EML 4905 Senior Design Project

A SENIOR DESIGN PROJECT PREPARED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

SAE BRAZIL AERODESIGN CHALLENGE Final Report

Miguel Jimenez Ricardo Andres Lugo Carlos Daniel Rojas Advisors: Andres Tremante, Ph. D. George S. Dulikravich, Ph. D. 1 December 2010

This report is written in partial fulfillment of the requirements in EML 4905. The contents represent the opinion of the authors and not the Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering.

Table of Contents
Ethics Statement and Signatures ................................................................................. v Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................... vi List of Figures ............................................................................................................ vii List of Tables .............................................................................................................. xi Abstract .................................................................................................................... xii 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................1
1.1 Problem Statement ...................................................................................................1 1.2. Motivation ..................................................................................................................2 1.3 Literature Survey ..........................................................................................................2

2. Project Formulation ................................................................................................6

2.1. Overview .....................................................................................................................6 2.2. Project Objectives ........................................................................................................6 2.3. Design Specifications, Constraints and Other Considerations ........................................6

3. Design Alternatives ............................................................................................... 14

3.1. Overview of Conceptual Designs Developed ............................................................... 14
3.1.1. Selection of Wings ..................................................................................................................... 15 3.1.2. Wing Design ............................................................................................................................... 17 3.1.3. Airfoil ......................................................................................................................................... 17 3.1.4. Fuselage ..................................................................................................................................... 17 3.1.5. Empennage ................................................................................................................................ 17

3.2. Design Alternative A .................................................................................................. 18 3.3. Design Alternative B .................................................................................................. 18 3.4. Design Alternative C .................................................................................................. 19 3.5. Feasibility Assessment ............................................................................................... 20 3.6. Proposed Design ........................................................................................................ 22

4. Project Management ............................................................................................. 23

4.1. Overview ................................................................................................................... 23 4.2. Breakdown of Work into Specific Tasks ...................................................................... 23 4.3. Organization of Work and Timeline ............................................................................ 24 4.4. Breakdown of Responsibilities among Team Members ............................................... 24 4.5. Total Hours Spent on Project ...................................................................................... 25 ii

4.6 Commercialization of Product ..................................................................................... 27

5. Aerodynamic Design and Analysis ......................................................................... 28

5.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 28 5.2. Main Wing Initial Design Parameters .......................................................................... 28
5.2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 28 5.2.2. Estimate of Take-Off Weight ..................................................................................................... 29 5.2.3. Wing Loading Selection .............................................................................................................. 29

5.3. Wing Design .............................................................................................................. 31

5.3.1. Airfoil Type ................................................................................................................................. 31 5.3.2. Taper Ratio ................................................................................................................................. 36 5.3.3. Sweep Angle .............................................................................................................................. 37 5.3.4. Dihedral Angle ........................................................................................................................... 37 5.3.5. Geometric Twist (Washout) ....................................................................................................... 37 5.3.6. Location ..................................................................................................................................... 38 5.3.7. Winglets ..................................................................................................................................... 38

5.4. Empennage Design .................................................................................................... 39

5.4.1. Location ..................................................................................................................................... 40 5.4.2. Horizontal Stabilizer ................................................................................................................... 40 5.4.3. Vertical Stabilizer ....................................................................................................................... 41

5.5. Aerodynamic Analysis ................................................................................................ 43

5.5.1. Theoretical Background ............................................................................................................. 43 5.5.2. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) ........................................................................................ 48

5.6. Propeller Selection..................................................................................................... 56

6. Structural Design and Analysis............................................................................... 57

6.1. Wings ........................................................................................................................ 57 6.2. Fuselage .................................................................................................................... 61
6.2.1. Nose Section .............................................................................................................................. 61 6.2.3. Middle Section ........................................................................................................................... 63 6.2.4. Payload Bay ................................................................................................................................ 67 6.2.5. Cage ........................................................................................................................................... 68 6.2.6. Boom .......................................................................................................................................... 70 6.2.7. Fuselage Assembly ..................................................................................................................... 71

6.3. Empennage ............................................................................................................... 72

6.3.1. Horizontal Stabilizer ................................................................................................................... 72 6.3.2. Vertical Stabilizer ....................................................................................................................... 73 6.3.4. Empennage Assembly ................................................................................................................ 74

6.4. Landing Gear Structural Design .................................................................................. 75 6.5. Aircraft Structural Design Assembly ........................................................................... 77 6.4. Stability and Control Analysis ..................................................................................... 78
6.4.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 78 6.4.2. Static Stability and Control........................................................................................................ 79 6.4.3. Sizing of Control Surfaces .......................................................................................................... 81

6.5. Electrical Design Layout ............................................................................................. 83 iii

7. Prototype Construction ......................................................................................... 85

7.1. Description of Prototype ............................................................................................ 85 7.2. Construction .............................................................................................................. 86
7.2.1. Wings ......................................................................................................................................... 86 7.2.2. Fuselage ..................................................................................................................................... 95 7.2.3. Empennage .............................................................................................................................. 102

7.3. Airplane Assembly ................................................................................................... 104 7.4. Monokote ............................................................................................................... 105 7.5. Parts List.................................................................................................................. 106 7.6. Prototype Cost Analysis ........................................................................................... 107
7.6.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 107 7.6.2. Aircraft Construction ............................................................................................................... 107 7.6.3. Competition Expenses ............................................................................................................. 109 7.6.4. Travel Expenses ....................................................................................................................... 110

8. Testing and Evaluation ........................................................................................ 112

8.1. Overview ................................................................................................................. 112 8.2. Design of Experiments ............................................................................................. 112 8.3 Test Results and Data................................................................................................ 114 8.4 Evaluation of Experimental Results ........................................................................... 118 8.5. Improvement of the Design...................................................................................... 118

9. Design Considerations ......................................................................................... 120

9.1. Assembly and Disassembly ...................................................................................... 120 9.2. Maintenance of the System ..................................................................................... 122 9.3. Environmental Impact.............................................................................................. 123 9.4. Risk Assessment ...................................................................................................... 124

10. Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 125

10.1. Conclusion and Discussion...................................................................................... 125 10.2. Future Work .......................................................................................................... 125

11. References ........................................................................................................ 127 Appendices ............................................................................................................. 130

Appendix A: Technical Drawings ..................................................................................... 130 Appendix A: Aircraft Assemblies ..................................................................................... 141 Appendix B: Detailed Raw Design Calculations and Analysis ............................................ 147 Appendix C: Catalogs and Manuals of Purchased Components ........................................ 166

iv

Ethics Statement and Signatures

The work submitted in this project is solely prepared by a team consisting of Miguel Jimenez, Ricardo Lugo, and Carlos Rojas and it is original. Excerpts from others work have been clearly identified, their work acknowledged within the text and listed in the list of references. All of the engineering drawings, computer programs, formulations, design work, prototype development and testing reported in this document are also original and prepared by the same team of students.

Miguel Jimenez Team Member

Ricardo A. Lugo Team Member

Carlos D. Rojas Team Member

Dr. Andres Tremante Faculty Advisor

Acknowledgments
The team would like to thank the following people for their selfless commitment to our project and their constant support and dedication throughout these months, without them, this would not be possible. Mr. Stephen Wood Prof. Javier Palencia Cuenca Prof. Andres Tremante Prof. George S. Dulikravich Mr. Rick Zicarelli Mr. Felipe Pradilla Our families FIU College of Engineering and Computing The ME Department Professors and Staff The Maintenance Staff in the EC building WURN 1020 AM Radio Station American Airlines Andre Carpucci, SAE Brazil Pilot Diego, and the Technological Institute of Aeronautics (ITA) Open Class Winning Team, Leviata. Rodrigo and his team, Keep Flying from the Polytechnic School of the University of Sao Paulo. Team 1 Senior Design Team MAIDROC Laboratory Staff All other contributing colleagues and friends not mentioned in this brief list.

vi

List of Figures
FIGURE 1: FLIGHT PATH FOR COMPETITION .................................................................................................. 1 FIGURE 2: AIRPLANE DIMENSIONS ................................................................................................................ 2 FIGURE 3: FIRST HOT AIR BALLOON ............................................................................................................... 3 FIGURE 4: WRIGHT FLYER IN 1903.................................................................................................................. 3 FIGURE 5: APOLLO 11 ..................................................................................................................................... 4 FIGURE 6: 2.4 GHZ FUTABA RADIO TRANSMITTER ......................................................................................... 7 FIGURE 7: VOLTWATCH .................................................................................................................................. 7 FIGURE 8: O.S. .61 FX ENGINE ........................................................................................................................ 8 FIGURE 9: VALID AND INVALID TAKE-OFF ...................................................................................................... 9 FIGURE 10: FLIGHT PATH DEPENDING ON TAKE OFF SECTOR ........................................................................ 9 FIGURE 11: PAYLOAD BEING WEIGHED - SECOND ROUND .......................................................................... 10 FIGURE 12: AIRPLANE BEING WEIGHED ....................................................................................................... 10 FIGURE 13: DIMENSIONAL INSPECTION LAYOUT ......................................................................................... 11 FIGURE 14: AIRPLANE HEIGHT INSPECTION ................................................................................................. 12 FIGURE 15: LENGTH MEASURING ................................................................................................................. 12 FIGURE 16: WIDTH MEASUREMENT ............................................................................................................. 13 FIGURE 17: FORCES OF AERONAUTICS ......................................................................................................... 14 FIGURE 18: SHAPE OF STRAIGHT WINGS ...................................................................................................... 15 FIGURE 19: WING PLACEMENT..................................................................................................................... 16 FIGURE 20: DIHEDRAL ANGLE TYPES ............................................................................................................ 16 FIGURE 21: PARTS OF AN AIRFOIL ................................................................................................................ 17 FIGURE 22: PROPOSED DESIGN A ................................................................................................................. 18 FIGURE 23: PROPOSED DESIGN B ................................................................................................................. 19 FIGURE 24: PROPOSED DESIGN C ................................................................................................................. 19 FIGURE 25: PROPOSED DESIGN .................................................................................................................... 22 FIGURE 26: TAKE-OFF VELOCITY VS. WING LOADING .................................................................................. 30 FIGURE 27: XFOIL SCREENSHOT ................................................................................................................... 32 FIGURE 28: PROFILI PRO SOFTWARE ............................................................................................................ 33 FIGURE 29: CH10 .......................................................................................................................................... 34 FIGURE 30: FX 63-137 ................................................................................................................................... 34 FIGURE 31: EPPLER E420 .............................................................................................................................. 34 FIGURE 32: CL VS. ANGLE OF ATTACK AND CD VS. ANGLE OF ATTACK FOR CANDIDATE AIRFOILS ............. 35 FIGURE 33: L/D VS. ANGLE OF ATTACK AND CM VS. ALPHA FOR CANDIDATE AIRFOILS .............................. 36

vii

FIGURE 34: SWEEP ANGLE GEOMETRY ........................................................................................................ 37 FIGURE 35: IDEAL STALL PROGRESSION ....................................................................................................... 38 FIGURE 36: FIRST WINGLET PROTOTYPE ...................................................................................................... 39 FIGURE 37: EXPERIMENTAL WINGLET .......................................................................................................... 39 FIGURE 38: RECOMMENDED LOCATION FOR HORIZONTAL TAIL ................................................................. 40 FIGURE 39: NACA 0010 ................................................................................................................................. 41 FIGURE 40: EPPLER EA 6(-1)012 ................................................................................................................... 41 FIGURE 41: FOUR MAIN FORCES ON AIRCRAFT............................................................................................ 47 FIGURE 42: OPENFOAM PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION ALONG WING WITH VELOCITY STREAMLINES.............. 48 FIGURE 43: CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW OF THE PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION AT MIDSPAN IN PARAVIEW ......... 50 FIGURE 44: THRESHOLD INDICATING LOW PRESSURE AREA........................................................................ 51 FIGURE 45: WINGTIP VORTICES GENERATED BY PRESSURE DIFFERENTIALS IN TIP. .................................... 52 FIGURE 46: FUSELAGE PROTOTYPES ............................................................................................................ 53 FIGURE 47: PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION - PROTOTYPE I .................................................................................. 53 FIGURE 48: PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION - PROTOTYPE II ................................................................................. 54 FIGURE 49: PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION PROTOTYPE I.................................................................................. 54 FIGURE 50: VELOCITY DISTRIBUTION - PROTOTYPE II .................................................................................. 55 FIGURE 51: WING SECTIONS ......................................................................................................................... 57 FIGURE 52: WING'S FORCE DISTRIBUTION AND RESTRAINTS ...................................................................... 58 FIGURE 53: SPAR FACTOR OF SAFETY ........................................................................................................... 58 FIGURE 54: WINGS STRUCTURAL DESIGN ................................................................................................... 59 FIGURE 55: PHYSICAL APPEARANCE OF RIBS ................................................................................................ 59 FIGURE 56 LEADING EDGE PLACEMENT ON RIB ........................................................................................... 60 FIGURE 57: COMPONENTS DISTRIBUTION ON FUSELAGE ............................................................................ 61 FIGURE 58: NOSE FUSELAGE STRUCTURE..................................................................................................... 62 FIGURE 59: THRUST SERVO PLACEMENT ON NOSE SECTION ....................................................................... 62 FIGURE 60: AERODYNAMIC STRUCTURE PLACEMENT AND GEOMETRICAL CHARACTERISTICS ................... 63 FIGURE 61: STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF MIDDLE SECTION OF FUSELAGE AND COMPONENTS ....................... 63 FIGURE 62: STATIC ANALYSIS BREAKDOWN ................................................................................................. 64 FIGURE 63: ASSEMBLY OF FRONT AND MIDDLE SECTION OF FUSELAGE ..................................................... 66 FIGURE 64: PAYLOAD ASSEMBLY .................................................................................................................. 67 FIGURE 65: CAGE STRUCTURE ...................................................................................................................... 68 FIGURE 66: FORCES AND RESTRAINTS IN STATIC ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 69 FIGURE 67: CAGE FACTOR OF SAFETY .......................................................................................................... 70 FIGURE 68: BOOM STRUCTURE .................................................................................................................... 71

viii

FIGURE 69: SERVO PLACEMENT AND LINK ................................................................................................... 71 FIGURE 70: FUSELAGE ASSEMBLY ................................................................................................................ 72 FIGURE 71: STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF HORIZONTAL STABILIZER .................................................................. 72 FIGURE 72: PLACEMENT OF HOLDING STRUCTURE AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS ............................... 73 FIGURE 73: STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF VERTICAL STABILIZER ........................................................................ 74 FIGURE 74: EMPENNAGE ASSEMBLY ............................................................................................................ 74 FIGURE 75: FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR LANDING GEAR ................................................................................... 75 FIGURE 76: STRESS ANALYSIS ON LANDING GEAR ....................................................................................... 76 FIGURE 77: STRUCTURAL DESIGN ASSEMBLY ............................................................................................... 77 FIGURE 78: LOCATION OF RUDDERS ............................................................................................................ 78 FIGURE 79: LOCATION OF ELEVATORS ......................................................................................................... 78 FIGURE 80: LOCATION OF AILERON ............................................................................................................. 79 FIGURE 81: BODY AXES AND SIGN CONVENTION OF THE AIRCRAFT ........................................................... 79 FIGURE 82: HISTORICAL GUIDELINES ON AILERON SIZES ............................................................................. 81 FIGURE 83: AILERON SIZE ............................................................................................................................. 82 FIGURE 84: TAPERED CONTROL SURFACE .................................................................................................... 82 FIGURE 85: ELECTRICAL CIRCUIT LAYOUT FOR THE AIRPLANE ..................................................................... 83 FIGURE 86: VOLTAGE DISCHARGE DIAGRAM ............................................................................................... 84 FIGURE 87: FUTABA 4-CHANNEL TRANSMITTER .......................................................................................... 84 FIGURE 88: FINAL PROTOTYPE ..................................................................................................................... 85 FIGURE 89: WOOD ROUTER BIT ................................................................................................................... 87 FIGURE 90: CNC ANILAM MILL MACHINE ..................................................................................................... 87 FIGURE 91: RIBS MILLING PROCESS .............................................................................................................. 88 FIGURE 92: SKETCH OF RIBS ......................................................................................................................... 88 FIGURE 93: BALSA RIBS ................................................................................................................................. 89 FIGURE 94: WING JOINTS ............................................................................................................................. 90 FIGURE 95: WING JOINT ASSEMBLY ............................................................................................................. 90 FIGURE 96: WING ASSEMBLY ....................................................................................................................... 91 FIGURE 97: WINGLETS .................................................................................................................................. 92 FIGURE 98: HINGE ........................................................................................................................................ 92 FIGURE 99: CONTROL SURFACES OF WING .................................................................................................. 93 FIGURE 100: SERVO PLACEMENT ON THE WINGS ........................................................................................ 93 FIGURE 101: COMPLETE WING ASSEMBLY ................................................................................................... 94 FIGURE 102: CONSTRUCTION OF FUSELAGE ................................................................................................ 95 FIGURE 103: FUSELAGE STRUCTURE ............................................................................................................ 96

ix

FIGURE 104: COMPONENTS ON FUSELAGE .................................................................................................. 96 FIGURE 105 ALUMINUM'S RODS .................................................................................................................. 97 FIGURE 106 FINAL CAGE STRUCTURE ........................................................................................................... 97 FIGURE 107 FUSELAGE-CAGE JOINT. ............................................................................................................ 98 FIGURE 108: LOADING DOOR ....................................................................................................................... 98 FIGURE 109: SCREWS UTILIZED ON WING-CAGE JOINT ............................................................................... 99 FIGURE 110: WINGS-CAGE JOINT I ............................................................................................................... 99 FIGURE 111: CLAMP ................................................................................................................................... 100 FIGURE 112: WINGS-CAGE FINAL ASSEMBLY ............................................................................................. 100 FIGURE 113: BOOM-CAGE JOINT ................................................................................................................ 101 FIGURE 114: SERVO PLACEMENT AND HOLDING STRUCTURE IN BOOM SECTION .................................... 101 FIGURE 115: REAL-SCALE DRAWING FOR EMPENNAGE ............................................................................. 102 FIGURE 116: HORIZONTAL STABILIZER WITH BOOM-EMPENNAGE JOINT ................................................. 103 FIGURE 117 EMPENNAGE ASSEMBLY ......................................................................................................... 103 FIGURE 118: CONTROL SURFACES ON EMPENNAGE .................................................................................. 104 FIGURE 119: AIRCRAFT ASSEMBLY ............................................................................................................. 104 FIGURE 120 MONOKOTE ............................................................................................................................ 105 FIGURE 121: VOLTWATCH .......................................................................................................................... 113 FIGURE 122: HANGING SCALE .................................................................................................................... 114 FIGURE 123: FUTABA S3003 SERVO ........................................................................................................... 115 FIGURE 124: FIRST TAKE-OFF ...................................................................................................................... 115 FIGURE 125: FIRST LANDING SEQUENCE .................................................................................................... 116 FIGURE 126: FIRST LANDING ROLL ............................................................................................................. 117 FIGURE 127: LANDING GEAR USED AT THE COMPETITION ........................................................................ 119 FIGURE 128: ASSEMBLY PROCESS............................................................................................................... 121 FIGURE 129: PAYLOAD BAY ........................................................................................................................ 121 FIGURE 130 COMPLETE ASSEMBLY OF AIRCRAFT ...................................................................................... 122

List of Tables
TABLE 1: DESIGN ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS .................................................................................................... 15 TABLE 2: PROPOSED DESIGN A CONFIGURATION ........................................................................................ 18 TABLE 3: PROPOSED DESIGN B CONFIGURATION ........................................................................................ 18 TABLE 4: PROPOSED DESIGN C CONFIGURATION ........................................................................................ 19 TABLE 5: COMPARISON BETWEEN DIFFERENT DESIGN ALTERNATIVES ....................................................... 20 TABLE 6: PROPOSED DESIGN CONFIGURATION ........................................................................................... 22 TABLE 7: ESTIMATED TAKE-OFF WEIGHT ESTIMATES .................................................................................. 29 TABLE 8: PRELIMINARY DIMENSIONING OF AIRPLANE ................................................................................ 31 TABLE 9: CHORD LENGTHS IN TIP ................................................................................................................. 37 TABLE 10: SIZE REDUCTION OPTIMIZATION ON VERTICAL STABILIZER ........................................................ 42 TABLE 11: INITIAL (GENERAL) CONDITIONS FOR CFD ANALYSIS .................................................................. 50 TABLE 12: DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEORETICAL 2D DATA AND 3D FINITE WINGS FOR ALPHA = 0 ............ 51 TABLE 13: AIRCRAFT'S LOAD STATIC ANALYSIS ............................................................................................ 64 TABLE 14: A36 STEEL PHYSICAL PROPERTIES................................................................................................ 67 TABLE 15: 1060 ALUMINUM PHYSICAL PROPERTIES .................................................................................... 69 TABLE 16: PARTS LIST ................................................................................................................................ 106 TABLE 17: AIRCRAFT EXPENSES .................................................................................................................. 108 TABLE 18: COMPETITION EXPENSES .......................................................................................................... 109 TABLE 19: TRAVEL EXPENSES ..................................................................................................................... 110 TABLE 20: EXPERIMENT LAYOUT ................................................................................................................ 112 TABLE 21: PROPELLER TESTING AND SELECTION ....................................................................................... 114 TABLE 22: FLIGHT PARAMETERS FOR ROUND 1 ......................................................................................... 117 TABLE 23: FLIGHT DATA FOR ROUND 2 ...................................................................................................... 118 TABLE 24: LANDING GEAR IMPROVEMENT ................................................................................................ 119

xi

Abstract
SAE Brazil AeroDesign is a competition that gathers engineering students from different parts of the world, with the objective of designing, constructing, and testing a Remote Controlled (RC) aircraft that must be able to lift the maximum possible payload within the given geometrical restraints and engine restrictions. After this competition conditions have been assigned, it is understood that the specific mission of this airplane is that of a high-lift and short take-off and landing (STOL) one, and low Reynolds number fluid dynamics methodology applies when calculating aerodynamics of the craft. The design process of the aircraft begins with important and extensive research analysis on similar airplane types which performed related missions. Historical data is then adapted to this scaled-down application, and after sizing down these values, preliminary estimates and calculations are performed and later refined to achieve a competitive aerodynamic structure. Furthermore, with the use of available software programs, important airfoil data is used to design an optimal wing design, which, for the sake of this project, needs to maximize the lift-todrag ratio, better known as L/D. After this preliminary design is obtained, theoretical values need to be tested through the use of computational fluid dynamics software programs. With the use of a Tesla-128 cluster in the Multidisciplinary Analysis, Inverse Design, Robust Optimization and Control (MAIDROC) Laboratory in the College of Engineering and Computing, a Linux-based open source program, called OpenFOAM, is chosen for the aerodynamic studies that are performed on the main wing and fuselage of the airplane. This software program poses no licensing limitations due to its open source nature, allowing the designers to maximize the required number of nodes and elements required by their simulation in order to obtain optimal results. After comparing these results with theoretical values, a structure capable of shaping this aerodynamically optimized airplane is then designed. All the components of the aircraft where thoroughly modeled and designed with the use of computer aided design (CAD) software, such as ANSYS and SolidWorks, in order to perform the necessary structural analysis testing and finite element analysis (FEA) simulations. After the

xii

components are designed, the feasibility of manufacturing is then assessed. If all criteria are met, and components have market availability and affordability, the construction process starts. Cost is a very important factor in the development of the project, and it is always kept to its minimum possible value. Total cost of the project includes expenses made on aircraft design and construction, competition expenses and travel expenses. The competition took place in Sao Jose dos Campos, Brazil, from October 21st through October 24th. The teams participation represented a milestone in our colleges international participation in engineering competitions, and set a solid foundation for the participation of other teams in the school in future events. Important media coverage, such as featuring in the schools newspaper, The Beacon, and a radio interview in WURN 1020 AM, represented the willingness and commitment this team had to compete abroad this past October. Two grants, one by American Airlines and one by the College of Engineering, further proved the external interest and confidence in the participation abroad. In addition, final results on the aircrafts behavior during takeoff, landing, and during flight time, as well as the competition outcomes are presented and discussed in the final sections of the report. Theoretical estimates were compared to actual values, and satisfactory results were obtained. As a final point, it should be noted that the successful construction, testing and participation of the team in Brazil is pioneering in every aspect, after careful research and development stages which lasted over nine months. It is the teams belief that this is just the beginning of many more projects that will make Florida International University a recognized and respected school in these SAE events, and school support is crucial for the educational development of these projects and endeavors.

xiii

1. Introduction
1.1 Problem Statement
The AeroDesign competition is a collegiate design event hosted and created by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), which is an organization that oversees the design, manufacturing and maintenance of automobiles and self-propelled vehicles for use on land, sea and air. Such organization conducts different types of competitions for engineering students. In such competitions; dedication, creativity and engineering skills and knowledge of students are tested. One of the competitions that SAE International organizes annually is the AeroDesign competition. Three different AeroDesign competitions are organized; East and West series, which are located in the United States, and AeroDesign Brazil, which is hosted by the national chapter of SAE in that country. Due to the dates on which these competitions are held, the best option available for the team to choose is AeroDesign Brazil. The competition was held in Sao Jose dos Campos, October 20 th through the 24th of 2010. It should be noted that this city is Brazils aeronautical center, hosting the worlds third airplane manufacturer, Embraer, as well as their Aerospace National Agency, the Centro Tecnologico Aeroespacial (CTA). This competition consists on the design and construction remote controlled (RC) aircraft capable of lifting a maximum payload. There are three different classes in which groups competed in: Regular, Open, and Micro. The PantherWings team, as it was christened, decided to go on the Regular Class for being the best suited class given the specifications of each. The Open Class is restricted to veterans of previous competitions, and Micro class is considered very risky due to unfavorable atmospheric conditions that might arise on the day of the competition, therefore some past experience is also a must. After takeoff, the airplane is expected to complete a loop as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Flight Path for Competition

The length of the runway in which the airplane must take off by is 61 meters, while the length in which it can land is 122 meters. A group is given an allotted time of three minutes to allow the plane to take off. The engine that must be used is a O.S. .61 FX engine. The dimensions of the airplane are very simple to understand, the sum of the total length, width and height of the aircraft must be greater than or equal to 4.00 meters and less than or equal to 6.5 meters. Figure 2 shows a better representation of the dimensions.

Figure 2: Airplane Dimensions

1.2. Motivation
The development of this project involves fundamentals of aeronautics, aerodynamics and fluid dynamics. Calculations and formulas have to be made based on the goal of the competition, which is maximum payload on an aircraft. Being able to design, construct and build an aircraft represented plenty of challenges that have been overcome. Organization is critical in the development of this type of project, and team work and leadership on each of the group members was indispensable. Radio Control (R/C) models such as cars, trucks, boats, airplanes, and helicopters are a hobby that has been around for a long time. This hobby involves knowledge in physics mechanics and some electrical field knowledge. Students involved in mechanical engineering have a very solid background in each of these areas, and having this type of background represents an enormous advantage in the design and construction of a radio control airplane. As students of Florida International University, it was highly motivating to represent Florida International University in SAE Brazil AeroDesign 2010, which took place on October 20-24, 2010 in Sao Jose dos Campos, Brazil.

1.3 Literature Survey

Aviation, in some form or another, dates back to about 200 B.C. in form of a kite. They were used by the Chinese as a military advantage by calculating distances between different posts. The next advancement in the aviation field didnt come until the late 18th century as a hot air balloon in France.

The first flight of the hot air balloon lasted about 4 minutes and 35 seconds and reached a maximum height of about 80 feet. Figure 3 shows an illustration of the first hot air balloon.

Figure 3: First Hot Air Balloon

The first sustained flight by a powered and controlled aircraft was obtained by the Wright brothers, Orville and Wilbur, in North Carolina on December 17, 1903. The first flight lasted about 12 seconds and spanned about 120 feet. Figure 4 demonstrates the Wright Flyer while in flight in Kitty Hawk, North Carolina.

Figure 4: Wright Flyer in 1903

During World War I, airplanes became a big advantage for countries when dealing in combat situations, as well as for communication. Radiotelephones were being used on these straightforward 3

aircrafts which assisted in communication between pilots and ground commanders. The first airplanes with weapons and machine guns attached to them didnt appear until 1914. Soon after then, it became common to see air to air combat and fighter planes. Aviation began to be applied to other things such as commercial aviation and cargo after World War II. In the 1950s and 1960s, all that was learned from airplanes, was being applied to something more advanced; space travel. The Russians were the first to send satellites into space and orbit the Earth, while the United States and NASA launched the first successful mission to the moon with Apollo 11 in 1969. Figure 5 shows Apollo 11 blasting off from Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

Figure 5: Apollo 11

Remote controlled airplanes have fascinated people and enthusiasts since about the 1930s. Nowadays there are many groups, such as the AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) that hold meetings and gatherings throughout the country, and where hobbyists can get together and talk and share information about RC Airplanes. Many parks such as Tropical Park in Miami, FL, as well as Markham Park in Weston, FL, host events where people can fly their own airplanes in a vast open space. These remote controlled aircrafts come in different kits such as ready to fly, almost ready to fly, balsa kits, and from scratch. These levels in kits mainly depend on the expertise the person has in this field. People usually start off with ready to fly kits in which planes come pre-assembled, and work their way towards less assembled planes and kits. Important parts in controlling an RC airplane are the receivers and servos. Some of these include ailerons, elevator, throttle, and rudder which control the roll, pitch, and yaw of an aircraft. Different frequencies are used to communicate to the airplane from the remote control. In the United States, the frequency that is mostly used for toys and RC airplanes is 72 MHzs. More recently, it is very common to see hobbyists use the newest 2.4 GHzs frequency on

their aircrafts and remote controls, mainly due to its ease of operation, which does not require the users to report channels so that there is no conflict.

2. Project Formulation
2.1. Overview
In order to be qualified to compete in the 2010 SAE Brazil AeroDesign, there were specific and important restrictions and constraints that had to be abided by. The competition was split up into 3 classes: Regular, Micro, and Open. It was decided to compete in the Regular class since it fit the best interests of the team. Each category had its own unique rules and regulations. These rules deal with, but are not limited to, different parameters such as the size and dimensions of the aircraft, the weight of the aircraft, and the specific engine that must be used. These guidelines helped create a level playing field at the competition between all of the groups and made sure that no group had a competitive advantage over another one through the expert advice of professionals, something that is both discouraged and not allowed by the organizers.

2.2. Project Objectives

At the time it was decided to choose to design and construct a remote controlled airplane for the AeroDesign competition, one of the goals was to fly the airplane successfully. Many colleagues that were reached out to for advice and knowledge about this subject told us that it is very difficult to design an airplane that would fly. Through lots of hard work and dedication, this goal, as well as achieving a high result in the competition, would be within reach and attainable. The SAE Brazil AeroDesign competition dates back to 2001 where 40 teams from all over Brazil competed in the inaugural event. As the years went by, the competition began to expand in participants and started to be acknowledged and recognized at both a national and international level. Teams from Mexico, Venezuela, and India have been represented at this event. No team from the United States has participated in the competition, and it was a great motivation the fact that the teams participation would mark the first team to do so and to represent Florida International University at a high manner in an international competition.

2.3. Design Specifications, Constraints and Other Considerations

SAE Brazil and its Competition Technical Committee clearly define the rules and regulations for the competition in its Operational Procedures Handbook distributed to all participating teams and available online for more convenient use. If deemed necessary by the committee, some modifications are made in this handbook and it is important to follow the one of the corresponding year of the event.

There are specific rules that all three classes must follow, as well as specific regulations for the different categories. The radio transmitter that is to be used at the competition is to be of 2.4 GHz. The Futaba remote control of this frequency that will be used at this competition is shown below.

Figure 6: 2.4 GHz Futaba Radio Transmitter

New to regulations this year was the introduction of a VoltWatch Receiver Battery Monitor. This will be used to verify the charge of the battery pack, in this case Nickel-metal hydride (NiMH). This was implemented to make sure there was not a stop in connection between the transmitter and receiver while in flight, thus causing the airplane to crash and not be able to finish its flight. The transmitter used is shown in Figure 7 and is compatible with NiMH and NiCd batteries.

Figure 7: VoltWatch

Another type that could be used in the competition is Lithium Polymer (Li-Po) batteries. A few advantages of using this kind battery are that it has a higher capacity and weighs less than the Nickelmetal hydride and the Nickel Cadmium batteries. A few disadvantages included were that it has an explosion risk because it requires a confined area to charge, it does not handle impact very well, and it is highly flammable. A key factor in choosing an NiMH battery over a Li-Po battery was the lower price 7

because of the limited budget. A Nickel-metal hydride battery pack ranges from $5 to $7, while the Lithium-Polymer batteries range from $22-$27. For the teams competing in the Regular Class, the specified engine that must be used is an O.S. 0.61 FX shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8: O.S. .61 FX Engine

This particular engine has a displacement of 0.61 cubic inches and a horsepower of 1.9 at 16,000 RPM; the RPMs range from 2,000 to 17,000. The total weight of the engine is 19.4 ounces (approximately 0.55 kg) and its stroke is 0.866 inches. Another engine that could have been used was the K&B 0.61 RC/ABC (PN 6170). When the airplane has completed preliminary inspections, the competitions judges and organizers fill up the gas tank with fuel and it is placed in line to go onto the runway. Once on the runway, the main landing gear is aligned with a line marked on the landing strip. Each team is given 3 attempts to take, or 3 minutes, whichever comes first. There are two sectors in which the aircraft must take off at; the first ending at 30.5 meters from the start and the second finishing at 61 meters from the start. The aircraft must be off the ground before it reaches the end of Sector 2.

Figure 9: Valid and Invalid Take-Off

The Figure 9 displays valid and invalid take off of the airplane. A judge is standing down the runway and lined up with the end of Sector 2. If the judge observes that the airplane did not take off within the defined distance, he or she will raise a red flag, therefore forfeiting that attempt. If the aircraft takes off within Sector 1 it is given approximately 13 points per kilogram of weight. If the aircraft takes off within Sector 2, it is given approximately 8 points per kilogram of weight.

Figure 10: Flight Path Depending on Take Off Sector

As shown in the previous figure, if a team is able to take off before the end of Sector 1, not only will it be awarded more points towards the final classification, but it will have to complete a much shorter circuit. Despite whichever sector a plane took off in, all aircrafts must land and come to a complete stop within 122 meters. After the removal of the payload, the payload and the airplane are weighed separately. Figure 11 show the process of the payload and airplane being weighed. 9

Figure 11: Payload Being Weighed - Second Round

Figure 12: Airplane Being Weighed

Once, and if the airplane completes the correct flight path, and lands successfully, a few inspections are conducted to make sure the aircraft is qualified and under the given dimensions. Important items that will be used to inspect the airplanes are four distinctive rectangular shapes, a height gauge, and a tape measure. During this process, the aircraft must be lying flat on the floor, and then the rectangles will be adjusted to the level of the wings. To check the length, the spinner of the

10

airplane must be touching one of these fixtures, then the rear most part of the aircraft should be in contact with another fixture.

Figure 13: Dimensional Inspection Layout

Figure 14 depicts what occurs during a typical inspection of an airplane after its successful flight. In order to find the height of the airplane, the highest point will be found with respect to a gauge arm which is resting on the floor.

11

Figure 14: Airplane Height Inspection

Demonstrated in Figure 14 is an example of how the height of the airplane is measured. Once this data is collected, the sum of the length, height, and sum of the distance between the flightgenerating devices (wings) must be greater than or equal to 4 meters and less than or equal to 6.5 meters. The next figures are from the competition and how they measured the aircraft.

Figure 15: Length Measuring

12

Figure 16: Width Measurement

It is important to note the payload bay must be reusable and used in every flight run. Cutting tools, such as scissors and knives are prohibited to be used in the act of removing the payload from the airplane. The payload bay should also not alter the dimensions of the airplane permanently.

13

3. Design Alternatives
3.1. Overview of Conceptual Designs Developed
It was established that the design of a RC Airplane requires different types of approaches. Placement of the wings, type of wing, dihedral angle, and geometry of the airfoil depend in the performance and mission of the airplane. The main purpose of the airplane required for this

competition is to carry a maximum payload with a predefined engine. With this purpose in mind, different designs were taken into consideration. Computer Aided Design (CAD) models of each of the designs have been drawn, and differences between them are described. There are four different forces that need to be considered when designing an airplane. These four forces are thrust, lift, drag and weight. Figure 17 shows a graphical representation where these forces are located.

Figure 17: Forces of Aeronautics

A Radio Controlled (RC) airplane is divided into parts or components: Wings, fuselage, power plant, and landing gear. From research presented in the previous section, alternative designs are to be presented and compared. Design of the aircraft is divided into three main sections: Wings, fuselage and empennage. Each of these components offers different prototypes and designs; meaning that combinations between components is the path to be taken. Some important decisions were taken with respect to the design of the aircraft. The geometry of wing to be tested is straight wing. There is no point in testing all the different wings geometries knowing that straight wing is the configuration that offers more stability to the aircraft with respect to the other configurations. Moreover, low wing configuration is not taken into consideration, mainly due to the fact that advantages of low wing configurations are not related with the specific purpose of aircraft, which is high stability. Only high and mid-wings are proposed in the designs. From all the different empennage configurations, only the two assemblies that offer more stability to the aircraft are taken into account. The two tail configurations to be proposed are standard tail, and T-type tail. For this section, the fuselage is treated as a neutral component of the aircraft, and it

14

is only utilized for illustrative purposes. Geometrical and physical characteristics of fuselage are determined by using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), which is discussed in the Aerodynamics section of the report. Table 1 summarizes all different options available to determine the prototypes to be analyzed.
Table 1: Design Alternative Options

Wing Placement High Wing

Wings Geometry Straight Tapered

Empennage Configuration Standard Tail

Medium Wing

Tapered Dihedral

T-Tail

From Table 1, a total of 12 different combinations are available. The three most efficient and stable prototypes are proposed. 3.1.1. Selection of Wings The main difference between mainstream RC airplanes is the shape of the wings. There are four types of wing shapes in airplanes: Straight, swing, sweep, and delta. The reason why there are different types of wings is because there are different functions that are considered when an airplane is designed, and this involves different speed and altitude. The type of wing that has been chosen for the design of this airplane is the straight wing. According to Anderson, the reason for this selection is because this type of wing is designed for small airplanes that do not require high speeds, and also due to the physical characteristics of the straight wing, lift is increased in low speeds. There are different shapes of straight wings; such as rectangular, elliptical, and tapered. Figure 18 illustrates the geometry of each of the different types of straight wings.

Figure 18: Shape of Straight Wings

15

These different types of geometries are to be tested by CFD analysis in OpenFOAM. Each of the geometries is compared to each other, and the most efficient geometry is chosen to the final prototype design. Even though flaps and slats are essential during the takeoff and landing of a real airplane, these two components will not be taken into consideration in the design of the wings because the speed that the airplane is going to experience will not require these mechanisms. The regime of speed that the airplane is going to undergo is subsonic, which means that the velocity will always be less than Mach 1. Placement of the wings in the fuselage has an enormous effect on stability and maneuverability of the airplane. There are three configurations regarding placement of the wings in RC airplanes: High, low, and mid wing. High wings give more stability to the plane with respect with the other two configurations, which is crucial in the design of this airplane. Low and mid wing airplanes have more maneuverability but stability is decreased. Stability can be increase using dihedral angle. The final design will be determined based on testing. Figure 19 illustrates the wings placement in an airplane.

Figure 19: Wing Placement

Dihedral angle is the angle between the outer tip of the wings, and the fixed part of the wing attached in the fuselage of the airplane. There are three different types of dihedral angles: Straight, Tip, and Polyhedral. Figure 20 shows graphically how these types of dihedral differ from each other.

Figure 20: Dihedral Angle Types

The decision for which dihedral is better truly comes from extensive fluid dynamics evaluation, but for practical purposes, a polyhedral wing is very complicated to manufacture, since it will require 16

two different angle sets. In light of this, a hybrid of tip dihedral and straight dihedral is considered, since due to material availability, the carbon fiber rods will force to split the wings in three pieces, a consideration also took for transportation purposes. 3.1.2. Wing Design Depending on the geometry of the wing, lift is may be increased or decreased. Curved or cambered airfoils create more lift than flat surfaces. That explains the shape that most of the airfoils have. The method, in which geometry is studied, is with the airfoil of the wing. As computers and technology have progressed at a remarkable pace in the last years, computational studies have been more resembling of the always-reliable wind tunnel testing.. Nowadays, CFD studies in powerful computers allows for visualization of pressure fields, velocity profiles, streamlines and many other important characteristics that the airplane is going to experience during the time of flight. Determination of the type of airfoil to be chosen depends on testing. 3.1.3. Airfoil Selection of the airfoil is a critical part in the design of wings. Depending on the airfoils geometrical characteristics, drag and lift can be reduced or increased. Figure 21 determines the principal parts of an airfoil. Understanding each of the parts in an airfoil is crucial when deciding what type airfoil is to be utilized in the airplane.

Figure 21: Parts of an Airfoil

3.1.4. Fuselage The body of the airplane, or fuselage, is the main body structure of the aircraft. In this design, the fuselage is going to enclose the engine. Some particular fuselages generate some lift, but considering dimensions and speed of the RC airplane, this force is neglected for this application, although optimization is to be performed to achieve minimal drag with maximal lift contribution. 3.1.5. Empennage The tail of an airplane, or empennage, manages most of the stability and control of the aircraft. The concept of flight dynamics plays an important role in the control and stability of the airplane. Flight

17

dynamics is the science that controls the orientation of the airplane in three dimensions. A more detailed explanation on the role of the empennage is given in the stability and control section.

3.2. Design Alternative A

Proposed design A has the following configuration:
Table 2: Proposed Design A Configuration

Wing Placement High Wing

Wing Geometry Tapered wings with Dihedral Angle

Empennage Configuration T - Tail

Figure 22: Proposed Design A

Configuration of proposed design A offers stability with selected placement and geometry of the wing. By using T-tail configuration, the pitch control of the aircraft is increased. T-Tail configuration, as shown in Figure 22 has the physical characteristic of having the horizontal stabilizer mounted in top of the vertical stabilizer. Disadvantages of prototype are complexity of the construction of a T-type tail, as well as the structural weight penalty carried by the reinforcements at the top, as pointed out by Corke. Moreover, there is loss of some stability by using T-Tail instead of Standard Tail.

3.3. Design Alternative B

Proposed design B has the following configuration:
Table 3: Proposed Design B Configuration

Wing Placement High Wing

Wing Geometry Tapered wings with Dihedral Angle

Empennage Configuration Conventional Tail

18

Figure 23: Proposed Design B

Configuration of proposed design B offers stability with selected placement and geometry of the wing. By using standard tail, stability of airplane is. Standard Tail configuration, as shown in Figure 23, has the physical characteristic of having the vertical stabilizer mounted in top of the horizontal stabilizer. It is very important to denote that construction of standard tail is not as complex as the T-Tail construction. One of the main disadvantages of this prototype is the loss of control of pitch by not using the T-Tail configuration, and the complexity of manufacturing tapered wings.

3.4. Design Alternative C

Proposed design C has the following configuration:
Table 4: Proposed Design C Configuration

Wing Placement Mid Wing

Wing Geometry Straight Wings

Empennage Configuration Conventional Tail

Figure 24: Proposed Design C

19

Proposed design C is the weakest aircraft with respect to the stability subject, due to the fact that placement of the wings is located in the middle section of the fuselage. No tapered section is present on the wing. By placing wings in the mid-section, the maneuverability of aircraft is incremented. Some of the disadvantages of this prototype are the construction of wings; due to the fact that the complete wing is divided into two sections, and the connection between the fuselage and wing are very complex, therefore heavy, and stability of aircraft decreases with respect to prototypes A and B.

3.5. Feasibility Assessment

Most of the advantages and disadvantages of the alternative designs previously exposed are explained in the previous section. In order to choose the most efficient design, prototypes are compared head to head in critical subjects such as stability, construction, lift capabilities, and efficiency. Comparison between designs is presented in Table 5.

Table 5: Comparison Between Different Design Alternatives

Alternative Design A Stability and Control Construction Lift Capabilities Efficiency

Alternative Design B

Alternative Design C

Total Check Marks

11

12

Evaluation on each of the subjects is performed by check marks, being 3 maximum value and 1 minimum. As predicted before, design C is the weakest design with respect to stability and control. With respect to construction, the only difference between designs A and B is the tail structure. Design A utilizes T-Tail, whereas design B utilizes a conventional tail configuration. Due to physical characteristics of vertical and horizontal stabilizers, construction of conventional tail is easier than T tail. Structural connection between fuselage and empennage is also easier to construct with conventional tail due to orientation of ribs present on the horizontal stabilizer. Construction of design C is complex because of the required joints between fuselage and wing.

20

Lift capabilities on wing depends on the selection of airfoil. Overall efficiency of designs is the same considering that weight of aircrafts is similar, and lift capabilities are the same if wings are evaluated with the same airfoil.

21

3.6. Proposed Design

After careful review and study of the three main design alternatives, the proposed design is selected to have the following configuration:
Table 6: Proposed Design Configuration

Wing Placement High Wing

Wing Geometry Tapered Wings

Empennage Configuration Conventional Tail

Figure 25: Proposed Design

Configuration of the proposed design is similar to alternative design B. The only difference between designs is the dihedral angle present on the tapered sections of the wing. Dihedral angle offers more stability to aircraft but; construction wise; it is very complex to obtain desirable results. In this aspect, the team does not want to take on unfeasible components that might not be present in the final prototype, and that is the main reason of dropping dihedral angle out of the design. It is important to mention that, since stability is crucial in the performance of the aircraft, dihedral angle is one of the goals in the prototype construction process. Since dihedral angle is not a certainty, all aerodynamic analysis to be performed in the prototype are completed with the physical characteristics that the proposed design offers. As mentioned before, design of fuselage is performed in the aerodynamics section. Final geometrical characteristics of fuselage are the result from various iterations decided from the computational fluid dynamics analysis. Dimensions of each of the components are presented in the proposed design are presented in the aircraft design section.

22

4. Project Management
4.1. Overview
In order to successfully complete a project of this caliber and length, it is important to organize and assign all tasks and assignments to everybody in the group. Putting together a timeline with deadlines of major tasks helps keep the group on schedule to finish at or before the deadline and makes sure that no job is forgotten. When creating the timeline it is crucial to have a finish date before the deadline. This is done because at times different duties take longer than expected, and keeping a conservative schedule prevents falling behind on time. Once the major tasks are known, it is important to distribute them to all of the members in the group. The following section demonstrates a more detailed description of the project management used by the group in order to have completed all tasks and assignments before the given deadline.

4.2. Breakdown of Work into Specific Tasks

Throughout the development and production of the project, it was imperative that each of the team members contribute to make possible the successful construction and testing of the remote controlled airplane and competing to the best of the teams ability at the competition. Different tasks were assigned to each of the three members to simplify the process of designing and building the airplane. The aerodynamic design of the airplane is an extensive process that must be completed by at least two of the members. An extensive amount of time must be put into computational fluid dynamics analysis, since for this project, the research will be such that there will be no wind tunnel testing. This will help the group decide on which of the proposed designs will best fit the predetermined requirements relating to topics such as lift coefficients, drag coefficients, and pressure differentials and distributions. The analyzing and design of the control and stability of the airplane is another important task that must not be taken lightly. Different designs and sizes of control surfaces must be taken into consideration and studied. These control surfaces will allow the airplane to be maneuverable and stable in flight, as required by the pilot and the environmental conditions it faces when airborne. These control surfaces will also produce non-equilibrium accelerated motions such as maneuvers, if necessary.

23

Extensive periods of time also will be taken into the construction of the remote controlled airplane. New procedures and manufacturing techniques have to be designed for the custom airplane, therefore having a reasonable amount of time for such task is crucial in achieving a timely construction before the competition. Moreover, the making of custom parts that are out of the teams expertise, due to several different reasons, have to be ordered, therefore time has to be allotted for such happenings. Because of financial limitations imposed on international travel, in order to attend the 2010 SAE Brazil AeroDesign Competition in Sao Jose dos Campos, the group had to come up with ideas to raise money. The sole price of the airfare tickets from Miami to Sao Paulo, the closest non-stop city from Miami, were approximately $1400 USD. The registration fee for the competition per group was estimated near USD $350.

4.3. Organization of Work and Timeline

4.4. Breakdown of Responsibilities among Team Members

Miguel Jimenez was in charge of computational fluid dynamics and propulsion calculations. Along with the help of Mechanical Engineering Masters Candidate, Mr. Stephen Wood, different wing, fuselage, and empennage designs were run using OpenFOAM in the Multidisciplinary Analysis, Inverse Design, Robust Optimization and Control Laboratory (MAIDROC) at the Engineering Center. Propulsion Calculations were theoretically performed with the use of ThrustHP, a hobbyist computer program that uses empirical data to theoretically estimate the thrust for a given engine and propeller selection, and later compared to experimental results obtained with the use of a hanging scale, which served as a dynamometer

24

Both Miguel Jimenez and Ricardo Lugo were in charge of the aerodynamic design. Raw calculations of parameters such as aspect ratios, coefficients of lift and drag, as well as plant form areas are shown in the appendix section of the report. Ricardo Lugo was in charge of calculations and design relating to stability and control. Calculations of the size of control surfaces such as ailerons, the elevator, and the rudder were done by Mr. Lugo. Carlos Rojas was in charge of the radio control survey as well as the servos and channels. Along with this Mr. Rojas was also in charge of the competition parameters. Throughout the design process, it was being confirmed that everything that is being considered will be under the competition rules and requirements for the airplane. The three members were in charge of the prototype construction and fundraising activities. Many proposals were sent out to different companies such as Florida Power and Light, Rockwell Collins, and Honeywell. The FIUs College of Engineering and Computing, through Dr. Norman Munroe, was very interested in the project and offered the pioneering team with $1,500 towards travel expenses. After approaching American Airlines and explaining the goals and ambitions to compete in this competition in Brazil, and becoming the first American team to participate in this competition, they offered the team a sponsorship in which a 50% discount was provided to each of the airfare tickets.

4.5. Total Hours Spent on Project

In this section, an hour per hour table is displayed to calculate the total amount of time spent by each team member on this project. Miguel Jimenez Topic Area Hours Spent Cost at (25/hour) Aerodynamic Research Open Foam Training Aerodynamic Wing Design and Optimization Propulsion Calculation and Propeller Selection Report-Brazil Engine Training Aircraft Construction 50 25 30 10 40 8 70 1250 625 750 250 1000 200 1750

25

Testing/Brazil Travel Report- Florida International University Total Hours and Cost

50 50 333

1250 1250 $ 8325

Ricardo Lugo Topic Area Hours Spent Cost at (25/hour) Structural Design and Stability and Control Research Aerodynamic Fuselage Design and Optimization Structural Aircraft Design Stability and Control Analysis Report-Brazil Aircraft Construction Testing/Brazil Travel Report- Florida International University Total Hours and Cost 50 40 35 40 40 70 50 50 325 1250 1000 875 1000 1000 1750 1250 1250 $ 8125

Carlos Rojas Topic Area Hours Spent Cost at (25/hour) Radio Control, Servo, Channel Research Competition parameters and Regulations Nose and Landing Gear Design and Optimization Report - Brazil Aircraft construction Testing/Brazil Travel Report- Florida International University Total Hours and Cost 50 30 30 40 70 50 50 320 1250 750 750 1000 1750 1250 1250 $ 8000

26

4.6 Commercialization of Product

Although the final design and product is not a typical remote controlled aircraft that is bought and flown by hobbyists and enthusiasts, it could have its unique uses and functions. When this project was first introduced, one of the goals was to create a building block and a foundation for future groups to attend SAE AeroDesign competition, both in the United States, and internationally in Brazil as well. The airplane and performed calculations, for example, can be used in the years to come as a reference for their own designs and airplanes, and for future generations of FIU students, fostering participation in these types of events.

27

5. Aerodynamic Design and Analysis

5.1. Introduction
The process of designing an aircraft is one that requires extensive planning and record keeping, due to the many different aspects of the design that require synchronization and constant updating, after initial assumptions are being made. In this sense, the design process mostly begins with the use of empirical and historical data, and after some rough assumptions are made, design parameters are obtained which then need to be revised again for further optimization of the aircrafts shape, so it can be said that the design is an iterative process. To expand this idea, after the constraints and givens of the airplane are given, the designer needs to select the mission the airplane has to perform. After such mission is assigned, the process begins by establishing the main criteria, e.g. the wing loading of the aircraft, which is a critical constant for several more upcoming parameters in the airplane design process. After empirical data is collected, more theoretical formulas are applied, especially those provided in the Design of Aircraft book by Thomas Corke. These formulas aid in the design of control surfaces, empennage, even fuselage designs, but after a solid design is created, simple fluid mechanics relations are required to estimate lift and drag values that point out the expected performance of the airplane, which has to satisfy the constraints and givens in such design.

5.2. Main Wing Initial Design Parameters

5.2.1. Introduction The main wing is the principal lifting surface of the aircraft. It is designed to carry the load of the airplane when in flight. Therefore, as expected, it is considered the single most important feature in the design of the aircraft. Its design was divided into three categories and their inner subcategories, the latter being an initial estimate of the take-off weight, followed by the wing loading selection, which further enabled the team to fully complete the wing. Given the competition rules and restrictions on the construction of the aircraft, some of the parameters are fixed and their values are kept constant or their range is specified, therefore altering the regular design pattern for an airplane. This, in return, eased the task of design by having not to decide between a very wide arrange of design parameters, but to only choose those needed to create the most appropriate wing for the design.

28

5.2.2. Estimate of Take-Off Weight The take-off weight is a crucial factor to determine early in the design stage, because of its importance for the design of many other parts of the airplane. In this case, the estimate of the take-off weight is slightly easy to assign because of historical values and also because of competition restraints. Given a fixed engine (O.S. .61 FX) and maximum take-off weight (MTOW) set to 20 kg, the team decided to fix a target value of 18 kg for the preliminary take-off weight. In final stages on the design, this MTOW will be reassessed to account for possible changes in the design and an initial breakdown of estimated weights is further done. Normally, this estimate splits the total weight of the aircraft into three basic categories, as shown in Equation ( 1 ).

WTO

W fuel W payload Wempty

(1)

This equation, although extremely general, includes the three main weight divisions of the aircraft. Table 7 shows a breakdown of the weights at this stage.
Table 7: Estimated Take-Off Weight Estimates

Description Fuel Payload Empty Weight TOTAL

Estimated Weight (kg) 0.300 14.000 3.700 18.000

After estimating the initial weight, the next crucial factor in the wing design is analyzed, the wing loading. 5.2.3. Wing Loading Selection The wing loading is defined as the ratio of the total weight of the aircraft with respect to the planform area of the main wing, which in mathematical notation is defined as W/S. The wing loading has a noticeable impact on many aspects of flight, including take-off and landing performance, as well as glide and climb rates, according to Corke. Choosing a wing loading that suits one of these criteria before mentioned hinders the aircraft performance on any of the other aspects, so it needs to be carefully chosen to give priority to those aspects that the aircraft is primarily designed for.

29

For this high-lift application, short take-off and landing is the single most important criterion. Equation ( 2 ) clearly states the effect on the wing loading on take-off, therefore, for a given engine and a maximum take-off length, it was deemed necessary to select a low wing loading so that the aircraft can reach take-off speed VTO in the shortest time possible.

VTO

1.2Vs

W 2 1.2 S C Lmax

0.5

(2)

Carefully examining Equation ( 2 ), it can be seen that, if density and the lift coefficient are fixed, the wing loading has a direct impact on the take-off velocity required for the airplane to lift off. Figure 26 shows the relationship existent between the wing loading and VTO for sea-level pressure and a fixed CLmax of 2.0, which is a reasonable value for angles of attack nearing positive 10 degrees, a value reasonable at take-off.

Take-Off Velocity vs. Wing Loading

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 50 100 150 200 250

Vto (m/s)

Wing Loading (N/m^2)

Figure 26: Take-Off Velocity vs. Wing Loading

All these numbers are important, but at this point a key factor has not been determined yet, and it is nothing else than the planform area of the wing, S, which is needed in order to find W/S. For this, it is necessary to look at the geometrical restrictions imposed on the aircraft, and make the best choice for the planform area to obtain the best high-lift configuration. For this, a new variable is introduced, called the aspect ratio, AR. The aspect ratio is given by Equation ( 3 ). This equation shows that the wingspan b is directly related to the planform area of the wing, and Bertin informs that values ranging from 6-10 are acceptable for high-lift applications.

30

b2 S

(3)

In this process, the first compromise arises, when it is understood that there is a need to have a relatively large planform area in order to have a reasonable take-off velocity, due to the engines output. Therefore, if looking at Figure 26, it was chosen to have a planform area close to 1 m2 to get a wing loading of approximately 180 N/m2, which in return gives a reasonable take-off velocity of 14.55 m/s. Now that the wing loading was determined and a wing planform area S was obtained, the wing needs to be properly sized to achieve these values.

5.3. Wing Design

After the preliminary estimates, which are based on both historical values and dimensional estimates, it is necessary to determine the exact shape and size of the wing that gives the maximum and optimal performance for the aircrafts mission. This section summarizes the process of the wing design, from airfoil selection to geometrical aspects such as taper ratios, washout, to location of the wing itself on the fuselage. It was at this stage that the preliminary dimensions of the aircraft were established, as shown in Table 8.
Table 8: Preliminary Dimensioning of Airplane

Airplane Parameter Wingspan, b Mean chord length, Length, l

Length (mm) 2500 400 2000

From this table, an approximation of the planform area S can be that of a rectangular wing, where the wingspan b is multiplied times the mean chord length, to obtain the desired value of 1 m 2. In further design criteria, the root and tip chords will be modified accordingly to the trapezoidal shape that the wing will have, in order to recalculate a more accurate value of S. 5.3.1. Airfoil Type The airfoil is the cross-sectional view of the shape of the wing. Its shape defines the behavior of the wing, therefore it must be chosen with utmost care and thorough research in order to achieve the expected performance from the aircraft. State-of-the-art technology currently allows for more advanced airfoil generation systems, where methods like inverse design and optimization can create a near-ideal lift distribution with minimized drag in order to obtain the most efficient wing for a given application.

31

However, as everything in aeronautics, there is a notorious compromise appearing in the ideal airfoil design theory, because it undermines the other aspects of the wing creation, namely, its manufacturability, its production cost and the material availability. As expected, the most aerodynamically efficient and optimized wing, requires extensive computational efforts along with thorough research time and development, while its manufacturing could also lead to a very complicated structure and painful creation. This same phenomenon occurs when the design is preferred for its low cost, etc. Therefore, a balance needs to be assessed that comprises the most important features needed, adhering to simplicity, effectiveness, and ease of manufacturing, keeping in mind the limited budget for its construction. With this said, it was decided that the airplanes wings have to be based on previously studied airfoils, where software packages such as Mark Drelas XFoil and Italian-based Profili provide useful data sets for an extensive collection of airfoils. Figure 27 and FIGURE are both actual screenshots of these two very useful software packages. 5.3.1.1. XFoil XFoil is a computer program designed by MIT professor Mark Drela, in which different types of airfoils, mainly gathered from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign database, are studied for applications at low Reynolds numbers and for a wide array of angles of attack, including viscous and inviscid boundary layer scenarios. Expanding this idea, the user has total control of their simulation cases, and transition into turbulent flow can even be visualized.

Figure 27: XFoil Screenshot

This software package can be used to determine important values for 2-D coefficients of lift and drag, as well as their relation, better known as lift-to-drag ratio, or L/D. However, it is important to mention that this software will produce results for a two dimensional scenario, that is, an infinite wing

32

where the lift-induced drag is ignored, and there is no wingtip vortices generated, which are a significant contributor to drag. For this reason, XFoil can never be enough for the design of a wing, but it is a key factor in deciding which airfoil is better suited for the application. 5.3.1.2. Profili Profili is an Italian computer program capable of combining XFoil and making it more user friendly, where comparison graphs between different airfoils can be made for better interpretation of the coefficients each airfoil has for a particular Reynolds number. Moreover, it is capable of generating stereolithography (STL) files for three-dimensional wings, which can further be exported into OpenFOAM for Computational Fluid Dynamics analysis. As another added plus, it gives recommendations for the structural location of the spars in the finite wing, where designers can get a preliminary location of the spars that guarantee the structural rigidity of the airplane.

Figure 28: Profili Pro Software

After evaluating an entire collection of high-lift, low Reynolds number airfoils, it was determined that the airfoils that will be thoroughly tested were the CH10, the Eppler E420 and the Wortmann FX 63137. The following figures give a graphical representation of these airfoils, where the pronounced cambering is the constant, for these high-lift airfoils. 33

Figure 29: CH10

Figure 30: FX 63-137

Figure 31: Eppler E420

After thorough study and evaluation, taking into account L/D performance, CD values, Power Factors and many other parameters shown in the , it was determined that the CH10 was the appropriate airfoil for the root and the FX 63-137 was assigned to be the tip airfoil, with a blend of the two as the wing moves from root to tip. The CH10 airfoil gives excellent L/D performance at low Reynolds numbers; with notable lift coefficients that increase steadily well into angles of attack nearing 12 degrees, where an appreciable decline in the lift coefficient can be appreciated as the AoA increases after that point. Values for CLmax were near 2.1 for the 2-D airfoil at take-off environmental parameters of velocity and pressure. However, if this airfoil was to be chosen for the entire wingspan, there would have been too much lift being generated at the wingtip, therefore creating a considerably large wingtip vortex which would translate to high pressure drag coefficients in the finite wing. This is the point where the FX 63137 airfoil was considered to be the tip airfoil. Equation ( 4 ) shows the how the airplane wings aspect ratio has a direct impact on the induced drag generated on the wing, so the lower the aspect ratio is, the greater this drag type will be. Moreover, for higher values of the lift coefficient, the induced drag will also increase exponentially. This is one of the most important reasons why the Wortmann airfoil was selected for the tip, due to its highlift properties, but lower CL than their counterparts. (4) The FX 63-137 airfoil (Figure 30), as its root airfoil counterpart, shows remarkable L/D values for an extensive array of angles of attack, yet with a lower base drag CD0, which also guarantees less structural considerations at the tip. The fact that this airfoil also generates less lift than the CH10, also makes it a great candidate for the tip because, although it is not necessary to go as far as making the tip symmetrical, it reduces the wingtip wake vortex due to its lower pressure differentials. In further sections, computational fluid dynamics studies confirm this assumption made at this stage of the design.

34

Figure 32: CL vs. Angle of Attack and CD vs. Angle of Attack for Candidate Airfoils

35

Figure 33: L/D vs. Angle of Attack and CM vs. Alpha for Candidate Airfoils

5.3.2. Taper Ratio This parameter is defined as the ratio of the chord size between the tip and the chord. Equation ( 5 ) shows the mathematical formulation for this relationship.

ct cr

(5)

The design objective of this parameter is to reduce the amount of lift-induced drag on the wing, since lower chord at the tip hinders the lift being generated at the end of the wing, therefore reducing the wake-generated pressure drag. This feature, plus the specialized airfoil type at the tip, is intended to reduce this phenomenon. For this wing, based on historical design values, a taper ratio of 0.35 was selected, and with the mean value set to 0.40, the root and tip chord lengths were obtained, as shown in Error! Reference ource not found..

36

Table 9: Chord Lengths in Tip

Wing Chord Location (Taper Ratio: 0.35) Root Tip 5.3.3. Sweep Angle

Length (mm) 520 182

The sweep angle is defined as the line perpendicular to the fuselages centerline and the line parallel to the leading edge. According to Kuethe, its main purpose and use is for transonic or highspeed subsonic aircraft, where supersonic Mach numbers are reached in some wing sections, and it is necessary a sweep angle in order to increase the critical Mach number. In this particular low Reynolds low speed application, it was rendered useless; therefore this parameter was not considered nor studied in the design.

Figure 34: Sweep Angle Geometry

5.3.4. Dihedral Angle The dihedral angle is the angle between the horizontal plane in the root chord and a plane between the lower and upper surfaces of the wing. For this aircraft, it was decided that a dihedral of 5 degrees would create enough stability without any prejudice that might arise from the sideslip condition generated by the dihedral effect. Also, the Keel effect or pendulum effect was discarded as well, due to the aircrafts center of gravity location, which is not too separated from the main lifting device, the main wing. 5.3.5. Geometric Twist (Washout) Geometric twist, also known as washout, is represented by a rotation of the chord of the root airfoil with respect to the airplanes longitudinal axis. For this application, its purpose is to control the stall characteristics of the airplane. The effects of washout on this low Reynolds applications have not been studied in this design for this report, however, experimental tests are scheduled to happen for future iterations of the plane, and their results will be reported accordingly. It is known, however, than the tendency of the variable airfoil wing produces a relatively small washout that most definitely has a

37

positive impact on reducing the airplane stall, by stalling first the root, therefore having a controlled stall and successful aircraft recovery.

Figure 35: Ideal Stall Progression

5.3.6. Location After all the wing parameters were thoroughly explained and detailed, it is important to know the location of the wings on this airplane. Given its size, materials and structural design, it was decided to place the wings on top of the fuselage, due to its ease of attachment, as well as the stability highplaced wings present on aircraft. Placing the wing anywhere along the fuselage would have represented major problems for the design, especially considering a middle wing configuration would leave a not desirable place for the payload bay, just like a low-wing configuration would have represented a less stable aircraft and a weight penalty in structure due to strong reinforcements in attaching the wings to the fuselage. Section 3 thoroughly explains the wing choosing process. 5.3.7. Winglets A final addition to the aircraft, helping to dramatically decrease the pressure drag originated at the tips, is the incorporation of winglets into the design. At the final stage of the design, two different types of winglets were considered and their effect on diminishing lift-induced drag was taken into account with the use of computational fluid dynamics. However, the second winglet was complicated to model, therefore theoretical assumptions had to be made for it, and therefore it was discarded. The first winglet prototype is a winglet that has the same winglet-span as its root chord, with a taper ratio of 0.3. This winglet will be oriented at an angle of 75 degrees with respect to the positive spanwise axis. Figure 36 illustrates the concept behind this winglet. It is important to mention that the

38

winglet is not responsible for stability or lift-generation purposes, whereas its main purpose in this application is to reduce the lift-induced drag, which is estimated at five percent.

Figure 36: First Winglet Prototype

The second prototype is an innovative design which splits the leading edge half-chord section upwards while the other half of the chord, up to the trailing edge, is facing downwards. This conceptual design promises very interesting results, but difficulties in processing the results obtained with this winglet obstruct the feasibility of its inclusion in the final iteration of the aircraft.

Figure 37: Experimental Winglet

The theoretical and less studied nature of the second winglet prototype, along with its manufacturing complexity, rendered it useless for consideration of inclusion in the proposed model.

5.4. Empennage Design

The tail is one of the most important parts of the plane, as it guarantees stability and maneuverability. Several configurations are available for engineers to decide on, including but not limited to conventional tails, T-type tails, V-shaped tails and other configurations.

39

Research has shown that the inverted V-tail is one of the most ideal configurations for airplanes, but it involves constructing a very tall, hence complicated landing gear system. Also, the control surfaces need special attention, therefore making it a very time costly solution. This being said, it was decided to go with the conventional tail system, with horizontal stabilizers being the base for a vertical stabilizer. 5.4.1. Location The tail is located along the same longitudinal axis as the main wing section. This selection was made due to the hindering of aircrafts control surfaces due to the wake generated by the main wing on critical angles of attack. Corke provides a very illustrative image showing this phenomenon. At this orientation, the turbulent air generated by the wake can cause a decrease in control of pitch and yaw, therefore compromising the aircrafts flight characteristics.

Figure 38: Recommended Location for Horizontal Tail

5.4.2. Horizontal Stabilizer The horizontal stabilizer corresponds to the section of the empennage that provides the ability of the aircraft to change its pitching orientation, therefore increasing or decreasing the angle of attack of the airframe and wings, altering the attitude in the spanwise axis. Although relatively large horizontal stabilizers guarantee stability, its contributions to the aircrafts overall drag coefficient can pose a threat to its performance, therefore, a careful study of its size must be conducted to guarantee both stability and reduced drag conditions. 5.4.2.1. Airfoil Selection The selected airfoil for the horizontal stabilizer was the symmetrical NACA 0010 airfoil. This selection was based because the tail needs to create as less drag as possible, and also it should provide

40

reasonable lift when the aircraft is at a positive angle of attack in order to successfully control de pitch of the plane. This particular airfoil showed low CD values and good CL values when not in level flight. 5.4.2.2. Planform Area, Wingspan, Aspect Ratio and Taper Ratio Using the mathematical relationship found in Equation ( 6 ), an initial estimate was found for the area of the aft stabilizer, SHT.

SHT

CHT

cW SW lHT

(6)

After obtaining this result, it was found that the planform area had a value of 0.17 m 2, a value very large for the airplane. After stability and control analysis, it was found that the tail force needed to keep the aircraft in cruise was very small, therefore it was decided to decrease 50% the size of the horizontal and vertical tails, to reduce their drag when the planform area was not as big as initial estimates predicted. The taper ratio was set to 0.4, the wingspan was 505 mm and root and tip chord lengths were specified as 261 mm and 81 mm, respectively.

Figure 39: NACA 0010

Figure 40: Eppler EA 6(-1)012

5.4.3. Vertical Stabilizer The vertical stabilizer is the other component of the empennage, which is responsible for the airplanes yaw control, preventing it from skidding and guaranteeing stability in turns and in crosswind scenarios. 5.4.3.1. Airfoil Selection The airfoil selected for the vertical stabilizer was that one with the smallest form drag C D0, because its lifting properties are not required for a vertical stabilizer. This being said, it was decided to use the Eppler EA 6(-1)012 airfoil, which shows very low drag coefficients at low Reynolds numbers. 5.4.3.2. Planform Area, Aspect Ratio, Wingspan and Taper Ratio Just like the horizontal stabilizer, the vertical stabilizers planform area was controlled by the following equation, 41

SVT

CVT

bw Sw lVT

(7)

where, like in the horizontal stabilizer, the vertical tail was found too large and a reduction of 50% was made, with the assurance that this reduction would suffice for enough control of the aircraft. The next table shows significant information about the decision on reducing to half the size of the tail. Table 10 clearly shows how this fifty percent reduction in size suffices for the required aerodynamic force requirements.
Table 10: Size Reduction Optimization on Vertical Stabilizer

Parameter Size Lift Required Deflection Force

Original Value 0.085 m2 11.71 CL near 2.50 N

Optimized Value 0.0425 m2 5.738 CL 5.738 N

Difference 50% reduction 50% reduction 128% over minimum

42

5.5. Aerodynamic Analysis

5.5.1. Theoretical Background 5.5.1.1. Introduction Extensive research and review of aerodynamics books have been critical for a proper analysis of the proposed Remote Controlled (RC) aircraft. For such a vehicle, a thorough understanding of the fluid mechanics concepts is essential for the elaboration of equations needed when designing, testing and prototyping the airframe and all of its components. Likewise, information about RC modeling and construction is fundamental to incorporate theoretical experience and knowledge on a team that requires this valuable information on prototype construction and testing. For this section of the project, the bibliography obtained mostly refers to that for amateur RC airplane builders, but it was also considered helpful for this task some professional studies by both government and civilian institutions on drone research and development. If analyzed properly, it could be said that both drone and RC airplane can be considered part of the same category, which are, occasionally, scaled-down unmanned airplanes that perform specific tasks. Another aspect that evidently becomes essential for a successful design of an airplane is stability and control. This field is of particular interest for anybody controlling a vehicle that is intended to be airborne, exposed to any weather and random atmospheric conditions, where designers have to be wary of the effects of those before mentioned sceneries. This study covers important control theories that have been implemented in the making of this airplane. 5.5.1.2. Fluid Mechanics The area of fluid mechanics can most definitely be considered the broadest and most important areas of all those that are used in the design and modeling of this RC airplane, mainly because these equations give validity to the flight characteristics and behavior that need to be displayed by the model to be successful. For a complete exposition and understanding of all the theory that is behind the concept of flight and aerodynamics, it is of utter importance to mention the properties of a fluid, which results to be air for this specific implementation. The relevance that each fluid property has for the design of the aircraft also presented, for both practical and simplification purposes. The first property that is exposed is temperature, which for an atomic point of view will be similar to the amount of kinetic energy that particles have inside a substance. In order to achieve

43

consistency and easier comprehension of the results, the study is based on the SI units for temperature, which in this case will be the Celsius (C) scale, and its universal counterpart, the Kelvin (K) scale. Both units are correlated by the following equation:

1K 1C

273.15 K

(8)

From this formula it is appreciable that there is a 1-to-1 ratio in this conversion, but instead the degrees are shifted by a fixed value that is 273.15 degrees. This is due to Kelvin scales purpose of reflecting zero degrees Kelvin (O K) to be set as the absolute zero temperature, where it is proven that at such temperature, molecules inside a material lose all kinetic energy and remain still. After this brief introduction to a very well-known property of any material, a derived property of a fluid is also presented. This particular property shows the ratio of force applied within an enclosed area, and such property is called pressure. The unit for pressure in the SI system is called a Pascal (Pa), and it is expressed as Newton per meter squared (N/m2). The effects of pressure on an element are always perpendicular to the contact surface of the element, due to the inexistence of tangential forces on static fluids.

F A

(9)

Throughout the study of the effects of pressure in the aircraft and its structure, it is necessary to introduce the importance of the standard atmospheric pressure, which is the pressure exerted by the air on all of the Earth. The value of this quantity is 101.325 kPa (1.01325x105 N/m2). Another important aspect of the pressure is the difference between atmospheric, gage and absolute pressure. Gage pressure is defined as the difference between atmospheric and total pressure, defined by

pgage

pabs

patm

( 10 )

In further study of matter and its relevant properties for this study, is clear that different materials exhibit different characteristics that make them unique and preferable for design considerations. Weight and volume are both critical for an airplane structure, and density is a property that defines the ratio of mass (directly proportional to weight) to an incremental volume. In other words,
( vol )

lim

( mass ) (vol )

( 11 )

and for an ideal fluid, 44

p RT

( 12 )

In Equation ( 12 ), a constant R was introduced, which is the known as the gas constant. Its value for standard air is 287.05 Nm/kgK. Note how density in a gas is greatly affected by its pressure and temperature; this relation is vital for the understanding of aerodynamic concepts in the analysis of the design. Viscosity is another key element in treatment with fluids, and it is of high interest to the study and understanding of airfoils in the design of the wings, as well as the main fuselage of the plane. Viscosity could be vaguely explained as the fluidity of a fluid, and is rigorously defined as the relationship between shearing stress, , and rate of shearing strain in a fluid, as found in Equation ( 13 ), linked by a constant , which is called dynamic or absolute viscosity of a fluid. In the equation, u corresponds to velocity and y to the vertical axis.

du dy

( 13 )

The kinematic viscosity is a simplification often included in this analysis, which is simply the ratio between the absolute viscosity and density. ( 14 ) To conclude an introduction on the variables that will be used in this report, the speed of sound is an always-important variable in the study of aerodynamic designs. It should be clear that the model airplane studied in this report does not achieve high velocities, therefore the clarification for such property is given as a mere fact, as to its importance is not so relevant for this specific study. However, this number is defined as the speed of a sound wave going through a specific fluid, and again, for this case will be standard U.S. air. For this case study, an interpolation is necessary to account for the altitude in So Paulo, Brazil, which is at an average altitude of 760m. Interpolating, we obtain for an altitude of 0.760km,

337.361

m s

( 15 )

In spite of this difference in speed, the value could still be approximated to 340m/s for practical purposes, as well as the value for standard air pressure, which for design purposes the 760m-altitude difference is negligible.

45

Another important element to be considered for a complete design of airplane modeling and design is the variation of the conditions as the aircraft changes height. It is known that the efficiency for a jet engine increases as it goes to its cruising altitude, but for this RC model the altitude difference from ground to cruise level is not expected to exceed 100m. Therefore all the before mentioned properties are assumed to be fixed throughout the flight. In this study, is assumed that an airplane-fixed reference will be used for the study of flow equations. Three main equations are also used to determine the fluids motion in an aircraft. These are the continuity equation, the conservation of linear momentum, and the conservation of energy. A quick overview of these will further enhance the concepts portrayed in these equations. Equation ( 16 ) shows the continuity equation,

u x

v y

w z

( 16 )

Navier-Stokes equation as a derivation of conservation of linear momentum. Fluid analysis is incomplete without explaining the importance of the Reynolds number, found in Equation ( 17 ) a non-dimensional quantity, which is defined as the ratio of inertia forces to viscous forces (Bertin).

Re
5.5.1.3. Boundary Layer Concept

U L
,L

( 17 )

The concept of boundary layer is critical to any person interested in the study of fluid flow through a plate or airfoil. It is known that inside the boundary layer, two types of flow can exist: laminar or turbulent flow. Laminar flow is a type of flow that shows continuous streamlines throughout the motion, and turbulent flow shows an irregular, discontinuous motion of the fluid particles. The critical Reynolds number, Rcrit, determines the moment of transition between these flows. Inside the boundary layer, the fluid going through the airfoil is assumed to be viscous, and the viscosity properties cannot be neglected. Nonetheless, the air outside of this boundary layer can be considered inviscid. For airfoil design, which is pertinent to this design, a laminar flow will always be preferred in comparison to a turbulent flow, since the priority is to lower the skin and pressure friction for slender bodies, whereas turbulent flow just adds an unnecessary skin frictional force onto the airfoil design.

46

5.5.1.4. Other Considerations In more advanced situations in aerodynamic design, an engineer could face the event of highspeed subsonic or even supersonic speeds. In these situations, the compressibility factor of air cannot be neglected, and new equations and theories step over for a more complicated analysis of the fluid flow. For the study presented in this project, it is clear that all flows are treated as incompressible, since the velocities obtained are far below Mach 1, which is defined to be the speed of sound at that particular altitude and corresponding temperature.

Mach. Number
5.5.1.5. Aerodynamics

vehicle.speed speed.of.sound

( 18 )

This section introduces the basic concepts of aerodynamic design, in particular the main forces acting on a flying airframe, which are lift, drag, thrust and weight (Figure 41).

Figure 41: Four Main Forces on Aircraft

To further explain this relationship, it is important to mention the two main sources of the moments and forces on an airplane: pressure distribution and shear forces on the entire structure of the airplane, but for this explanation, the wing airfoil is considered. It is important to mention that the effect of these forces is separated by a 90-degree angle, being the pressure normal and the shear tangential to the surface. The sum of these two sources of forces and moments generates a resultant force vector and moment that can be further divided into two components that fall into the category of the four main forces; these are lift and drag.

47

As defined by Anderson, lift is the component of the resultant force R that is perpendicular to the direction of the free stream air, whereas drag is the component parallel to this same resultant force R. 5.5.2. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) 5.5.2.1. Introduction to CFD After obtaining a first rendition of the airplane, it is important to test its flight characteristics, in order to compare them with theoretical data. In fluid mechanics, it is understood that even for same geometrical shapes, different flow speeds tend to produce completely different results in the flight characteristics of a wing. This being said, it is crucial for verification to test the flight characteristics of the airplane ideally with both computational fluid dynamics and wind tunnel testing. In this project, wind tunnel testing was cancelled because the testing bench was not operating and repair was not feasible anytime soon.

Figure 42: OpenFOAM Pressure Distribution Along Wing with Velocity Streamlines

Because of that, computational fluid dynamics becomes extremely important for successful verification of the flight characteristics of the airplane, with extensive periods of research being put on carefully analyzing each component

48

5.5.2.2. Computational Resources To get values that resemble those obtained with proper wind tunnel testing, it is important to use appropriate resources in order to achieve correct values. There are various CFD commercial software available for students and professionals, among them some famous like ANSYS Fluent or CFX, or for simple calculations there is even SolidWorks FloWorks. However, these software packages are very expensive and academic licenses are very limited due to the computational power required to run these complicated codes. However, a Tesla-128 Unix-based cluster was used in FIUs own facilities, in the Multidisciplinary Analysis, Inverse Design, Robust Optimization and Control (MAIDROC) Laboratory directed by Prof. George S. Dulikravich. With the use of parallel computing, and the help of graduate student Mr. Stephen Wood, the different scenarios were tested out for an extensive array of different wing configurations, fuselage optimization, obtaining fast results with the help of supercomputing. The software package used by was OpenFOAM, which is an open source computational fluid dynamics suite capable of processing a wide range of cases, but for this situation, it ran perfectly incompressible fluid cases for low Reynolds wings. In order to work in OpenFOAM, the user needs to export the wing shapes into ASCII Stereolithography (STL) format, in order to run the simulation in this software. CFD helped determine the shape of the most aerodynamically important parts of the aircraft, mainly, the main wing, the fuselage, and the horizontal and vertical tail components. 5.5.2.3. Pre-Processing of Results In order to run the simulation, it is important to set up the case correctly in order to get accurate results. For this, several initial conditions were established, as shown in Table 11. The atmospheric values were those from the U.S. Standard Atmosphere, where the conditions are very similar to those present in Sao Jose dos Campos, Brazil. The other existing condition was the inlet velocity field, which in turn calculates the Mach Number.

49

Table 11: Initial (General) Conditions for CFD Analysis

Condition Density Temperature Inlet Velocity Density Normalized Pressure (Gauge) Mach Number

Value (unit) 1.225 (kg/m3) 288 (K) 15 (m/s) 0 (m2/s2) 0.044

After assigning these values, the processes are run for a large period of time in the computers, with the results being analyzed in ParaView, OpenFOAMs visualization and post-processing software. 5.5.2.4. Post-Processing of Results OpenFOAM outputs its results in text format. These results need to be analyzed using visualization software, and Kitwares ParaView is very handy and it gives a wide array of options to analyze the wing. From slice planes (Figure 43) to thresholds (Figure 44), it allowed the team to take a look at very important values of pressure and velocity which optimized the design.

Figure 43: Cross Sectional View of the Pressure Distribution at Midspan in ParaView

50

Figure 44: Threshold Indicating Low Pressure Area

Moreover, the code was modified to obtain important force coefficients that are necessary to compare analytical values obtained for 2D case with those values obtained in CFD. One of these comparisons was shown in Table 12.

Table 12: Difference between Theoretical 2D Data and 3D Finite Wings for Alpha = 0

Parameter Lift Coefficient Drag Coefficient

XFoil 2D CH10

XFoil 2D FX 63-137

OpenFOAM 3D CH10 Only

OpenFOAM 3D Variable Airfoil

1.23 0.014

0.91 0.009

0.6537 0.0871

0.8 0.067

As it can be seen, the lift coefficient, albeit smaller, is around 80% of the idealized 2-D scenario, which still delivers remarkably good lifting qualities. However, the drag is around 5.5 times greater than the expected value. This can be attributed to pressure drag coefficients in wingtips and increased skin drag due to the large planform area, S. These types of analysis are key to improving the shape of the wing, reason that it was decided to go for the variable airfoil shape instead of the simple 3D CH10 airfoil. Future study on the effects on the winglet will be studied and reported, because it is believed it will dramatically decrease drag values. As shown in Figure 45, it can be seen how there are considerably large vortices being generated at the tip of the aircraft, and due to its relatively low aspect ratio (for its mission), the use of winglets will damp these adverse pressure drag components.

51

Figure 45: Wingtip Vortices generated by Pressure Differentials in Tip. Winglets are designed to reduce this effect.

5.5.2.2. Fuselage Optimization with CFD Techniques The aerodynamic shape of fuselage was analyzed using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). Iterations of geometric shapes were conducted until optimal values of skin drag and pressure drag were obtained. Design of fuselage is divided into 4 main bodies; nose, main body, boom, and aerodynamic cover for nose and wing. The front part of the fuselage will contain major mechanical and electrical components of the aircraft such as engine, servos, battery, and receiver. Housing for each of the components is constructed in the front part of the fuselage. The main body of fuselage is where the payload bay is going to be positioned, as well as the structural cage that connects all the key components. The purpose of the cage will be explained in detail in the structural design of fuselage section. A boom will be the entity that connects the main body of the fuselage with the empennage. The boom consists of a carbon fiber cylinder of 15.29 millimeters in diameter. Aerodynamic cover for the nose plays an important factor in the design of the fuselage. Main function of the cover is creating a streamlined body for the fuselage. Streamlined bodies may increase value of skin drag in a small percentage, but pressure drag is decreased in a significant manner. An important number of fuselages were designed, but only the two most considerable options are going to be compared and analyzed. For CFD analysis, a rigid body designed that includes both geometrical shapes of fuselage and wing. Figure 46 presents the two fuselage prototypes.

52

Figure 46: Fuselage Prototypes

Again, it is important to mention that figure above is a representation of fuselage and wing structure in the same geometrical figure. Differences between two prototypes are, mainly, the shape of cover over the nose area. Prototype one provides a nose cover that begins in the front of the fuselage and is extended until wing structure. Prototype two offers a nose cover only for the nose, and the wing geometry is clearly visible. On the first prototype, a streamlined, airfoil-simulating structure was added to evaluate for a possible lift increase, which was non-existent in prototype two. Length and height are conserved equally in both prototypes. For CFD analysis, a subcritical Reynolds number is utilized. Figure 47 and Figure 48 are compared in order to determine which of the prototypes offer a better option concerning pressure drag.

Figure 47: Pressure Distribution - Prototype I

53

Figure 48: Pressure Distribution - Prototype II

Figure 47 and Figure 48Error! Reference source not found. determine behavior of pressure concerning each of the shapes. It is clearly shown that pressure in the frontal part of the plane is significantly higher in prototype two. At the aft section of the fuselage, prototype two presents a high wake than prototype one. This factor is present due of the air velocity at that position. The color blue represents low pressure, which is an indication of lift created by the body, when compared to the neutral green present at the flat bottom. Even though low pressure is present in both of the figures, prototype one offers a higher lift. By comparing results in each of the prototypes, prototype one offers a superior pressure drag behavior. Figure 49 and Figure 50 provides pressure and velocity distributions along the fuselage on each of the prototypes.

Figure 49: Pressure Distribution Prototype I

54

Figure 50: Velocity Distribution - Prototype II

As mentioned before, due to the fact that the airplane experiences velocities in the subsonic range, the Reynolds number implemented on the CFD analysis is subcritical. Velocity distribution on the prototypes is similar on both cases. As the body is exposed to the upstream undisturbed air, there is a change in velocity on the fluid as it irrupts through the undisturbed air, which is represented in the figures by the green and yellow that trails the body. The critical position in which there is a difference in velocity; concerning the two prototypes, is in the nose of the plane. Due to the fact that prototype one offers a further streamlined surface, changes in velocity with respect to the atmosphere is lower than the values in prototype two. It is important to mention that the change in velocity created once the object makes contact with the air, generates wake turbulence, which is often located at the aft of the aircraft and its clearly denoted on the figures. From the results of the CFD analysis, prototype two is chosen to be the fuselage of the aircraft.

55

5.6. Propeller Selection

Propeller is the entity that converts rotational motion into thrust. Hobby stores offer different types of propellers that are correlational with the selected engine to be utilized on the aircraft. Figure 50(a) determines the propeller size to be selected with relation to the engine displacement. For the aircraft, the competition rules and parameters requires that the engine must have a displacement of 0.60. From Figure 50(a) the appropriate size of the propeller for the selected engine are listed in table. Prop range for engine size 0.60 is from 11x6 to 12x8.

Figure 50(a): Propeller Selection

56

6. Structural Design and Analysis

The aircraft is constituted of three main sections: Wings, fuselage and empennage. Structural design on each of the sections is mainly based in the fact that the aircraft must be easily disassembly. In the following sections, a detail explanation on the structural design on each of the components that constitute the airplane is presented.

6.1. Wings
Structural design of wings is constitute by balsa ribs and carbon fiber spars. Wing structure is divided into three main sections. Figure 51 gives a graphical representation of geometry of wing. Wing is divided into three main sections. Middle section, and tapered sections A and B.
Tapered A

Middle

Tapered B

Figure 51: Wing Sections

Middle section of the wing consists of ribs with the same geometrical characteristics. Tapered sections A and B, as its name indicates, present tapered sections. This means, that each of the ribs that constitute these wing sections have a unique physical appearance. It is very important to mention that the tapered section have variable airfoils. Having variable airfoil represents that each of the ribs present on sections A and B are unique. Each of the sections requires two carbon fiber spars. Outer diameters of spars are 15.87mm and 9.53 mm, respectively. Since each of the section requires two spars, a total of six carbon fiber spars are utilized. The main function of the spars is to withhold ribs as well as provide a strong support to the wing. Selection of material to be utilized is critical due to the fact that minimizing weight is one of the most important factors in the construction of the aircraft; but it is also very important strength of material. As presented before, material selected for ribs is balsa wood and material selected for spars is carbon fiber. In order to assure durability of strength of spars, a static analysis is perform on each of the 57

spars, where the force to be tested if 180N, which is the lift generated by the wings. Total force is distributed along surface of the three carbon fiber spars that must be joined. Restraints are located where the wing is joined with cage, as well as position where joints between the spars are located. Applied force is denoted by purple color, and restrains by green color as shown in Figure 52.

Figure 52: Wing's Force Distribution and Restraints

All prototypes to be designed, are modeled using SolidWorks. Static analysis is performed by using COSMOSWorks. Once the study is performed, the factor of safety of the entire structure is calculated, as can be seen in Figure 53.

Figure 53: Spar Factor of Safety

Factor of safety of entire carbon fiber structure is 4.9. By having this value, it is concluded that material is not going to fail under any circumstances when force is applied in such direction. 58

With the selection of material on each of the components present on the wing, construction of a structural wing is required. Figure 54 gives a graphical representation of the wings structural design. As introduced before, structural design of the wing consist of 30 balsa wood ribs and six carbon fiber spars.

Figure 54: Wings Structural Design

Weight of the aircraft is one of the most important factors in the project. Even though balsa wood is a very light material; weight wise speaking, lighting holes are designed on each of the ribs in order to keep weight to its minimum possible value. Figure 55 presents physical appearance of ribs with lightening holes. Lightening holes were designed depending geometrical characteristics on each of the ribs. It is important to minimize weight of the ribs without weakening the physical strength on each of them.

Figure 55: Physical Appearance of Ribs

Leading edge and trailing edge balsa sheet reinforcements are located on the wing are l on each of the three sections. Leading edges are located in front of each of the sections of the wing. In order to obtain a smooth and continuous surface in the leading edge location, a special cut was design for each of the ribs as shown in Figure 56. In order to achieve a continuous surface, very thin balsa wood sheets are required. Because of the geometrical characteristics of the front portion of the ribs, a special treatment on the thin balsa wood sheet is required. This is due to the fact that if a balsa sheet is folded

59

in the desired form, the balsa would break. A detail explanation on the balsa wood treatment is explained in the construction of prototype section.

Figure 56 Leading Edge placement on Rib

Differing from leading edge, trailing edges are different on each of the wings sections due to control surfaces location on each of the tapered sections. Design of ailerons is presented in the stability and control analysis section. Structural design of winglet consists of two main carbon fiber ribs. Root rib of the winglet is the same as the rib located in the tip of the wing. Rib located in the tip of the winglet is 40% smaller than the rib located in the root of the winglet. All geometrical characteristics of winglets are explained in the design of the aircraft section. In order to achieve the desired 5o angle on the dihedral angle, a special type joint is manufactured. This joint encounters two critical tasks when constructing the complete wing structure. It joins wings sections A and B with the middle section, and gives dihedral angle to the tapered sections. A very detailed explanation on these joints is provided in the construction of prototype section. At the end of the assembly of the structural design of the wing, Monokote; a light plastic that covers and forms the surface of the wing, is applied in the entire structure. Pictures of complete wing assembly with Monokote already fixed are provided in the construction of the prototype section.

60

6.2. Fuselage
6.2.1. Nose Section Design of the fuselage was divided into three main sections: Nose, middle section and boom. Nose section of the fuselage is where most of the electrical components of the aircraft are located (Switch (5), receiver (6), batteries (3), and thrust servo (4)), as well as the engine (1) and gas tank (2). Component distribution is shown in Figure 57.

3 1 2

5 6

Figure 57: Components distribution on Fuselage

Material selected for nose structure is plywood of 0.5 cm of thickness. Even though selected material has reasonable weight, strength of material is crucial in this section of the aircraft. Strength of plywood is essential because engine is located in this section as well as the nose gear (not shown in figure below). The firewall; which is the place where the engine is mounted, has to be a very solid and stable structure. In order to reduce weight, lighteing holes are designed on each of the side faces of the nose structure, as it is graphically presented in Figure 58.

61

Figure 58: Nose Fuselage Structure

As the whole structure requires stability and strength, it is also crucial to secure structural stability and correct placement of the servo that provides thrust to the engine. The back wall of the nose section is the strongest and most stable part of the nose structure. Once the location is determined, a wooden structure is manufactured and assures the required stability that servo needs. As mentioned before, a pushrod actuated by a servo controls the admission valve on the engine, and this is the reason why it requires special attention. While manufacturing the servos holding structure, it is important that the servo can be easily removed for maintenance or replacement purposes. Figure 59 presents the servos location on the nose structure as well as physical characteristics of servos mounting structure. Material selected for mounting structure of servo is plywood.

Figure 59: Thrust Servo Placement on Nose Section

In order to protect components present on the nose of the fuselage, an aerodynamic part is designed in order to protect such components. As tested in the aerodynamics section, it is essential to design such component in a way that reduces drag by its geometry. It is also very important that component covers the corresponding wing section on the fuselage due to the fact that increases performance of the aircraft. A detailed explanation of the aerodynamics performance of the aircraft is

62

conducted in the aerodynamics section. Figure 60 determines placement of aerodynamic structure as well as physical characteristics. It is important to mention that the aerodynamic structure is easily removable in order to access components inside the nose of the fuselage via a Velcro fastening system.

Figure 60: Aerodynamic Structure Placement and Geometrical Characteristics

6.2.3. Middle Section Middle section of the fuselage is a rectangular box in which payload is located. Structural design of this section of the fuselage is crucial because it is the place where wings are attached to the rest of the airplane. With this fact in mind, it is reasonable to use the same material as the material used in the front part of the fuselage, i.e., the nose. Components located on the middle section of the fuselage are the payload bay and the cage structure. A wooden cargo loading door is designed in the aft of the fuselage in order to facilitate access to payload, due the fact that payload must be easily removed and added. In order to decrease weight, lightening holes were designed on each side of the assembly. Figure 61 shows components present on middle section of the fuselage, as well as the physical characteristics of the middle section of the fuselage.

Figure 61: Structural Design of Middle Section of Fuselage and Components

63

Position of payload is the most important factor in the structural analysis design process. In order to find the exact position where the payload must be located, a static analysis of all components present on the aircraft must be conducted. It is important to mention that analysis must be conducted without payload. This is due to the fact that the payload is a variable value. With the static analysis, the center of gravity (CG) of the aircraft is determined. Once the exact location of CG is calculated, load can be symmetrically added with respect to the CG, without affecting its location. The center of mass of payload must be exactly positioned on the center of gravity of the aircraft. This will give the advantage that, if load is added or removed, it will not affect the CG. Figure 62 presents a breakdown on how some of the forces were taken into consideration. Four of the most important components on the aircraft (wings, fuselage, payload and empennage) are evaluated with respect to their physical length. The rest of the components (express as a single arrow on Figure 62) are evaluated as a single force acting directly into an exact position on the fuselage. Payload Battery Empennage Structure Wing Structure Receiver Battery Tank Engine

1757 mm

Figure 62: Static Analysis Breakdown

Static analysis is performed in a Excel spreadsheet. Table 13 list all components present on the aircraft with its respective weight and location. In order to determine CG of aircraft, length of the airplane is required. Length of fuselage is determined on design of fuselage section, and it is calculated to be 1757 mm. Center of gravity of aircraft is located at 503.4 mm measured from the front part of the aircraft (Nose).
Table 13: Aircraft's Load Static Analysis

Fuselage Structure Analysis

64

Fuselage Data Fuse Length Load Summary (fuselage) Load Type Weight (kg) x/L_start x/L_end resultant x/L Fuel Payload Structure Engine Wing Struct. Tail Struct. Battery Receiver Servo 1 aileron (2) Aerodynamic Component Servo 2 Elevator Servo 3 Rudder Servo 4 Engine Servo Nose Gear Switch Boom Nose Gear Landing Gear 0.2536 0 2.08 0.56 1.5 0.3 0.119 0.00825 0.0744 0.04 0.0372 0.0372 0.0372 0.0372 0.0086 0.08 0.24 0.58 0.08 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.74 0.02 0.18 0.19 0.06 0.40 0.40 0.18 0.08 0.21 0.50 0.17 0.38 0.16 0.34 0.50 0.06 0.50 0.90 0.05 0.18 0.21 0.19 0.42 0.42 0.19 0.09 0.20 1.00 0.24 0.41 0.12 0.27 0.25 0.03 0.34 0.82 0.03 0.18 0.20 0.12 0.41 0.41 0.18 0.09 0.20 0.75 0.20 0.39 1.757 m

For manufacturing purposes, front and middle section of the fuselage are constructed as one complete structure to assure strength of the bottom. Assembly of front and middle section of the fuselage is presented in Figure 63

65

Figure 63: Assembly of Front and Middle Section of Fuselage

66

6.2.4. Payload Bay By knowing the calculated width of the fuselage, the maximum width accessible for the payload bay is 185 mm. A36 Steel is the material to be used as payload. Physical properties of ASTM A36 steel plate are listed in Table 14.
Table 14: A36 Steel Physical Properties

Description Elastic Modulus Poisson's Ratio Shear Modulus Mass Density Tensile Strength Yield Strength

Value 2.000E+11 0.26 7.930E+10 7.85 4.500E+08 2.850E+08

Units N/m2 -N/m2 g/cm3 N/m2 N/m2

Width of payload bay is set to 150 mm. Steel plates available in the industry started from a thickness of 5 mm. ( 19 ) Equation ( 20 ) shows the basic definition of density, where is mass. Density, width and thickness of steel plates are known. In order to find length of the steel plates, desired mass of each of the steel plates must be set. If mass of steel plates is set to 1.4 kg, by using equation ( 19 ), length of the steel plates is calculated to be 250 mm. Figure 64 shows assembly of payload bay and payload. is density, and V is volume and m

Figure 64: Payload Assembly

67

Payload bay is to be constructed with the thinnest aluminum plate available in the market. Lightening holes are designed to keep weight as minimum value as possible. The joint method used between the payload assembly and the middle section of the fuselage is by the use of two -20 screws and nuts set. For weight reduction considerations, the screws used could have been made out of nylon, but due to the competition restrictions on safety and materials, it was required to use steel for all fasteners. 6.2.5. Cage The cage is the most important assembly in the structural design process of the aircraft. The major purpose of the cage structure is to link all major aircraft components, i.e. the wings, fuselage and empennage into a one rigid and safe structure. Length of the cage structure is correlational with the length of the ribs located in the middle section of the wing (520 mm). Given the importance of the cage, a strong yet light material such as aluminum was selected for the assembly. In this type of structure, welding is required to assure safety and rigidity of the assembly. Outer diameter of aluminum rods is selected to be 17 mm. Figure 65 presents physical and geometrical characteristics of the cage structure.

Figure 65: Cage Structure

A static analysis on the structure is performed to assure that strength of selected material as well as geometry is able to withhold required loads. Static analysis is conducted in SolidWorks by using COSMOSWorks. The most important analysis is to determine whether or not the cage structure can withhold a total force of 180 N produced by the wings. Force is implanted where the wings are linked to the cage. Figure 66 shows applied forces (purple) and restraints located in each of the legs (green).

68

Figure 66: Forces and Restraints in Static Analysis

As explained before, a total force of 180 N is tested on the structure. Since a total of three joints with the wing are present, the total force must be distributed along these joints. A greater force is experienced on the front two joints. A total force of 70 N is applied on each of these joints. The third and last joint is a connecting member of the cage structure. Force is distributed along the connecting tube, and the total force applied in this element is 40 N. The aluminum selected for the cage prototype is 1060 Alloy. All physical properties of material are required in order to execute proper FEA analysis. Important properties of selected material are listed in Table 15.
Table 15: 1060 Aluminum physical properties

Description Elastic Modulus Poissons Ratio Shear Modulus Mass Density Tensile Strength Yield Strength

Value 6.900E+10 0.33 2.700E+10 2700 6.894E+07 2.757E+07

Units N/m2 -N/m2 kg/m3 N/m2 N/m2

When conducting static stress analysis, the displacement, stress and strain are determined. The minimum factor of safety experienced in the structure is 1.2, which is an acceptable value for this type of applications. The criteria used to determine the factor of safety is through Von Mises stresses. Figure 67 expresses factor of safety throughout entire structure.

69

Figure 67: Cage Factor of Safety

Even though the diameter of the tubing present on the cage structure can be reduced, (and by replacing the selected diameter, weight of structure is reduced as well), the cage structure continues to be the most important structural component on the aircraft. Decreasing the outer diameter of the tubing affects performance of the assembly, so in order to assure that cage structure will not fail; an outer diameter is set to be 17 mm, as it was set at the beginning of the structural design. All the three joints that takes place in the cage structure, namely the cage-wing, cage-fuselage and cage-boom connections, are explained in detail in the construction of prototype section. 6.2.6. Boom Boom section of the fuselage is the link between fuselage end empennage. The boom section is composed of one major component, selected to be a carbon fiber rod with outer diameter of 15.87 mm. In order to connect the boom with the middle section of the fuselage, a plywood component is manufactured that acts like a roof in the middle section of the fuselage. As described before, the component that links the middle section of the fuselage with boom is the cage structure. Figure 68 shows structural design of the boom section of the fuselage.

70

Figure 68: Boom Structure

The wooden structure in the boom section is essential because it embraces the two servos that regulate the control surfaces on the empennage; specifically the rudder and elevator. In order to connect the carbon fiber rod with the wooden structure, a link is designed that assures stability on the empennage. Left assembly on Figure 69 represents assembly of servos into the boom structure; right assembly gives a graphical representation of structure utilized to link the two main components of the boom section.

Figure 69: Servo Placement and Link

6.2.7. Fuselage Assembly Complete structural design of fuselage is presented in Figure 70. As explained before, the front and middle sections of the fuselage are manufactured as a complete structure. Joints between middle and boom section takes place in the cage structure. The aerodynamic part that covers the nose of the fuselage can be easily removed through the use of Velcro fastening on the walls.

71

Figure 70: Fuselage Assembly

In order to cover lightening holes present on the fuselage, the finalized structure is covered with Monokote.

6.3. Empennage
Empennage structure is divided into two main entities; horizontal and vertical stabilizer. Structural design of these entities that compose the empennage are exactly similar to the wings structure. 6.3.1. Horizontal Stabilizer As introduced before, structural design of horizontal stabilizer is similar to the structural design if the wings. A total of ten balsa ribs are utilized in the structure. Instead of a carbon fiber spars (used on wings), a balsa wood spar is utilized in order to keep ribs on desired location. This is a considerable change keeping in mind the total force experienced on empennage is almost negligible if compared to the total force experienced by the main lifting wings.

Figure 71: Structural Design of Horizontal Stabilizer

72

The horizontal stabilizer must be directly connected with boom of the fuselage. In order to join these two components, a structure; similar to the one that joins the wooden structure with the boom on the fuselage section, is designed. Placement of the holding structure is between the two biggest ribs of the horizontal stabilizer. These two ribs act as a supporting assembly for the holding structure. The holding structure in the horizontal stabilizer also acts as a support for the vertical stabilizer and; by applying two screws; the two main components of the empennage are joined. The manufacturing process for the holding structures is critical due to the fact that if there is any failure on joints, the yaw and pitch controls; which are located on the empennage, will be lost, therefore rendering the airplane uncontrollable. Due to the structural importance of the holding structure, it was necessary to utilize a material that offers better physical properties than balsa, which is plywood. Figure 72 shows exact placement of the holding structure as well as physical and geometrical characteristics by itself.

Figure 72: Placement of Holding Structure and Physical Characteristics

The control surface located in the vertical stabilizer, i.e, the elevator, is designed in the stability and control section. Construction is explained in detail in the construction of prototype section. The complete entity is covered with Monokote. 6.3.2. Vertical Stabilizer Structural design of vertical stabilizer is constituted by five balsa wood ribs and a balsa wood spar. Figure 73 shows structural design of vertical stabilizer.

73

Figure 73: Structural Design of Vertical Stabilizer

The control surface in vertical stabilizer, that is, the rudder, is designed in the stability and control section. Construction is explained in detail in the construction of prototype section. 6.3.4. Empennage Assembly Figure 74 shows the complete structural design of the empennage.

Figure 74: Empennage Assembly

74

6.4. Landing Gear Structural Design

The landing gear on the airplane holds an important function in completing the task and operations given by SAE Brazil in the competition. If the landing is not able to withstand the estimated payload, then the entire airplane would collapse at the time of landing. From preliminary calculations, the estimated payload was 14 kilograms, making the estimated weight of the aircraft approximately 18 kg. To ensure the landing gear is capable of withstanding this amount of weight, it was estimated a 175% increase in weight acting on the airplane at the moment of where the airplane first reaches the ground. Different designs were tested on SolidWorks using the CosmosWorks application. From the 175% increase in weight and force acting on the landing gear, the designs were tested with a weight of 31.5 kg, or 309.015 Newtons. After analyzing a few simple designs, it was decided to use a shape similar to an arch. This design was tested under weight and force mentioned earlier and gave results which are shown in Figure 75.

Figure 75: Factor of Safety for Landing Gear

The figure previously shown is a representation of the factor of safety of the landing gear. The minimum factor of safety distribution came out to approximately 1.6. This is a very satisfying value for the design, given that it is light in weight, but still capable of holding of expected payload, plus and estimated amount of shock at the moment of impact with the ground.

75

Figure 76: Stress Analysis on Landing Gear

A final analysis that wanted to be run on the landing gear was a stress test. The maximum von Mises stress, according to the CosmosWorks application on SolidWorks, was approximately 1.754 Pascals. This amount of stress is not found on many points throughout the object, it is only

visible at the holes where the landing will be connected to the axle and subsequently its wheel.

76

6.5. Aircraft Structural Design Assembly

Complete assembly of three of the most important components of the aircraft; wings, fuselage, and empennage, is presented in Figure 77.

Figure 77: Structural Design Assembly

77

6.4. Stability and Control Analysis

6.4.1. Introduction The three angles of rotation of an aircraft are roll, pitch and yaw. With the angles of rotation, the pilot can control the aircraft, which rotates about its center of rotation. The empennage is responsible for the control of two of the angles of rotation, which are yaw and pitch. Rudders are in control of the yaw. Movement of the rudder, which is dictated by the servo, generates a rotation on the airplane from left to right. To a better understating of how this rotation takes place and where the rudders are located, Figure 78 shows a graphical representation of the location.

Figure 78: Location of Rudders

Elevators, which are also located in the empennage, are in control of the pitch of the plane. The movement of the elevators, which are also control by the servo, is up and down, which means that pitch controls the nose attitude of the airplane. Pitch is a very critical angle of rotation, because it is related with the angle of attack on the airfoil. Figure 79 determines where the elevators are located in the empennage.

Figure 79: Location of Elevators

The last angle of rotation to be introduced is roll. Ailerons are located on each of the wings of the airplane, as shown in Figure 80. As its name represents it, roll is in charge on the roll to the sides of the airplane; right and left. When the airplane needs to roll over a side, ailerons move in opposite directions to each other. As an example, when the left aileron moves up, the left aileron moves down, and the airplane rolls towards the left side.

78

Figure 80: Location of Aileron

6.4.2. Static Stability and Control Static stability of an aircraft consists on the analysis of the three direction motion that an aircraft have, which consist of pitch, roll, and yaw. The analysis will determine whether the airplane is statically stable, as well as the sizing of the control surfaces. Figure 81 illustrates body axes and sign convention of the aircraft.

Figure 81: Body Axes and Sign Convention of the Aircraft

Longitudinal (Pitch) stability analyzes aircraft response to a sudden change on pitch angle. Static Margin (SM) measures the pitching stability, where static margin is defined as

( 20 )

where

In order to achieve static pitching stability, static margin must positive (SM >0). Addition of payload on the aircraft must not affect the static value sign, and must remain positive. Directional Stability is a moment about the center of gravity, meaning a rotation about the vertical axis. Calculating the coefficient of directional stability; , determines stability. The value of

coefficient must be positive, and a reasonable range specifies that values must range between 0.08 and

79

0.28. To determine the coefficient of directional stability, contributions from the fuselage, wing, and vertical stabilizer must be analyzed as well.

( 21 )

To determine contribution from fuselage, the following formula is utilized

( 22 )

where the VOL is volume of the fuselage, h and w correspond to height and width of the fuselage as well. Contribution from fuselage to coefficient is 0.001698182 Contribution from the wing is determined by ( 23 )

From the presented formula, all parameters are from the wing design. No sweep angle is present on the wing, and the x value is the distance from the center of gravity of the aircraft, to the wing aerodynamic center. Values from CG and wing aerodynamic center are obtained from fuselage design section. Value of x is 17.77 millimeters. Value of coefficient of wing is 0.055092096. Last coefficient to be determined is contribution from vertical stabilizer. ( 24 ) where calculated by ( 25 ) No sweep angle is present on the vertical stabilizer, and with respect to the fuselage center line. Volume coefficient is calculated by ( 26 ) Here, the coefficient of vertical stabilizer is 0.0158. is the height of the wing root chord represent influence of fuselage and wing on vertical stabilizer. This influence is

80

By adding all the calculated coefficients; fuselage, wing and vertical stabilizer, the total directional stability coefficient is defined as 0.0726. Again, in order for the aircraft to be stable, coefficient must be positive, and calculated value is close enough to be within the reasonable range provided before. 6.4.3. Sizing of Control Surfaces 6.4.3.1. Ailerons Ailerons control the lateral (rolling) moment of aircraft. Size of the aileron was design using Figure 82, which uses some historic values and guidelines

Figure 82: Historical Guidelines on Aileron Sizes

Value of span of the airfoil expands from 50 to 90% of the wings span. By evaluating values from the wing design section, calculations of total aileron span are between values of 625 and 1125 millimeters. Figure 83 shows a graphical explanation between different scenarios of the aileron size.

81

Aileron Size
1200 Aileron span (mm) 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 3.5 4.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 9.5 10.5

Aileron Chord (mm)

Figure 83: Aileron Size

In order to determine size of ailerons, wing is considered to be a fully tapered wing; meaning no rectangular middle section is taken into consideration. Surface available in the wing has a length of 891.55 millimeters. Minimum value calculated from the wing span; 625 millimeters, its calculated to be 70.10% of available surface. Control surface is tapered, and width variables depending placement along the wing span. Ailerons are frequently about 15-25% the size of the wing chord, and if the wing is tapered; control surface must be tapered as well, as shown in Figure 84.

Figure 84: Tapered Control Surface

The main reason for tapering the control surface is due to the location of the spars, which are positioned on the way of the ideal control surface. If no taper ratio is present in the control surface, a curved spar will be required, or any other system that allows for such control surface to be generated.

82

6.4.3.2. Rudders and Elevators As well as the sizing of the ailerons, rudders and elevators are sized using historic values, which gave a percentage to follow. Both control surfaces regularly are 25 to 50% of the tail chord. Most of control surfaces located on the empennage begin on the fuselage and extend to 90% of the tail span. Horizontal stabilizer has a wingspan of 505 millimeters. Since the only element of fuselage present on the aft of the aircraft is the boom, a single control surface for the entire horizontal stabilizer will be taken into account. Desired length of control surface is from tip to tip of the entire horizontal stabilizer. Vertical stabilizers wingspan is 292 millimeters. Same approach is taken to decide the length of the control surface is from tip to tip of the entire vertical stabilizer.

6.5. Electrical Design Layout

Figure 85: Electrical Circuit Layout for the Airplane

Demonstrated in Figure 85 is a representation of the schematic for the electrical design. As the voltage source, a battery pack of Energizer NiMH 1.2 Volt batteries is being used. This battery pack consists of four of these batteries, raising the voltage to 4.8 volts. These batteries are rated for 2300 milliAmp-Hours (mAh) each. One of the reasons on the decision to use a Nickel metal hydride battery pack was that it has a higher energy density of almost 40% compared to nickel-cadmium batteries, this will in effect give a longer time of flight, if necessary. If an electrical analysis is to be run on the electrical system, it would look like a Thevenin equivalent discharge. The circuit has a series combination of voltage source ( resistor ( . ), a series resistance ( , and finally a parallel combination of a capacitor ( ) and a

83

Shown in Figure 86 is a graph comparing the voltage of the used battery versus the capacity discharged. From this figure it can be said that the battery maintains its voltage even when the capacity discharged is increasing.

Figure 86: Voltage Discharge Diagram

The radio used is a Futaba 2.4 GHz 4-channel receiver for the aircraft. The power required to make the receiver function properly is 4.8 volts to 6.0 volts, while the current is 80 milliamps (mA). Figure 87 is a picture of the transmitter used for the competition.

Figure 87: Futaba 4-Channel Transmitter

The servos being utilized have an operating voltage of 4.8 volts to 6.0 volts. The current at 4.8 volts is said to be approximately 7.2 milliamps (mA). If the specifications of all the parts are correct, the airplane should be able to stay in flight for approximately 3.75 hours, given the batteries are fully charged.

84

7. Prototype Construction
7.1. Description of Prototype
Prototype to be constructed is presented on Figure 88.

Figure 88: Final Prototype

The placement of wing with respect to the fuselage is high wing. Tapered wings and variable airfoil throughout the tapered sections A and B are present on the wing structure. Also, the design of wing has been optimized using computational fluid dynamics. In order to reduce induced drag, winglets have been designed and added to the final prototype. A dihedral angle of five degrees on the tapered sections of the wing is obtained with the use of manufactured aluminum joints located on each of the two spars present on the three wings sections. Conventional empennage configuration has been selected and geometrical characteristics of fuselage have been determined using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Design of landing and nose gears has been tested with static analysis. With such configuration, the prototype is ready to be constructed.

85

7.2. Construction
Construction of the prototype is one of the most challenging steps in the process of the project. This is due to the fact that transferring ideas and CAD models into reality is not always possible. Constraints the team had to face were time, money, and availability from industry with respect to materials and components. Brazil is a country where the most commonly units used are in SI system. From the beginning of the development of the project, team decided to use SI units. By taking this decision, team had to face some challenges in the manufacturing process due to the fact that most of the materials available in the US are in English or American System units. During the process of manufacturing, original aircraft ideas had to be slightly modified in order to obtain the desirable materials or components. Also, some of the deviations from the original ideas concerns with what is available in the industry. Custom made parts are really expensive and required considerable time to be manufactured. Most of the times, decisions had to be taken on what the market had available. Even with the modifications that had to be made, design of the aircraft was not affected and dimension; as well as geometrical characteristics of the main components such as wings, fuselage, and empennage, remained as stated in the design and structural design sections. The process of manufacturing each of the parts and components present on the aircraft is detailed explained in the following sections. 7.2.1. Wings Structural design of wing is composed of balsa wood ribs and carbon fiber rods. As explained in the structural design section, the wing is divided into three main sections. Middle section and tapered sections A and B. Middle section of the wing is constituted by 10 balsa wood ribs which are exactly the same to each other. Tapered sections A and B are constituted by 10 balsa wood ribs on each section, in which each of the ribs have a unique geometry due to the fact that variable airfoil and the tapered wing are implemented in the design of the wing. In order to obtain the exact geometry on each of the ribs along the platform area of the wing, Profili; which is software for development of wings in the radio control aircraft area, is utilized. Profili calculates the exact geometry of the ribs depending number of ribs and airfoil(s) utilized. Files can be exported into a computer-aided design software, which in this case is SolidWorks. By performing this, ribs can be designed and assemble together to construct the desired wing prototype with real dimensions. A CNC Mill will be utilized to cut the ribs. In order to input ribs data into the Anilam Mil Machine, a G-code or Anilam code must be written. A software called MasterCam is utilized to reproduce a code

86

that simulates the exact shape of the CAD drawing, and transforms it into machine G-Code. Files of ribs are input into Mastercam, and code is reproduced with exact geometrical characteristics of each of the ribs. Machine-friendly language G-code is input into Anilam Mill machine. This computer code is reviewed by the milling machines processor and software interface offers an option of previewing geometry of cut to be performed. Once the code is reviewed and ready to be utilized, a special wood routing bit must be used in order to obtain a perfect cut. The bit utilized for all balsa ribs is a commercially available Diablo 1/4 in. x 1 in. Carbide Straight Router Bit. Figure 89 shows the physical appearance of a wood router bit. A total of 2 bits were utilized in the complete process of cutting all the ribs of wings and empennage.

Figure 89: Wood Router Bit

Balsa wood sheets are securely placed into machine as shown in Figure 90. It is crucial that balsa sheets do not move during the milling process in order to obtain expected results.

Figure 90: CNC Anilam Mill Machine

87

It is very important to remove all wooden chips during the milling process. This assures quality of cut on the ribs. Tool utilized in the removal of chips is a vacuum as can be appreciated in Figure 91.

Figure 91: Ribs Milling Process

First step in the milling process is to sketch geometry of ribs to be cut into balsa. This gives the advantage to know where exactly the lightening holes are positioned. Screws, denoted in Figure 92 by their black color, are drilled into balsa sheets to assure that ribs are locked and no movement is permitted.

Figure 92: Sketch of Ribs

The final product is presented in Figure 93. A total of 45 ribs were cut, which includes all ribs from wings, horizontal and vertical stabilizer.

88

Figure 93: Balsa Ribs

With the process of manufacturing ribs of the wing and the empennage completed, assembly of the entire wing can be started. As specified in the structural design section, construction of wing is divided in three sections. Due to the fact that each of the sections is constituted by two carbon fiber spars, joints between the spars are required in order to join the sections together. These joints are critical in the performance of the airplane, because if any failure on the joints takes place during flight, control of the complete aircraft will be lost. A total of four joints are required in order to join the three wing sections. Manufactured joints are shown in Figure 94. Outer diameters of aluminum rods utilized in the joints are the same as inner diameters in the wings spars respectively. Since outer diameters in aluminum rods differ from each other, two different joints must be produced for each section juncture. Because of the difference in diameter, different screws are utilized. For the joints between thicker spars in the wing, a #10 screw is utilized. In order to secure the screw, security nuts and lock washers are required on each junction. For the spars located in the back of the wing, a #6 screw is utilized on each juncture. For security reasons, security nuts and locks are also placed in each juncture. The adhesive used on each juncture is disocyanate and cyanoacrylate. Glue must be applied on the complete surface of each joint and must be introduced to each of the wings spars until it dries. Team could have drill a screw thru each wing spar instead of using glue on the junctures, but a risk of weakening the carbon fiber structure was very high. The glue option was deemed safer after performing a quick safety test and

89

the decision of utilizing glue was taken in order to secure structural strength of carbon fiber rods. Manufactured joints also meet the responsibility of producing a five-degree angle for dihedral on each tapered section.

Figure 94: Wing Joints

In order to reinforce each of the joints between the wing sections, tie wraps are placed and glued on each side as can be appreciated on Figure 95. Figure 95 also presents complete assembly of two sections on the wing.

Figure 95: Wing Joint Assembly

Complete wing assembly is presented in Figure 96. White paper shown below the wing structure in Figure 96 is a drawing printed on real scale dimension in which it is specified where the ribs must be located along the platform area of the wing. It is very important that ribs are positioned in the way the 90

structural design was completed, and real-scale drawing fits like a guide. With the assembly of the completed wing presented on figure, it is very clear to define the tapered sections and the angle required by the wings spars. Ribs are glued to carbon fiber rods with cyanoacrylate.

Figure 96: Wing Assembly

With the assembly of structural design of wings completed, development of winglets is started. Winglets are located at the wingtips of the aircrafts wings. Its initial rib is the same as the last rib on each side of the wing, which is 182 mm of length. The top rib of the winglet its 40% smaller that the initial length of the rib, which is about 72.8 mm. Structural designs on each of the winglets is shown in Figure 97. Physical and geometrical characteristics of winglets are explained in aircraft design and structural design sections.

91

Figure 97: Winglets

Control surface on wings; ailerons, are part of the wing design structure. Ribs on the selected place are cut in a certain manner that shape of the designed wing is not affected. Once the control surfaces are manufactured, they are joined to the wing structure by hinges. These hinges allowed necessary movement in order to control the lateral (rolling) moment. Figure 98 shows a physical representation of hinges utilized to join the control surfaces with the wing structure.

Figure 98: Hinge

Four hinges, symmetrically divided thought out the entire surface of the control surface, are utilized on each of the control surfaces. It is very important to place the hinges in the correct positions on both surfaces in order to keep the shape of the wing as designed. By placing hinges in the incorrect positions; performance of the aircraft would be affected.

92

Figure 99: Control Surfaces of Wing

With the control surface already attached to the structural design of the wing, a servo, which will be in control of the ailerons on each of side of the wing, must be implemented in between two ribs in the wing. A solid structure is manufactured that will withhold the servo. It is important to manufacture this solid structure keeping in mind that head of the servo must be located outside the wing structure, as seen in Figure 100. Metallic control rods are utilized to convert rotational force from servo into linear force. In order for the force to be transmitted into the control surface, control horns are required on each of the ailerons. Control horns need a solid base which is implemented with balsa wood between the ribs and where the control horn is located. On Figure 100, a pushrod and control horn are shown.

Figure 100: Servo Placement on the Wings

93

The complete assembly of wing; with winglets and control surfaces, is shown in Figure 101.

Figure 101: Complete Wing Assembly

94

7.2.2. Fuselage As stated in the structural design section, fuselage is divided into three sections. For manufacturing purposes, two of these sections; nose and middle section, were constructed as one solid structure. Plywood is joined together with disocyanate and cyanoacrylate, two powerful adhesives. In order to obtain 900 angles, beams and straight rulers were utilized as shown in Figure 102.

Figure 102: Construction of Fuselage

Designed lightening holes are drilled in the front and middle section of the fuselage in order to reduce weight, as seen in Figure 103. Aerodynamic component that protects and covers components in front section is manufactured using thin balsa wood. Cargo loading door is manufactured with the same material as fuselage structure. A hinge is utilized in order to give capabilities of constructed piece to act as a door. Two holes are drilled thru door and cage, and two screws and placed in such holes in order securely close and lock the door. Closing mechanism is performed by using wing nuts. It is very important; for security reasons, that door is securely closed. This is due to the fact that payload is located in the middle section of fuselage.

95

Figure 103: Fuselage structure

In order to securely place components present on the nose of the fuselage, Velcro was utilized as displayed on Figure 104.

Figure 104: Components on Fuselage

Once the structure of the fuselage is concluded, manufacturing process of the cage is started. Aluminum tubes of 17 mm are acquired and bent in the desirable and required geometry as seen in

96

Figure 105. In order to obtain the required cages width, three aluminum pieces are cut and required to be welded to the two bent structures.

Figure 105 Aluminum's rods

The welding process is a critical step in the construction of the cage. As introduced in the structural design section, the cage is the link between all the three major components of the aircraft. Welding must be executed professionally to assured strength, durability, and stability of complete cage structure. With all these factors in mind, and knowing the importance of welding, team decided that welding must be conducted by a professional welder. Figure 106 shows final cage structure with welding already performed. Length of the cage is exactly the same as the ribs located in the middle section of the wing.

Figure 106 Final Cage Structure

There are three main joints present on the cage. Joints present are cage-fuselage, cage-wing, and cage-boom. The three joints require special attention due to the importance of such joints. Any

97

failure in any of the three joints could results in catastrophic consequences to the structure of the aircraft. In order to join fuselage and cage, a special part had to be manufactured. A solid aluminum rod with outer diameter equally to the inner diameter of the cage is introduced on each of the four legs of the cage. In order to assure placement and strength of the aluminum rods inside the cage, a screw passing thru the cage and the aluminum rod is implanted as denoted in Figure 107. Each of the aluminum rods is manufactured with a screw hole of -20. It is crucial to implement fender washers on each of the legs due to force distribution purposes on wood.

Figure 107 Fuselage-Cage Joint.

As mentioned before, back door of fuselage acts as a cargo loading door. In order to be able to close door securely, two screws are installed between the cage and door, as presented in Figure 108. Closing method preferred for the cargo door is by the use of wing nuts, also presented in Figure 108, which also shows open and close door positions.

Figure 108: Loading Door

98

Cage-wings joint is divided in two main sections. Each of the two carbon fiber spars must be in juncture with the cage. The most important joint takes place in the thicker spar of the wing (OD 15.87 mm). Two screws with diameter are drilled through the wings spar and cage. Length of screws is 120 mm and each of them is securely locked with wing nuts. Screws utilized on cage-wing joint are shown in Figure 109. Two aluminum plates are implemented on each side where the screw makes contact with the carbon fiber spar. Addition of plates is to distribute force along its longitudinal axis instead of applying force into a single point, which can be catastrophic for carbon fiber.

Figure 109: Screws utilized on Wing-Cage Joint

Figure 110 shows final assembly of front spar of the wing with cage. Security tape is put on carbon fiber spars when holes are drilled thru to assure that no cracks or any damage is performed on the spar. Security tape can be differentiated in the figure by its blue color.

Figure 110: Wings-Cage Joint I

99

A second spar present on the wing (9.53 mm) also requires a juncture with the cage. Since the outer diameter of the spar is very small, drilling holes for screws is not recommendable due to the fact that it may weaken the spar structure. For this main reason, instead of joining both structures with screws, components are joined together with a manufactured clamp. Material utilized on clamp is a thin aluminum that allows bending without damaging or breaking its natural composition. It is important to manufacture clamp in such way that it is easily disassemble. Figure 111 shows the completed manufactured clamp. From that figure, left side of clamp secures spar from wing, and right side fastens the clamp on the cage. It is also visible that right side of the clamp has a handle that assists with assembly and disassembly of the joint.

Figure 111: Clamp

Figure 112 shows complete joint between cage and wings.

Figure 112: Wings-cage Final Assembly

100

Boom of fuselage is joined to structure through the cage. As discussed in the structural design section, one of the components in the boom section is a wooden entity that acts like a roof on the fuselage. Joint between the two components is performed by drilling a total of four screws, equally divided on two on each side. To assure security and strength of joint; security screws, as well as security lock nuts and washers are utilized. For assembly and disassembly purposes, boom of fuselage and horizontal stabilizer of empennage are assembled as a one complete part, or entity.

Figure 113: Boom-Cage Joint

The wooden section of the boom is manufactured with plywood. Walls that hold servos for elevator and rudder are made with balsa wood. Holding structure for boom is manufactured with plywood as well, and it is pasted to the wooden section using disocyanate. This particular type of adhesive is also applied in the interior of the holding structure to assure a secure bonding between carbon fiber rod and plywood.

Figure 114: Servo placement and holding structure in Boom Section

101

7.2.3. Empennage Ribs of horizontal and vertical stabilizer were cut in a process that is explained in detail in the construction of the wings section. By having the balsa ribs already cut, balsa spars are added to each of the structures. In order to obtain exact placement of ribs, real-scale drawings are printed to use as a guide, as seen in Figure 115.

Figure 115: Real-scale Drawing for Empennage

Ribs are pasted to spars by using cyanoacrylate. Holding structure; which is in charge of joining boom of the fuselage and horizontal stabilizer, is placed in the middle of the horizontal stabilizer structure, as explained in the structural design section. Method of paste between boom and horizontal stabilizer is using disocyanate. This is a special type of glue that bonds the two components together. Figure 116 shows structural design of horizontal stabilizer with leading edge and elevator (control surface). Holding structure is already pasted joining the two structures (horizontal stabilizer and carbon fiber rob). Disocyanate is denoted by its white color and foamy consistency.

102

Figure 116: Horizontal Stabilizer with Boom-Empennage Joint

Method of linking the horizontal and vertical stabilizer is using the holding structure placed on the horizontal stabilizer as a base for the vertical stabilizer. Two screws are drilled through the last rib of the vertical stabilizer and the holding structure. Joint is reinforced by using disocyanate and cyanoacrylate to assure strength and stability of structure.

Figure 117 Empennage Assembly

Both of the control surfaces on each of the stabilizers on the empennage are manufactured in the same manner. Control surfaces are obtained by cutting the calculated portion of the tail of the ribs. By performing this, the geometry of the wing is kept as designed. Control surfaces are attached to the stabilizer structures by hinges, which allows the required motion to control the aircraft during flight. Rotational force of servo in converted into linear force by plastic control rods, denoted in Figure 118 by its yellow color. These control rods are protected by a blue light plastic rod. In order for the control surfaces to move, control horns are required on each of the control surfaces. Control hors required a solid base, which is manufactured with balsa wood and placed between two ribs on the control surface, as can be seen in Figure 118. 103

Figure 118: Control Surfaces on Empennage

7.3. Airplane Assembly

Aircraft assembly of the three main components of the aircraft; wings, fuselage, and empennage, is presented on Figure 119.

Figure 119: Aircraft Assembly

104

7.4. Monokote
Wings, fuselage and empennage structures are covered with Monokote. As explained before, Monokote is a light plastic utilized to protect and give aerodynamic shape to components. It is available in various colors, as well as transparent tones. Transparent blue Monokote is utilized on wings and empennage structures. Solid blue Monokote is utilized in the fuselage section. Process of adhering Monokote is quite simple, but at the same time it must be performed very carefully in order to obtain the quality results. Material is cut in the required size and one of the sides of Monokote is adhesive. The material adheres to the balsa after heat is applied, with the use of a hot iron. Once the Monokote is fixed into the structure, a heat gun is utilized in order to firm material and remove wrinkles, as seen in Figure 120. It is highly noticeable where heat gun has been applied. By applying heat gun in the complete structure of wings and empennage, aerodynamic performance is increased due to the new wrinkle-free surface.

Figure 120 MonoKote

105

7.5. Parts List

A complete list of parts present on the aircraft is presented in Table 16. Elements are divided among position on the aircraft. Function, as well as quantity of each element, is also listed on table.
Table 16: Parts List

No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Element Radio Control Engine Engine Mount # 10 Screw, nut and washer # 10 Screw, nut and washer Gas Tank Batteries Receiver Switch Velcro Servo Balsa Wood Ribs Carbon Fiber Spars #10 Screw, nut, and washer #6 Screw, nut, and washer 1/16 Balsa sheet Hinges 1/4" Screw and wing nut Aluminum plates Clamp Control Horns Control Rods Servo

Function Control of Aircraft Nose of Fuselage Thrust of aircraft Holds engine Firewall screws that holds engine mount Engine mount screws that holds engine Stores required fuel Supplies electrical power to aircraft Receives signal from RC On/Off power Secures components in fuselage Controls the air admission into engine Wings Structural Design of Wings Structural Design of Wings Joint between wing's main spar Joint between wing's secondary spar Leading and trailing edges Control surface joint on Wings Joint between Wings and Cage Joint between Wings and Cage Joint between Wings and Cage Control of Ailerons Control of Ailerons Control of Ailerons

Quantity 1 1 1 4 4 1 4 1 1 -1 30 6 2 2 -8 2 4 1 2 2 2

106

No. 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

Element Empennage Balsa Wood Ribs Balsa Wood Spar Hinges Plywood Joint Balsa Wood Ribs Balsa Wood Spar 1/16" Balsa Sheet Hinges Screw

Function Structural Design of Horizontal Stabilizer Structural Design of Horizontal Stabilizer Control surface joint on Horizontal Stabilizer Joint between Boom and Horizontal Stabilizer Structural Design of Vertical Stabilizer Structural Design of Vertical Stabilizer Leading and trailing edges Control surface joint on Vertical Stabilizer Joint between Vertical and Horizontal Stabilizer Landing and Nose Gear Take Off / Landing Take Off / Landing Control of Nose Gear MonoKote Protects Aircraft Structural design

Quantity 10 1 4 1 5 1 -4 2

43 44 45 46

Landing Gear Nose Gear Servo Monokote

1 1 1 --

7.6. Prototype Cost Analysis

7.6.1. Introduction Cost analysis of complete project is divided among sections: Aircraft construction, competition expenses, and traveling expenses. Complete cost of project is divided equally among members of the team. 7.6.2. Aircraft Construction Aircraft construction includes components that the aircraft requires such as engine, radio control, servos, etc., as well as materials. A complete list of all projects expenses is displayed on Table 17. List includes stores where components or materials were acquired, as well as total expenses in such stores. A total of three hobbys stores were required Crown Hobbies, Tower Hobbies, and Warricks Hobby Super Stores. Most of purchases in hobby stores are components that airplane requires (Propellers, fuel lines, gas tank, gas, fuel pump. servos and RC, screws and nuts, control horns, control rods, Monokote). Carbon fiber rods utilized on wings spars and boom of fuselage were obtained in Third Coast Kite and Hobby. Balsa wood required for ribs present on wings and empennage structures was acquired on Specialized Balsa Wood. In order for balsa sheets to have the desirable size, balsa 107

sheets required to be laminated, which had an extra cost. Payload utilized on the competition was steel plates. Steel plates and aluminum rods used on cage structures were obtain in C&R Metals. As explained before, professional welding was required in cage structure. Welding was performed in Accurate Machining. The Home Depot was the place where most of screws and glue were acquired. Also, plywood required for fuselage and wooden crate for transportation were purchased at The Home Depot.
Table 17: Aircraft Expenses

Engine Crown Hobbies Tower Hobbies Warrick's Hobby Super Store Third Coast Kite and Hobby Specialized Balsa Wood C&R Metals The Home Depot Navarro Accurate Machining Total

$158.72 $219.57 $189.92 $277.67 $122.63 $129.75 $51.30 $218.81 $4.14 $26.75 $1,399.26

108

7.6.3. Competition Expenses List of competition expenses are listed in Table 18. Competition requires a registration fee. In order for a team to attend the competition, a SAE membership was required for each of the participants. Also, during the summer time, a technical report of design of aircraft needed to be sent to Brazil. A total of 5 printed reports were required. Cost of printing, binding, and shipping is listed in Table 18.
Table 18: Competition Expenses

AeroDesign Registration SAE Membership Report Total

$358.00 $60.00 $115.30 $533.30

109

7.6.4. Travel Expenses Competition was held in Sao Jose dos Campos, Brazil. The city is located 80 km from Sao Paulo. There are no direct flights from Miami to Sao Jose dos Campos, so the airplane tickets purchased were nonstop from Miami to Sao Paulo. Each of the airplane tickets had a rate of USD $1450 with American Airlines. With American Airlines sponsorship, each of the airplanes ticket had a total cost of USD $727.20 per person. Transportation of the aircraft was achieved in a designed wooden crate. In order to the components to fit in such crate, size of crate was superior that standard baggage and an oversized penalty had to be paid. A rental car was method of transportation in Brazil. Car was rented from October 19 th to October 24th. Car rental and gas expenses are listed. Total time spent in Brazil was 6 days. Amount of expenses in hotel accommodations is listed on Table 19: Travel Expenses.
Table 19: Travel Expenses

American Airlines Airfare Jimenez, M. American Airlines Airfare Lugo, R. American Airlines Airfare Rojas, C. American Airlines Crate Transportation Car Rental LocarAlpha Ibis Hotel Oct. 20 (x3 persons) Novotel Oct. 21-24 (x3 persons) Guarulhos Airport Plastic Wrap Dutra Gas Station Ethanol Total $727.20 $727.20 $717.20 $125.00 $533.56 $117.99 $349.53

$35.32 $45.43 $3,378.43

110

The College of Engineering and Computing denoted a total of USD $1500 as a support for students in the competition. By subtracting total amount donated by the College of Engineering, total expenses from aircraft construction, competition expenses, and travel expenses represent an estimated total of USD $3.810.99. Total expenses of project are divided equally among members of team. This being said, the total amount spent by each member of the team is USD $1270.33. From the beginning of the project, estimated expenses by each member were near one thousand U.S. dollars. Even though expenses by each member exceeded the projected budget, team was committed to the participation in SAE Brazil AeroDesign competition, and saw this competition as a one-time life opportunity that could not be wasted. Traveling and competition experiences satisfied the economical sacrifice made by the team.

111

8. Testing and Evaluation

8.1. Overview
The testing process for this airplane was unique for this type of applications, since there is not a standard or reference on how to test new airplane models. The team decided to rely heavily on the CFD results obtained in OpenFOAM, and these results were then compared to the actual data collection gathered on flight. In the preliminary stages of the design, where some components were not ready yet, those components that were already built were tested to verify their theoretical performance, which was later accompanied by a ground roll of the aircraft before its maiden flight, performed in Brazil at the competition grounds, due to high confidence on the construction of the prototype.

8.2. Design of Experiments

As explained in Section 8.1, there was no predesigned testing process, therefore it was decided to operate and test components as they were available to the team. In a chronological order, Table 20 shows a list of experimental procedures performed before the competition flight.
Table 20: Experiment Layout

Testing Procedure Engine Break-in Electrical System Check Landing Gear Test Carbon Fiber Spars Test Control Surfaces Test Payload Bay Restraint Test Ground Roll Test First Flight with Light Payload

Components Involved O.S. .61 FX Engine Battery Pack, Receiver, Transmitter, Servos, VoltWatch Landing Gear, Wheels, Fuselage Carbon Fiber Tubes, Aluminum Joints Servos, Hinges, Control Horns, Pushrods Payload Bay, Steel Plates, Fuselage and Screws Entire Aircraft Entire Aircraft with 2.002 kg Useful Payload

In correspondence with the list, the first component that was tested was the engine. It is the part of the airplane responsible for thrust, and being brand new, it required an extensive break-in process that lasted approximately two weeks. In this period of time, a test bench was designed to hold the engine safely, as the team was able to start the engine for the first time. A normal break-in procedure lasts about 4 to 5 fuel tanks, where the engine lubricates itself from the oil inside the fuel, and its components self-adjust for peak performance. After running the engine to achieve prime

112

condition, the mixture is then finely tuned from very rich to lean to obtain the best air-fuel ratio (AFR), to then obtain the optimal power rating for the engine. Regarding the electrical system check, all the components were plugged as shown in the schematics in Figure 85. After connecting all the components, one channel was disconnected and the VoltWatch (Figure 121) was used to verify the status of the batteries. All servos rotated correctly, thus the system was checked for failure.

Figure 121: VoltWatch

For the landing gear testing, a FEA testing was performed on a CAD model and manual bending of the landing gear was made. In this sense, a high bending force produced by hand was applied on the system, which actually exceeded the value of all loads that were to be carried by the landing gear, therefore proving that the system would be rigid enough. It was understood and known that such landing gear was poorly chosen for the application; however, a new landing gear was later developed. Carbon fiber, as is, was delivered with a specifications sheet that can be found on the Appendices section of the report. Bending tests were performed on the manufacturing lab, which proved the enormous bending resisting properties of this material. However, a more important test was to be performed, which was the stress concentrations due to the aluminum joints between the main wing spars. The control surfaces test was performed to verify that these surfaces were able to deflect by the design specifications and that the servos would move appropriately. Moreover, the ground roll testing consisted of a short taxi to prove the airplanes performance on ground. This test, as well as the first flight, was performed on Sao Jose dos Campos. The maiden flight consisted of a flight with the minimum take-off weight plus a small (2.002 kg) payload. The reason for entering some payload in the maiden flight was to properly adjust and calibrate the center of gravity, which could not have been done without the payload bay.

113

8.3 Test Results and Data

After the experiments were described, the outcomes, as expected, were of high satisfaction to the team, due to their success. In the break-in process, the use of a manual dynamometer (Figure 122) was used to obtain thrust measurements after the engine was run several times. Given the inaccuracy of the available tool ( 2 kg), a rough estimate of 7 kg was obtained for thrust, which was satisfactory compared to theoretical results for thrust calculations, found in Table 21. These results were obtained using ThrustHP, a computer program capable of estimating thrust values for these types of engines and their respective propellers. For this application, through research, the APC 13x4 propeller was chosen to be the best fit.

Figure 122: Hanging Scale Table 21: Propeller Testing and Selection

Propeller Used APC 13x4 Master Airscrew 13x4

Theoretical Static Thrust 5.28 kg (11.64 lbf) 6.73 kg (14.84 lbf)

At this stage, it is important to mention that all tests ran almost flawlessly, with the exception of the engine, whose glow plug had to be replaced due to failure. However, the control surfaces test had an important adversity that the team had to fix in order to fly. The problem was in the rotational direction of the servos in both rudder and ailerons. For this configuration, the ailerons were rotating the opposite way they were supposed to, and the rudder was also turning incorrectly. To fix this issue, the rudder represented the easiest solution. The Futaba transmitter has a Servo Reverse switch that immediately troubleshot the issue, but the ailerons required other methodology, because both right and

114

left ailerons were rotating in the same direction, therefore creating an elevator type motion. The solution to the problem was to change the placement of the pushrod with respect to the head of the servo, in order to make the servo counter-rotate. This solution was effective and practical, and accurately resolved the issue.

Figure 123: Futaba S3003 Servo

Finally, the most important of all tests was performed, after checking all vital components were tested and running appropriately. This test was the first, maiden flight of the airplane. The first flight was performed on October 23rd in Sao Jose dos Campos, in early afternoon. Weather conditions were light crosswinds with high chances of rain, and cloudy skies. The take-off run was very smooth and the airplane took off in Sector 2, at approximately 35 meters from the zero meter mark. Figure 124 shows clearly how the judge (far right) raises the flag indicating that lift-off was shortly after surpassing the 31-meter line for first sector. Feedback from the pilot also points out that take-off run was performed at a reduced thrust, in order to have more control on a first flight. This is normal and justifiable because the pilot needs to get acquainted with the aircraft on the first flight.

Figure 124: First Take-Off

115

After take-off, the airplane conducted a safe flight doing the competition-imposed oval circuit before approaching, in which a smooth approach was performed before landing. Figure 125 is a graphic depiction of the landing process.

Figure 125: First Landing Sequence

However, a design error caused the first mishap of the prototype. After landing, the aircraft rolls for approximately 10-12 meters before the pilot commits a mistake. Given the airplanes unusually high center of gravity due to erroneous landing gear choosing, the pilot drastically veers the airplane right, which immediately flips the airplane, causing minor damage to the left winglet. Another factor contributing to this tip over is that the pilot was not aware that the wheels were very soft and rubbery, which could have slowed down the airplane by itself without the need for drastic turns.

116

Figure 126: First Landing Roll

This first flight was extremely successful and after a post-flight inspection, it was found that all parts and components were in excellent shape, and only the damaged winglet had to be repaired. Table 22 shows the testing rounds performance sheet. An extensive check of all joints, structural members and electrical systems was performed, and no damage whatsoever was found present in the prototype. After repairing the winglet, the airplane was ready for its second flight, the qualifying flight.
Table 22: Flight Parameters for Round 1

Flight Parameter Empty Weight Total Weight Take-Off Sector Valid Flight

Result 6.660 kg 8.662 kg Sector 2 Yes

The qualifying flight required the airplane to lift the minimum qualifying payload weight, which was set to be four (4) kilograms. Given this, the team proceeded to load the airplane with 4.501 kg of useful payload of high-density A36 steel plates. After a minor adjustment to the center of gravity of the airplane, the airplane lifted-off again in very harsh environmental conditions. The airport was reporting strong crosswinds which complicated and compromised the lateral stability of the aircraft. However, the airplane took off again with no complications and lifted off behind the 31-meter line, making a Sector

117

1 take-off, another important design feat. On landing, the airplane faced heavy wind gusts, but managed to land safely. The flight was also validated and the team successfully qualified, a feat seldom seen on first timers, and also on the competition itself, in which 26 teams did not manage to take off.

8.4 Evaluation of Experimental Results

Regarding flight itself, it can be noted that the experimental results confirmed what had been proven in theory. The aircraft successfully took off two out of two times, and both landings were successful, if taken into account that the tip-over accident was pilot error. Estimated take-off and cruise airspeeds were as predicted. Expanding this, the video might have shown a probably slower take-off and landing in the second round, but this is due to the large wind factor present in the competition, where the airspeed is the indicating factor and not the ground speed. If taken into account the weight for the second round, and the wind component, the estimated take-off airspeed was set as 12.95 m/s, which is very close to theoretical predictions at 15.00 m/s for a full seventeen kilogram Maximum Take Off Weight (MTOW). It should be noted that an increase in the angle of attack shortens this velocity even more, and that is dependent on runway and weather conditions at the time of flight.
Table 23: Flight Data for Round 2

Flight Parameter Empty Weight Total Weight Take-Off Sector Estimated Take-Off Airspeed Theoretical Take-Off Airspeed Calculated T/O Airspeed Accuracy

Result 6.660 kg 11.161 kg Sector 1 12.95 m/s 15.60 m/s 84.14%

8.5. Improvement of the Design

After both flights, it was evident that the most significant issue that needs immediate correction is the landing gear design. For that, the team worked fast to do a complete redesign of the landing gear system, making it with lighter and thinner materials, decreasing its height with respect to ground, which improves the aircrafts stability, weight and maneuverability on ground. Table 24 summarizes the benefits of the new landing gear system.

118

Table 24: Landing Gear Improvement

Old Landing Gear Problem Very High Ground Clearance/ Higher CoG Very Heavy Landing Gear (~1.5 kg) Wide Landing Gear/ High Drag Complex Nose Gear Assembly

New Landing Gear Solution Improved Shorter Gear/ Lower CoG Light Landing Gear (~0.65 kg) Fuselage-Wide Landing Gear/ Reduced Drag Simple/Low Drag Nose Gear Assembly

Once the airplane flew and succeeded in completing the specified circuit in the competition, different components were analyzed to see what kind of improvement can be done to the design. A significant factor in the amount of drag present on the airplane was the landing gear that we used at the competition. Due to time constraints, a landing gear was purchased based on structural properties that would guarantee us to withstand 18 kg. Figure 127 shows the landing gear that was used.

Figure 127: Landing Gear Used at the Competition

This will lead to a considerable increase in drag acting on the airplane. An essential key in reducing all of this drag was the addition of the winglets to the aircraft. From literature review, the winglets that we used, with an approximate 75 degree angle from the vertical, had an estimated drag reduction of about 10%. For the new landing gear it was decided to use a smaller and thinner piece of aluminum. The dimensions of this part, before being bent, were 49.53 cm. (19.5 inches) by 7.62 cm (3 inches) and 0.635 cm (one-quarter of an inch) thick. The aluminum piece was later bent into the desired shape. The section that is the be connected to the fuselage is 180 mm in length, meaning the length of the landing gear will be approximately 6.35 cm in height.

119

9. Design Considerations
9.1. Assembly and Disassembly
Assembly and disassembly of aircraft is one of the most important factors in the development of the project. Due to the fact that competition is held in Brazil, aircraft must be transported with in a box. As specified before, wing structure is divided into three main components. Nose and middle section of the fuselage was constructed as a single entity, and boom of fuselage is joined permanently with empennage structure. Nose and landing gear are individual entities that are joined to the bottom part of the fuselage structure. Complete process of assembly and disassembly takes about 15 to 20 minutes. It is a simple process, but tightening all security lock nuts and screws is a time consuming procedure. Fuselage is the main component in the assembly process. All different components that constitute the aircraft are joined to fuselage. First two components to be assembled are the nose and landing gear. Landing gear connection with fuselage is obtained with 3 simple screws. Fender washers and security lock nuts are utilized to assure safety. With nose and landing gear already joined to fuselage structure, next component to be assembled is the boom-empennage component. Connection between structures is performed by four screws that go through wooden section of the boom and cage structure on the fuselage. Screws are securely tightened with lock nuts. It is very important to connect the two servos present on the boomempennage component to the receiver. Once the wings are assembled in the aircraft, access to components inside the middle section of the aircraft is limited. It is also very important to assembled payload bay and payload before wings are assembled to the aircraft. As mentioned before, access to the middle section of the fuselage once the wings are assembled is limited, and is only available through the cargo loading door. Payload bay assembly to the fuselage is conducted by two screws and regular nuts. Tools are not required in the assembly, and can be performed by hand. Figure 128 shows assembly of fuselage, nose gear, landing gear, and boom-empennage structure. Finally, the last component to be assembled is the wing structure.

120

Figure 128: Assembly Process

Payload bay structure is presented on Figure 129. Payload is added depending on the required weight. Screws utilized on assembly are also present of figure below.

Figure 129: Payload Bay

Assembly of wings is the component that requires more work and time. Wing structure is assembled before it is joined to the fuselage. Wing is divided in three sections, and process of assemble is by joining spars that are present on each section of the wing. Two screws on each side of the middle section are required to join such section with the two tapered sections of the wing. Once the joints are completed, security tape is placed between sections in order to cover joints. As explained in the construction of prototype section, two screws that pass thru wings spars and cage is method of joining fuselage and wings. 121

Figure 130 displays complete assembly of aircraft.

Figure 130 Complete Assembly of Aircraft

9.2. Maintenance of the System

After the aircraft is assembled and a flight is completed, a major maintenance on the complete aircraft is required by the competition. The gasoline level must be checked and, if necessary, required amount is added. Fuel lines between engine and gas tank are double checked to assure gas is delivered properly to the engine. Propeller nut and spinner must be re-tightened. The behavior of each of the servos that control the aircraft is critical to the performance of the aircraft during flight. Servo that controls thrust of the engine must deliver secure rotation to the intake valve located in the carburetor of the engine. Control rod connecting servo and engine must be tightened on each of its ends (servo and intake valve). Holding structure of servo must be double checked to assure there is no loose movement. Servo that controls nose gear is located below the fuselage structure. Due to the fact that servo is placed in upside down position; servos screws must be tightened again. Servos located on the wings are responsible for aileron control. Correct movement on each of the ailerons must be double checked, as well as correct position of each of the control surfaces when servos are set in neutral position on the transmitter. Same procedure must be conducted on the control surfaces located on the empennage. Control rods on each of the component (wings, vertical and horizontal stabilizer) are double checked to assure performance during flight.

122

Tape that protects the wing joints must be removed. Screws located on each of the joints of the wings spars must be checked, and must be tightened if necessary. Due to the fact that security nuts are re-utilized, it is recommendable that these nuts are only used 3 to 4 times. After that, they may lose their effectiveness and replacement is advised. Same procedure is utilized in screws (4) that connect boom with cage structure. Once process is completed, new security tape is placed between wings sections. If load is added of removed, nuts on each of the screws of the payload bay must be placed and double checked. Since load is added or removed, center of gravity of the entire aircraft may suffer a small displacement. It is important to make sure that the center of gravity is located in the desired location. Last step in the process of maintenance of the aircraft is to assure that components located on the nose of the fuselage are securely placed and tightened with Velcro. Since the fuel is located in this section of the aircraft, the component located in the floor of the fuselage, namely the battery pack, is wrapped with a plastic bag so, if there is any gas leakage, it wont damage the battery.

9.3. Environmental Impact

When constructing the airplane, it is important to maintain the damage to the environment as miniscule as possible. This is an important concept to follow, since new regulations are being targeted at producing less pollution and are more eco-friendly. The groups that are competing in the Regular Class of the event will use 10% Nitromethane fuel. This type of fuel is hazardous to humans if ingested and if it comes into eye and skin contact. It causes severe damage to the kidneys, nervous system, and liver. Its vapor and mist is also irritating to the eyes, mucous membrane, and upper respiratory tract. According to studies, long term degradation products may arise from this type of fuel. In order to minimize the exposure of toxic fumes and CO2 , the testing of the engine was done outside in an open field away from flammable objects. In order to help preserve and minimize the amount of fuel disposal, the organizers of the competition provide 10% Nitromethane that will be used. If any fuel is left over after an airplane has competed their run, it is collected back by the organizers to be used for other groups and airplanes. The United States Department of Health and Human Services has completed research on the exposure of Nitromethane vapor to animals such as rabbits and mice. There was no significant effect on the growth weight and organ weights of these animals. Since humans are only exposed to 10%

123

Nitromethane vapor when they are dealing with this type of fuel for their remote controlled aircraft, it is believed that it will not have severe damage to a persons growth and their internal organs.

9.4. Risk Assessment

At the competition there were a few risk parameters that had to be taken into consideration. Not only were they present to ensure the safety of the participants, but of the spectators as well. These policies were checked during the time of inspection, before any of the airplanes are given a chance to get out on the runway and fly. A precaution that is carefully looked at is the tightness of the propeller and the spinner. Since the spinner is rotating at approximately 12,000 rpm, it can severely injure a person who comes into contact with it while it is motion. It is also important in incorporate some sort of steering system on the aircraft to make the braking process much easier, as well as maneuverability on ground. If this sort of system is not looked into, the pilot will have a tougher time handling the direction and speed of the plane at the moment of landing, possibly subjecting the spectators to injuries from a collision with the airplane. In the case of this airplane, the servo that controlled the movement of the rudder was also connected to the front landing gear. It is also crucial that there is no interference in the 2.4 GHz frequencies with other radio transmitters and receivers of the same frequency.

124

10. Conclusion
10.1. Conclusion and Discussion
A remote-controlled airplane was designed, built, tested and taken into an international competition in Brazil. After reaching sponsorship agreements with both American Airlines and the College of Engineering and Computing, the team was able to travel to Brazil and satisfy the initial travel aspirations. The final prototype flew the qualification payload requirement in Brazil, which placed the team between the top third competitors in a group of more than 70 teams. The maximum take-off weight reached on testing was 11.220 kg without any structural damage to the airplane, which shows that near 70% of the estimated maximum lift was achieved. Pilot feedback and analysis also confirm that the airplane is able to lift even more weight, which could definitely make this airplane extremely competitive. However, 60% of the take-off weight was attributed to the empty weight structure, a factor that was reduced by 16% with the redesign of the landing gear system. Likewise, an innovative aluminum structure, not common on these applications, was found to be critical to the structural integrity of the airplane, and made possible for the airplane to reach the exhibited lifting capabilities. In conclusion, the SAE Brazil AeroDesign competition is an excellent method for engineers to get a very deep hands-on experience on engineering design and manufacturing, because of the extensive multidisciplinary work that is entailed due to the complexity of the project. Even though the team size could be considered to be short, the experience and knowledge acquired is of utmost importance and value for professional development.

10.2. Future Work

A series of suggestions are laid out in order to improve the airplane characteristics. The final weight of the aircraft is 6.75 kg. Comparing weight of the aircraft with the most efficient aircrafts in the competition, final weight of prototype is heavier than expected. The component that had the most weight added to the aircraft is the fuselage assembly, which is constituted by the nose and middle section of the fuselage. The total weight of fuselage assembly is 2.00 kg. This weight is due to the fact that material used in most of the assembly is plywood. This material has a considerable weight with respect to the rest of the materials used in the aircraft and, even though lightening holes were implanted in the assembly. In order to reduce weight in this assembly, more lightening holes must be

125

designed. It is very important to determine places were these lightening holes are drilled, because it is crucial that strength and rigidity of assembly is not affected. If a complete new fuselage assembly is to be manufactured, selection of material must be conducted keeping in mind that structure must be rigid and strong. Selection of plywood in the design was a correct decision, due to the results obtained. A reasonable way of reducing weight is by selecting plywood with a smaller thickness. Most of the screws available in the market are steel screws. An effective way of reducing weight on the aircraft is to use screws of a lighter material. Reasonable materials to use are aluminum or nylon. It is very important to check which screw materials are allowed by the competition due to their safety rules. Some of the constraints that the team faced with screws was that most of the non-steel screws must be custom made. After a flight is conducted, bonus points are provided if the payload can be removed before ten seconds. Unfortunately, these points were never acquired by the team due to the design of the payload. Method of removing the payload is by removing the two screws that are utilized as a joint between the payload bay and the fuselage. Process of removing designed payload usually takes about 30 seconds. Moreover, Du-Bro 350T treaded wheels with a 3.5 inch diameter were used on the front and main landing gears of the aircraft. These were chosen because of their shock absorbing fits and it is known to work well on paved runways. At the competition, it was observed that the amount of weight of the airplane caused the wheels the compress and deflect, getting dangerously close to bursting conditions. Because of this, it is believed the airplane can reach its take off velocity much earlier than what occurred. Instead of using these wheels, perhaps circular pieces of aluminum can be used with a thin piece of rubber on the outer rim. This will guarantee that there will be no deflection of the wheel because of the weight of the airplane. This could also help gain bonus points in taking off in sector 1.

126

11. References
1. Abbot, Ira. Theory of Wing Sections: Including a Summary of Airfoil Data. New Dover Edition. Dover Publications, 1959. 2. Abzug, Malcolm.Airplane Stability and Control. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2002. 3. Aircraft Structure - An introduction to major airplane components". Time Travel Research Center . March 14, 2010 <http://www.zamandayolculuk.com>. 4. Anderson, David F..Understanding Flight. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2001 5. Anderson, John. Fundamentals of Aerodynamics. McGraw Hill. New York, NY. 2001 6. Anderson, John. Introduction to Flight. New York: McGraw Hill, 2005. 7. Ashley, Holt. Aerodynamics of Wings and Bodies. 1 ed. New York, New York: Dover Publications, 1985. 8. Askue, Vaughan. Flight Testing Homebuilt Aircraft. Aviation Supplies & Academics, Inc., 1992. 9. Bertin, John and Michael Smith. Aerodynamics for Engineers. Prentice Hall. Englewood Hills, New Jersey. 1989. 10. Chun-Yung Niu, Michael. Airframe Structural Design: Practical Design Information and Data on Aircraft Structures. 2 ed. . Adaso Adastra Engineering Center, 2006. 11. Corke, Thomas. Design of Aircraft. Prentice Hall: New Jersey, 2003. 12. Craig, Gail. Introduction to Aerodynamics. Anderson, IN: Regenerative Press, 2002 13. Dole, Charles. Flight Theory and Aerodynamics: A Practical Guide for Operational Safety. 2 ed. New York, New York: Wiley Interscience, 2000. 14. Douglas, John F..Fluid Mechanics. Prentice Hall: London, 2001 15. Farokhi, Saeed. Aircraft Propulsion. 4 ed. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley, 2006. 16. Fielding, John. Introduction to Aircraft Design (Cambridge Aerospace Series). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 17. Holt, Ashley. Aerodynamics of Wings and Bodies. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1965. 18. Houghton, E.L.. Aerodynamics for Engineering Students. Burlington, MA: Butterworth Heinemann, 2003. 19. Hull, David. Fundamentals of Airplane Flight Mechanics. New York, New York: Springer, 2007 20. Janna, William. Introduction to Fluid Mechanics. 3 ed. Boston, MA: PWS-Kent, 1993. 21. King, R.P..Introduction to Practical Fluid Flow. Burlington, MA: Elsevier, 2002.

127

22. Kuethe, Arnold and Chuen-Yen Chow. Foundations of Aerodynamics. John Wiley & Sons. New York, NY. 1998. 23. Lee , Aaron . "Model aircraft and Aerodynamics ". AeroModeling. April 3, 2010 <http://www.myaeromodelling.com>. 24. Milne-Thomson, L. M. . Theoretical Aerodynamics. 2 ed. New York, New York: Dover Publications, 2009. 25. Munson, Bruce, et. al. Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics. John Wiley & Sons. New York, NY. 2002. 26. Nicolai, Leland M., Estimating R/C Model Aerodynamics and Performance. Lockheed Martin. 2009 27. Newman, Dava. Interactive Aerospace Engineering and Design. 1 ed. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2001. 28. Phillips, Warren. Mechanics of Flight. 2 ed. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley, 2009. 29. Raithmaier, Larry. Standard Aircraft Handbook for Mechanics and Technicians. 6 ed. . New York, New York: McGraw-Hill Professional, 1999. 30. Raymer, Daniel. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach. 4 ed. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio: AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics & Ast, 2006. 31. Raymer, Daniel. Simplified Aircraft Design for Homebuilders. Illustrated Edition. Design Dimension Press, 2002. 32. Reinhart, Richard. Basic Flight Physiology. 3 ed. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill Professional, 2007. 33. Roskam, Jan. Airplane Aerodynamics and Performance. Lawrence, KS: DARcorporation, 1997. 34. Sabersky, Rolf. Fluid Flow. A First Course in Fluid Mechanics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1999. 35. Simmons, Martin. Model Aircraft Aerodynamics. 4th ed. Trans-Atlantic Publications, Inc., 1999. 36. Smith, Hubert. Illustrated Guide to Aerodynamics. 2 ed. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill Professional, 1991. 37. Stevens, Brian. Aircraft Control and Simulation. 2 ed. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley Interscience, 2003. 38. Streeter, Victor. Fluid Mechanics. 9 ed. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Professional, 1998. 39. Subsonic Wind Tunnel, Long Eaton, Nottingham, UK: TecQuipment, ND. Pamphlet. 40. Tu, Jiyuan. Computational Fluid Dynamics. Burlington, MA: Elsevier, 2008 128

41. U.S. Department of Transportation, Airplane Flying Handbook. Federal Aviation Administration, 2004. 42. Versteed, H. Computational Fluid Dynamics. 2 ed. Boston, MA: Prentice-Hall, 2007. 43. Von Mises, Richard. Theory of Flight. 1st ed. McGraw-Hill Professional, 1991. White, Frank. Fluid Mechanics. 4 ed. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Professional, 1999.

129

Appendices
Appendix A: Technical Drawings
Engineering drawings of each of the components present on the aircraft are presented in this section. Units utilized in drawings are millimeters (mm).

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

Appendix A: Aircraft Assemblies

The following technical drawings represent the assemblies existing on the airplane. All dimensions are in millimeters, unless shown otherwise.

141

142

143

144

145

146

Appendix B: Detailed Raw Design Calculations and Analysis

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

Appendix C: Catalogs and Manuals of Purchased Components

Carbon Fiber Rods

166

167