rest of the data compiled in
Table I. The purpose of this two-frame display of the bodysize effect on evolutionary design is to show that the correlations that emerge are somewhat sharper when the military
models are excluded (note the relatively larger R2 values).
This finding makes sense because the evolution of military
models is driven by an objective (mission) that is not exactly
the same as the objective of civilian helicopter models.
For conciseness, the analytical formulas that correlate
the data (without the military data) are reported directly on

120, 014901-1

Published by AIP Publishing.

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 5.1.65.194 On: Sat, 30 Jul 2016
14:31:20

014901-2

Chen et al.

J. Appl. Phys. 120, 014901 (2016)

TABLE I. Helicopter models, and their dimensions and performance (m: military models).

Model

Year

Engine model

Alpi Syton AH 130

Robinson R66
Bell 206A
MD 500E
Bell 206B
MD 520N
MD 530F
Airbus Helicopter SA 318C
Airbus Helicopter EC120B
Airbus Helicopter SA 341G
Bell 206L
MD 600N
Bell 206L-1
Airbus Helicopter SA 342J
Airbus Helicopter AS 350B
Airbus Helicopter SA 315B
Bell 206L-3
Airbus Helicopter AS 355E
Airbus Helicopter SA 316B
Airbus Helicopter AS 350B3
Airbus Helicopter SA 316C
Airbus Helicopter SA 319B
Bell 407
Airbus Helicopter AS 355F
Agusta A109
Agusta A109A
Airbus Helicopter AS 355N
Airbus Helicopter EC135 T1
Agusta A109C
Airbus Helicopter EC135 P1
Airbus Helicopter EC135 P2
Airbus Helicopter EC135 T2
MD Explorer
Agusta A109K2
AW119MKII
Bell 427
Agusta A109E Power
Airbus Helicopter EC635 P3
Agusta A109S
Bell 429
Airbus Helicopter BK117 A-4
Airbus Helicopter BK117 B-2
Bell 222
Airbus Helicopter BK117 C-2
Airbus Helicopter EC145
Mi-2
Bell 222B
Bell 230
Bell 204B
Bell 205A
Airbus Helicopter SA 365N
(m) Kawasaki OH-1
Airbus Helicopter SA 365N1
Bell 430
Airbus Helicopter AS 365N2
Airbus Helicopter AS 365N3
Bell 205A-1
(m) Bell UH-1H
(m) Bell AH-1F

2008
Solar T62
2010
RR 300
1966
RR 250-C18B
1982
RR 250-C20B
1971
RR 250-C20
1991
RR 250-C20R/2
1985
RR 250-C30
1964
Turbomeca Astazou IIA
1997
Turbomeca Arrius 2F
1972 Turbomeca ASTAZOU IIIA
1975
RR 250-C20B
1997
RR 250-C47M
1978
RR 250-C28
1976 Turbomeca ASTAZOU XIV H
1977
Turbomeca Arriel 1B
1970 Turbomeca ARTOUSTE III B
1981
RR 250-C30P
1980
RR 250-C20F
1970
Turbomeca Artouste IIC
1997
Turbomeca Arriel 2B
1971 Turbomeca ARTOUSTE III D
1971 Turbomeca ASTAZOU XIV B
1996
RR 250-C47B
1981
RR 250-C20F
1971
RR 250-C20
1976
RR 250-C20B
1989
Turbomeca Arrius 1A
1996
Turbomeca Arrius 2B1
1989
RR 250-C20R/1
1996
PW 206B
2001
PW 206B2
2002
Turbomeca Arrius 2B2
1996
PW206A
1992
TURBOMECA Arriel 1K1
2007
PT6B-37A
2000
PW207D
1996
Turbomeca Arrius 2K1
2015
PW 206B3
2005
PW207C
2009
HTS 900
1986
LTS 101-650B-1
1992
LTS 101-750B
1983
LTS 101-650C-3/3A
2000
Turbomeca Arriel 1E2
2002
Turbomeca Arriel 1E2
1965
PZL GTD-350W
1983
LTS 101-750C-1
1992
RR 250-C30G2
1963
T5309A
1968
T5311A
1981
Turbomeca Arriel 1C
2000
TS1-M-10
1983
Turbomeca Arriel 1C1
1999
RR 250-C40B
1989
Turbomeca Arriel 1C2
1997
Turbomeca Arriel 2C
1968
T5313A
1970
T53-L-13B
1995
T53-L-703

Number of Engine Maximum T-O

Radius of
SFC
Fuel
engines
mass (kg)
weight (kg)
propeller (m) (lb/shp h) capacity (l)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1

64
91
64
71.7
71.7
76.7
115.1
140
103.5
147.5
71.7
126.3
106
160
120
173
112.4
71.7
178
134
178
160
113.85
71.7
71.7
71.7
101.3
114
78.5
118.9
117.2
114.3
108
123
184.8
113.7
112.8
116.9
113.7
142.9
127
123
109
125
125
140
111
117.93
220
225
116
152
118
127
119
131
246.8
247
247

580
1225
1360
1361
1451.5
1591
1610
1650
1680
1800
1814.4
1859
1882
1900
1950
1950
2018
2100
2200
2250
2250
2250
2268
2300
2450
2600
2600
2630
2720
2720
2835
2835
2835
2850
2850
2970
3000
3000
3175
3175
3200
3350
3560
3585
3585
3700
3742
3810
3855
3855
4000
4000
4100
4218
4250
4300
4309
4309
4500

3.82
5.03
N/A
4.05
N/A
4.2
4.16
5.1
5
5.25
N/A
4.19
N/A
5.25
5.46
5.51
N/A
5.345
5.5
5.35
5.51
5.51
5.33
5.345
5.5
5.5
5.345
5.1
5.5
5.1
5.1
5.1
5.15
5.5
5.415
N/A
5.5
5.2
5.415
N/A
5.5
5.5
6.1
5.5
5.5
7.25
N/A
N/A
6.35
N/A
5.965
5.8
5.972
6.4
5.972
5.972
N/A
N/A
6.8

N/A
N/A
0.65
0.65
0.65
0.608
0.592
0.623
N/A
N/A
0.65
0.58
0.606
N/A
0.573
N/A
0.592
0.65
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.58
0.65
0.65
0.65
N/A
N/A
0.608
0.548
N/A
N/A
0.574
N/A
N/A
0.555
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.54
0.577
0.577
0.572
N/A
N/A
0.817
0.577
0.592
N/A
0.68
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.57
N/A
N/A
0.58
0.6
0.568

N/A
282
287.7
242
287.7
235
242.3
580
410
457
371
440
371
457
540
565
419
736
565
540
565
565
483.7
736
550
550
736
680
N/A
680
680
680
564
468
595
770L
595
680
563
821L
607.6
697
670
N/A
879
N/A
709
709
605
832.8
1144.7
N/A
1134.5
710L
1134.5
1134.5
832.8
789
N/A

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 5.1.65.194 On: Sat, 30 Jul 2016
14:31:20

014901-3

Chen et al.

J. Appl. Phys. 120, 014901 (2016)

TABLE I. (Continued.)

Model

Year

Engine model

Mitsubishi MH 2000
(m) US Helicopter AH-1S
Sikorsky S-76A
Bell 210
Airbus Helicopter EC155B
Airbus Helicopter EC155B1
Bell 212
(m)AW Lynx
Sikorsky S-76B
Sikorsky S-76C
Sikorsky S-76D
Bell 412
Bell 412EP
Kaman K-Max
HAL Dhruv
Sikorsky S-58T
(m) Airbus Helicopters Tiger
AW 159
W-3 Sokol
(m) Bell AH-1W
Kamov Ka-60
Airbus Helicopters SA 330J
(m) BoeingSikorsky RAH66A
Bell 214ST
(m) Bell-UH-1Y
Airbus Helicopter AS 332L1
Airbus Helicopters AS 332 L2
(m) Boeing AH 64D
(m) Sikorsky HH-60G
(m) NHIndustries NH90
(m) NHIndustries NH90 NFH/TTH
Airbus Helicopter EC225LP
(m) Mi-35M
Airbus Helicopter EC725
(m) Mi-24
Sikorsky S-92
Airbus Helicopter SA 321F
(m) Mi-17
Mi-38
AW EH101-500
(m) AW EH101-400
(m) Mi-26

1996
1996
1978
2005
1998
2002
1971
1990
1985
1991
2012
1983
1994
1994
2002
1972
1991
2009
1979
1980
2010
1976
1996
1982
2008
1984
1986
1995
1991
2007
2013
2004
2005
2005
1972
2002
1993
1977
2003
1994
2003
1983

Mitsubishi MG5-110
T53-L-703
RR 250-C30
T5317B
Turbomeca Arriel 2C1
Turbomeca Arriel 2C2
PT6T-3B
RR Gem 42
PT6B-36
Turbomeca Arriel 2S1
PW210S
PT6T-3B
PT6T-3D
T5317A
Turbomeca TM333-2B2
PT6T-6
MTR 390
CTS800-4N
PZL-10W
T700-GE-401
RD-600 V
Turbomeca Turmo IV C
T800-LHT-801
CT7-2A
T700-GE-401C
Turbomeca Makila 1A1
Turbomeca Makila 1A2
RTM 322-01/12
T700-GE-700
RTM 322-01/9
T700-GE-T6E
Turbomeca Makila 2A
TV3-117VMA
Turbomeca Makila 1A4
TV3-117V
CT7-8A
Turbomeca Turmo IIIC3
VK-2500
TV7-117V
CT7-6
RTM 322-02/8
Lotarev D-136

each of the graphs of Figs. 14. Indicated is also the R2 value

of each correlation, which shows that the correlation is statistically meaningful. The corresponding correlations obtained
by including the military data are indicated in the respective
figure captions. In these empirical formulas, the masses (M,
Me, Mf) are expressed in kg, the propeller radius Rp is
expressed in m, and the heating value of the fuel (H) is
expressed in shp h/lb (or 5.9  106 J/kg), where shp means
shaft horse power. The engine efficiency g is defined in
Section III.
Figure 1 shows that the efficiencies (g) of helicopter
engines have evolved such that g is proportional to the
engine size (Me) raised to a power that is less than 1. This is

Number of Engine Maximum T-O

Radius of
SFC
Fuel
engines
mass (kg)
weight (kg)
propeller (m) (lb/shp h) capacity (l)
2
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
3
3
2

154
247
115.1
248
129.2
131.5
299
183
169
131.2
162.4
299
325
256
156
305
154
173.7
141
197
220
230
149.7
212
208
241
247
249
198
233
220
279
310
247
285
246
225
295
360
220
248
1050

4500
4536
4762
4762.7
4800
4920
5080
5125
5307
5307
5386
5397
5397
5443
5500
5897
6000
6000
6400
6690
6750
7400
7896
7938
8391
8600
9300
9525
9900
10 600
10 600
11 000
11 500
11 751
12 000
12 020
13 000
13 500
14 200
14 290
14 600
56 000

6.1
N/A
N/A
N/A
6.3
6.3
7.32
N/A
6.7
N/A
N/A
7
N/A
7.35
6.6
N/A
N/A
6.5
7.85
7.3
6.75
7.95
5.95
7.92
7.44
7.8
8.1
7.3
7.05
8.15
N/A
8.1
N/A
8.1
8.65
8.58
9.45
10.63
10.55
9.3
9.3
16

N/A
0.568
0.592
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.596
0.65
0.594
N/A
N/A
0.596
0.601
0.59
0.529
0.592
N/A
0.448
0.598
0.464
N/A
0.629
0.462
0.473
0.459
0.481
N/A
0.45
0.459
0.42
0.434
N/A
0.473
N/A
0.485
0.452
0.603
0.485
0.439
0.47
0.45
0.456

N/A
511
1084
780
1256
1256
N/A
N/A
1084
1084
1128
N/A
1277.5
N/A
N/A
1400
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1565
N/A
N/A
1438
2043
2043
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2588
N/A
N/A
N/A
2896
N/A
N/A
3942
4235
N/A
N/A

in accord with the prediction based on the constructal law,4

according to which g should vary as Mea , where a < 1.
In Fig. 2, we see the correlation of the engine size
(Me) versus vehicle size. The two frames, together, reveal
an approximate proportionality between engine size and
body size, and, in addition, a ratio Me/M that is in the order
of 1/10. This finding is the same as in the engine size
versus body size scaling exhibited by the evolution of
airplanes.6
Figure 3 shows that the engine size and the fuel load
have emerged to be proportional over a size range that spans
one full order of magnitude. The engine mass is roughly one
third of the fuel load mass over this entire range. This too

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 5.1.65.194 On: Sat, 30 Jul 2016
14:31:20

014901-4

Chen et al.

FIG. 1. Bigger engines are more efficient: the correlation between engine efficiency and engine size. In the indicated correlation, the military helicopter
data (the black circles) were not included. If the military data are included,
the correlation becomes gH 0:53 Me0:25 , with R2 0.79.

agrees with the trend uncovered for the evolution of

aircraft.6
Figure 4 reveals the correlation that emerged between the
helicopter propeller radius (Rp) and the vehicle size, which is
represented by the maximum take-off mass (M). The figure
shows that the propeller radius varies monotonically with the
vehicle size, where Rp emerged as proportional to M0.3.

J. Appl. Phys. 120, 014901 (2016)

FIG. 3. The proportionality between fuel load and engine size. In the indicated correlation, the military helicopter data (the black circles) were not
included. If the military data are included, the correlation becomes
Me 0.29 Mf, with R2 0.79.

Because the vehicle size M is proportional to the vehicle length

scale cubed (L3), the proportionality between Rp and M0.3
means that Rp is essentially proportional to L.
The geometric meaning of the body-size scaling
revealed by Fig. 4 is that the propeller radius scales with the
length scale of the vehicle, and that all helicopters (large and
small, old and new) are geometrically similar. This conclusion is the same as the one reached in the study of the evolution of aircraft, where all aircraft evolve to be geometrically
similar, with the wing span almost the same as the fuselage
length.6
The geometric similarity of old and new helicopter models is evident in Fig. 5. Furthermore, the figure shows that
during the past five decades the specific fuel consumption
(SFC) has decreased to half of its original level. This too is
in accord with the evolution of the specific fuel consumption
of commercial aircraft (measured in liters of fuel spent for
one seat and 100 km flown).6 The specific fuel consumption
plotted in Fig. 5 is defined in Section III.
III. DISCUSSION

As shown in studies of the evolution of commercial aircraft and animals,6,8,1921 theory can deepen our understanding of the origin of body-size scaling. We start with the

FIG. 2. Bigger engines belong on bigger helicopters: the proportionality

between engine mass and helicopter mass. The first graph shows the linear
correlation of the data of Table I; the second graph shows the power-law
correlation. In the indicated correlations, the military helicopter data (the
black circles) were not included. If the military data are included, the linear
correlation becomes Me 0.05 M, R2 0.87, and the power-law becomes
Me 0.24 M0.83, R2 0.90.

FIG. 4. Bigger propellers belong on bigger helicopters: the rough proportionality between propeller radius and helicopter length scale, or body mass
raised to the power 1/3. In the indicated correlation, the military helicopter
data (the black circles) were not included. If the military data are included,
the correlation becomes Rp 0.47 M0.31, with R2 0.88.

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 5.1.65.194 On: Sat, 30 Jul 2016
14:31:20

014901-5

Chen et al.

J. Appl. Phys. 120, 014901 (2016)

FIG. 5. The evolution of the specific fuel consumption of helicopters during the past five decades. The black circles indicate military helicopters (see m in
Table I).

observation that a hovering aircraft such as a helicopter can

move in all directions. Chief among these is the vertical
direction: the main function of the aircraft is to hover, i.e., to
maintain its altitude above ground. Secondary is the sliding
movement in the horizontal direction. The simplest model is
the one that retains the fewest and most important features of
the actual physical system. This is why we begin with the
assumption that the hovering body is stationary at its altitude, while consuming fuel to maintain itself in this position
for the longest time possible.
Thermodynamics shows that larger flow systems function less irreversibly, because their flows encounter smaller
obstacles, such as wider ducts and larger heat transfer areas
in heat exchangers. The monotonic effect of size on efficiency was predicted in Ref. 4. The mathematical conclusion
is that if the size of the engine is represented by its mass Me,
then the energy conversion efficiency of the engine evolves
such that it increases monotonically with size
g c1 Mae ;

(1)

where c1 is a constant factor. The a exponent is comparable

with 1, and must be less than 1 because the g curve must be
concave with respect to Me: this is because in accord with
thermodynamics, the efficiency cannot surpass an ideal level,
a ceiling. The more mature the engine technology, the higher
the efficiency, the closer to the ideal level, and the smaller
the a exponent. The engine efficiency is defined as
g

Pt
;
HMf

(2)

where P is the shaft power from engine, t is the time of hovering, H is the heating value of the fuel, and Mf is the mass

of consumed fuel. The specific fuel consumption (SFC) is

the quantity of fuel consumed in order to produce one unit of
power in one unit of time22
SFC

Mf
:
Pt

(3)

By comparing Eq. (3) with Eq. (2), we see that

g

1
;
SFC  H

(4)

or, gH 1=SFC. By using the helicopter data compiled in

Table I, we found the correlation shown in Fig. 1.
The rotor hovering efficiency (gp) is defined as the ratio of
the minimum possible power required to hover (induced
power) to the actual power required to hover (shaft power).
The total hover power is a value that can be obtained only by
measurement. Unfortunately, we did not have access to measurements of performance. In any case, care must be taken when
comparing rotors. Only rotors with the same disk loading
should be compared. Testing is the only way to figure out the
relationship between the gp and the radius of the propeller.
Noteworthy is the study23 that reported the static testing of
micro propellers. A load cell and a torque transducer were used
to measure the thrust and torque created by the propeller. The
results show that a larger-diameter propeller tends to be more
efficient, which is in accord with the body-size effect anticipated with the constructal law.1,4 At the design loading of the
rotor, a value of gp 0.550.60 is typical. Because of this narrow range, in the following analysis we treat gp as a constant.
The size of the hovering aircraft is represented by its
total mass M, which accounts for everything that hovers,
engine (Me), propeller (Mp), fuel (Mf) and the rest of the
body frame (Mb)

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 5.1.65.194 On: Sat, 30 Jul 2016
14:31:20

014901-6

Chen et al.

J. Appl. Phys. 120, 014901 (2016)

M Me Mp Mf Mb :

Assume that the engine mass Me varies, while the other

masses do not vary. Consequently, the total mass changes
with the engine mass. We explore the idea that there is a
certain relationship between the engine mass and the total
helicopter mass when considering that best performance
means maximum hovering time for a given amount of fuel.
To start, from Eq. (2) we find that the engine power output
is
_ f =t:
P Hg M

(6)

The engine power is responsible for the force (the thrust, T)

that holds the hovering body at constant altitude. The relationship between P and T is
T

1
g P;
V p

(7)

where T and V are the thrust and the induced air velocity,
respectively.22 The induced velocity is V (T/2qA)1/2,
where q is air density, and A is the rotor disk, i.e., the circular area swept by the blades of the rotor. The vertical equilibrium of the hovering body requires
T Mg:

(8)

Combining Eqs. (6)(8), where t is the duration of the hovering flight, we obtain
t

HMf ggp 0:56Mf Mae gp

Mae

K 1:5
;
TV
TV
M

(9)

where K 0:56 Mf gp g3=2 2q1=2 is treated as constant, and

M varies linearly with Me as shown in Eq. (5). The maximum hovering time is obtained by maximizing t with respect
to Me, and the result is
Me 2
a < 1:
3
M

(10)

In conclusion, the evolutionary designs should tend toward vehicles with a certain proportion between engine size
and total body size. This is in accord with the empirical correlation found in Fig. 2 and is the same as the proportionality
between muscle mass and total body mass in animal
design1921 and the proportionality between engine mass and
total mass in airplane design.1,6
In Fig. 4, we saw that a larger helicopter carries larger
blades. A relation between Rp and M is22
CT =r

T
pRp
T

constant:
2 Nc
2 3
qNC
Rp

qA RX

T
constant;
qNcX2 R3p

(5)

(11)

Under hovering conditions, CT/r can be thought of as the lift

coefficient per blade. The number of blades is N. Here, it is
assumed that the mean angle of attack of the blade is a constant. The thrust coefficient CT is equal to T/[qA(R X)2],
where X is angular speed of the rotor, r is the rotor solidity,
which is equal to Nc/(pRp) where c is the chord of the blade.
Equation (11) becomes

(12)

and, in view of T Mg, we arrive at the proportionality

1

Rp  M 3 :

(13)

This is in agreement with Fig. 4, which shows that if a power

function is used for curve-fitting, then Rp emerges as proportional to M0.3. This means that Rp is roughly proportional
to the length scale of the helicopter, which is proportional
to M1/3. This agrees with a correlation of data reported in
Ref. 24.
In summary, the evolution of helicopters adds itself to
the universal phenomenon of evolution,1,25 which is exhibited by all flow systems that are free to morph as they flow:
animate, inanimate, and engineered. The latter are the technology evolutions responsible for empowered humansthe
evolving human and machine species.13 The application of
the constructal law to the evolution and spreading of UAVs
recommends itself as a subject for future investigation.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank the Research Grants Council, Hong

Kong, for the financial support under Contract No. C501014E. Professor Bejan also thanks the U.S. National Science
Foundation for supporting his research activity during this
period.
1

A. Bejan, The Physics of Life: The Evolution of Everything (St. Martins

Press, New York, 2016).
2
A. Bejan, Shape and Structure, from Engineering to Nature (Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000).
3
A. Bejan and S. Lorente, The constructal law and the evolution of design
in nature, Phys. Life Rev. 8, 209240 (2011).
4
A. Bejan, Why the bigger live longer and travel farther: Animals,
vehicles, rivers and the winds, Sci. Rep. 2, 594 (2012).
5
A. Bejan, Rolling stones and turbulent eddies: Why the bigger live longer
and travel farther, Sci. Rep. 6, 21445 (2016).
6
A. Bejan, J. D. Charles, and S. Lorente, The evolution of airplanes,
J. Appl. Phys. 116, 044901 (2014).
7
G. Gabrielli and Th. von Karman, What Price Speed?, Mech. Eng. 72,
775781 (1950).
8
A. Bejan, J. D. Charles, S. Lorente, and E. H. Dowell, Evolution of airplanes, and What price speed?, AIAA J. 54, 11161119 (2016).
9
S. Teitler and R. E. Proodian, What price speeds, revisited, J. Energy 4,
4648 (1980).
10
B. H. Carson, Fuel efficiency of small aircraft, J. Aircr. 19, 473479
(1982).
11
J. Yong, R. Smith, L. Hatano, and S. Hillmansen, What price speed
revisited, Ingenia 22, 4651 (2005).
12
D. Paul, L. Kelly, and V. Venkayya, Evolution of U. S. Military aircraft
structures technology, J. Aircr. 39, 1829 (2002).
13
Y. S. Ong, P. B. Nair, and A. J. Keane, Evolutionary optimization of
computationally expensive problems via surrogate modeling, AIAA J.
41, 687696 (2003).
14
K. Chiba, Y. Makino, and T. Takatoya, Evolutionary-based multidisciplinary design exploration for the silent supersonic technology demonstrator
wing, J. Aircr. 45, 14811494 (2008).
15
M. S. Francis, Unmanned air systems: Challenge and opportunity,
J. Aircr. 49(6), 16521665 (2012).
16
M. S. Francis, Design of next generation unmanned air systemsissues
and opportunities, in AIAA 2008-8978, The 26th Congress of
International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS), 1419
September 2008, Anchorage, Alaska.

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 5.1.65.194 On: Sat, 30 Jul 2016
14:31:20

014901-7
17

Chen et al.

K. Nonami, Prospect and recent research and development for civil use
autonomous unmanned aircraft as UAV and MAV, J. Syst. Des. Dyn.
1(2), 120128 (2007).
18
P. Jackson, K. Munson, and L. Peacock, Janes all the World Aircraft
(Janes Information Group, London, 19951996).
19
K. Schmidt-Nielsen, Scaling: Why Is Animal Size So Important?
(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1984).
20
E. R. Weibel, Symmorphosis: On Form and Function in Shaping Life
(Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000).

J. Appl. Phys. 120, 014901 (2016)

21

B. K. Ahlborn, Zoological Physics (Springer, Berlin, 2004).

W. Johnson, Helicopter Theory (Dover, New York, 1994).
23
J. B. Brandt and M. S. Selig, Propeller performance data at low Reynolds
numbers, in 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 47 January 2011,
Orlando, FL, AIAA Paper No. 2011-1255, 2011.
24
W. Johnson, Rotocraft Aeromechanics (Cambridge University Press, New
York, 2013).
25
A. Bejan, Maxwells demons everywhere: Evolving design as the arrow
of time, Sci. Rep. 4, 4017 (2014).
22

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 5.1.65.194 On: Sat, 30 Jul 2016
14:31:20