1 | P a g e

AE 410
AEROSPACE ENGINEERING LABORATORY
PROJECT FINAL REPORT


Instructor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Dilek Funda Kurtulu

Assistant: zgr Harputlu

Submitted by: Zil Castle United Flight Test Inc.

Name Number
Ramin Rouzbar 1702356
Afif Umur Limon 1679885
S. Burak Sarslmaz 1679935
Volkan zdemir 1680164
Metehan Yayla 1747120
Murat enipek 1680255

Submitted to: zgr Harputlu
Submission Date: 11.06.2013
2 | P a g e

Abstract
For the course AE410, Performance Verification Tests of an Unmanned Amphibious Aircraft project
is chosen by the team. In this report, literature research regarding the project is done, pitot-static
system calibration tests conducted. Then, the performance tests methodology is explained and its
results are described. They include verification of theoretical flight dynamics and stability
performance results by successive flight tests using Arduino autopilot interface.
Nomenclature
IAS Indicated Airspeed
CAS Calibrated Airspeed
EAS Equivalent Airspeed
TAS True Airspeed
GPS Global Positioning System
A-UAV Amphibious UAV
R/C Rate of Climb
A/C Aircraft

Damping ratio of Phugoid Mode

n
Natural Frequency of Phugoid Mode
TPR Transient Peak Ratio
T Period of Phugoid Mode
V
s
Stall Speed

List of Figures
Figure 1 ArduPilot Mega 2.0 Kit .............................................................................................................. 4
Figure 2. Horseshoe Heading Technique ................................................................................................. 5
Figure 3. Velocity Vectors in Horseshoe Maneuver
[6]
............................................................................. 5
Figure 4 Calibration Curve ....................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 5. Tower Flyby
[4]
........................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 6 Work Flow of Altitude Error Determination ............................................................................. 8
Figure 7 Tower Flyby Test Results, Calibration Curve ............................................................................. 9
Figure 8 Rate of Climb Curve ................................................................................................................. 10
Figure 9 Performance Takeoff Test ....................................................................................................... 10
Figure 10 Maximum Velocity Test ......................................................................................................... 11
Figure 11 Phugoid Mode Behavior ........................................................................................................ 12
Figure 12 Transient Peak Method
[1]
..................................................................................................... 12
Figure 13 TPR vs. Damping Ratio
[1]
....................................................................................................... 12

List of Tables
Table 1 Horseshoe Maneuver Test Results ............................................................................................. 6
Table 2 Horseshoe Maneuver Test Results for IAS=19 m/s .................................................................... 6
Table 3 Overall Test Results .................................................................................................................... 7
Table 4 Transient Peak Ratios ............................................................................................................... 12
Table 5 Damping and Natural Frequency of Phugoid Mode ................................................................. 13
3 | P a g e


Table of Contents
Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... 2
Nomenclature .......................................................................................................................................... 2
List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................... 2
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................ 2
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................... 3
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 4
Experimental Apparatus .......................................................................................................................... 4
Flight Test Results and Discussion ........................................................................................................... 5
First Test Campaign ............................................................................................................................. 5
Second Test Campaign ........................................................................................................................ 9
Third Test Campaign .......................................................................................................................... 11
Future Work .......................................................................................................................................... 13
References ............................................................................................................................................. 13



4 | P a g e

Introduction
During flight tests, several data such as airspeed, barometric altitude etc. will be collected. In order
to perform flight tests successfully, these data should be calibrated at the very beginning of the flight
test campaign. Therefore, the first flight test campaign consists of pitot-static system calibration tests
by using horseshoe heading technique and tower flyby method.

During pitot-static system calibration tests, airspeed and barometric altitude sensor are examined
and their errors are determined. In order to calibrate airspeed, horseshoe heading method is used.
Moreover, tower flyby method is employed to calibrate barometric altitude sensor.

Having completed calibration tests, the second flight test campaign starts including aircraft
performance tests. These tests can be listed as; rate of climb test, V-speeds tests, turn performance
tests, takeoff landing tests etc.

Finally, phugoid mode of the aircraft is excited during flight test and its response is analyzed. In the
end, results obtained from these tests are summarized and discussed.
Experimental Apparatus

Figure 1 ArduPilot Mega 2.0 Kit

APMs barometric pressure sensor is effectively used. GPS sensor is directly attached to it and data
from that sensor are evaluated in tests. That is, Full Ardupilot Mega is used in the tests for
measurement and recording the data.



5 | P a g e

Flight Test Results and Discussion
First Test Campaign
In this test campaign, air data system is calibrated with following tests:

Horse Shoe Heading Technique
For the health of project, pitot-static calibration tests need to be conducted to be sure about their
functionalities and reliabilities. Airspeed calibration is one of the most critical one. In the aircraft,
Indicated Air Speed (IAS) is measured and displayed as True Air Speed (TAS) to the pilot after some
calculations in data computer. For the flight safety, correctness of these calculations must be
checked. One of the methods for this purpose is horseshoe heading technique.

Figure 2. Horseshoe Heading Technique
In this test method, the aircraft flies sequential constant headings at 90
o
intervals in any direction (as
long as they are 90 intervals see figure 1). The method can be used at any altitude and the
direction and magnitude of the wind does not need to be predetermined. During flight through these
legs, aircraft heading at each leg, altitude and Indicated Air Speed are held constant and GPS data is
collected. At least 3 legs should be flown for required to determine 3 unknowns of wind velocity
component in North direction (V
N
), in West direction (V
W
) and magnitude of |V
wind
|. Calculations
used in horseshoe method are shown in figure 2:


Figure 3. Velocity Vectors in Horseshoe Maneuver
[6]
6 | P a g e

V
N
: Wind velocity component in North direction
V
W
: Wind velocity component in West direction
V
T
: True Air Speed
V
1
: Ground Velocity in Leg 1 obtained from GPS data
V
2
: Ground Velocity in Leg 2 obtained from GPS data
V
3
: Ground Velocity in Leg 3 obtained from GPS data

Considering aforementioned information, flight tests are conducted and corresponding test results
are shown in table 1.
Table 1 Horseshoe Maneuver Test Results


Having determined the TAS of the aircraft, thorough Equivalent Airspeed (EAS), Calibrated Airspeed
(CAS) is calculated by the procedures explained below:

)]


The expectation is to have considerable the same CAS and IAS values. Otherwise, pitot system needs
a calibration for static port position error.
Sample calculation steps for unique airspeed (19 m/s) are tabulated in table 2.

Table 2 Horseshoe Maneuver Test Results for IAS=19 m/s




In the end, CAS and IAS values are compared and errors due to pressure distribution over static port
are examined. From test results, it is convenient to assign an offset of 3.1 m/s. For the velocity of 39
KIAS (19 m/s), required calibration is decided to be 3.1 m/s. Horseshoe maneuver is repeated for the
several operational speeds. In the end, calibration curve (figure 3) is generated from the results
obtained for operational velocities and indicated in table 3.

Test # V1 ground(kts) V2 ground(kts) V3 ground(kts) Wind Angle() V wind (kts) TAS (kts)
1 56 50 39 -10 9 47
Test #
V wind
(kts)
TAS (kts) IAS (kts) CAS (kts) EAS (kts) TAS (kts)
Calibration
(kts)
Calibration
(m/s)
1 9 47 39 44 44 47 5 2,6
2 11 49 39,5 46 46 49 7 3,3
3 9 47 37 44 44 47 7 3,6
4 10 47 39 44 44 47 5 2,6
5 12 50 40 47 47 50 7 3,6
Measured by Sensor
Theoretical Values
Test Results
Mean Value 3,1
Std. Dev. 0,5
Calibration (m/s)
7 | P a g e

Table 3 Overall Test Results




Figure 4 Calibration Curve
Calibration curve equation is:
()

( )
Position error of the pitot system is considerable high for the test platform. Offset value of 3.5 m/s is
required in order to have an error of 0.5 m/s around operational velocity interval (19-22 m/s).

Tower Flyby Method
In order to verify that the aircraft measures the pressure altitude correctly, tower flyby test is
conducted. The tower fly-by method is one of the techniques which results in a direct determination
of static error in indicated pressure altitude.
Since the barometric altimeter and airspeed system use the same static source, it is possible to
correlate the altimeter position error directly to the airspeed error. This correlation assumes that
there is no error in the total head system.
The test technique is to fly the aircraft along a ground reference line, past the tower, in stabilized
flight at a constant airspeed and at the approximate height of the reference altitude. The primary
piloting task is to maintain a constant indicated altitude during the run. The tower is equipped with a
sensitive altimeter. The data recorded during each run are the indicated pressure altitude of the
tower as it passes the tower. Note that the tower altimeter must be at the zero grid line position in
the tower. Tower flyby test technique is illustrated in figure 4.

Figure 5. Tower Flyby
[4]
Test Speed (IAS) (m/s) Vwind (kts) KTAS KIAS KCAS KEAS KTAS Position Error (kts) Calibration (m/s)
19 10 48 37 43 43 46 6 3.08
21 10 51 41 48 48 51 7 3.6
23.5 8 57 45 54 54 57 9 4.6
8 | P a g e

Pressure altitude values are recorded to the aircraft data computer, namely exalt. Pressure at the
level of flyby line is measured with flight test instruments. Aircraft constant altitude from the flyby
line is measured by taking photos from the tower. Distance from aircraft to fly-by line is measured in
terms of pixels. Additionally, aircraft length is measured in terms of pixels and known in terms of
feet. Using the ratios, geometric altitude of the aircraft with respect to flyby line can be computed.
Then, using temperature ratio, geometric altitude is converted into barometric altitude. Adding the
pressure at flyby line level and pressure found with respect to flyby line, actual pressure height of the
aircraft is determined. In the end, using this pressure value, barometric altitude of the aircraft is
computed and compared with the exalt pressure altitude values. Work flow is illustrated in figure 5.


Figure 6 Work Flow of Altitude Error Determination

Data reduction process is explained below, mathematically;

Where

Multiply geometric altitude (

) with temperature ratio to obtain barometric altitude(

) .

(


) ( )

( ) ( )

9 | P a g e

Flight tests for this maneuver have been completed. Following the data reduction process, explained
previously, results are obtained and are shown in figure 6.


Figure 7 Tower Flyby Test Results, Calibration Curve
Altitude error of the test platform is almost negligible. Expectation is to have higher altitude errors at
lower and higher speeds. Since pressure distribution over the aircraft is affected by higher angle of
attack in lower airspeeds, altitude error increases. At higher airspeeds, turbulent effects and
increased induced velocity result in higher altitude errors. Offset value of 1 meter can be applied to
the data reduction process in Autopilot system.
Second Test Campaign
Having found the altitude and airspeed calibration values in pitot-static system, second flight test
campaign including performance tests is started. This campaign consists of level acceleration test,
performance take-off test and maximum velocity test.

Level Acceleration Test
Aircraft may use its excess power either accelerating or increasing the altitude. Further, it may
perform accelerated climb. With this phenomenon, level acceleration test is conducted in order to
determine rate of climb of the aircraft. Kinetic energy rate obtained during acceleration is computed
and converted to potential energy gain.

Test procedure can be expressed briefly as;
Climb at full throttle with the velocity of 1.1V
s
.
At desired flight level, begin to accelerate at constant altitude.
When the A/C reached to its maximum velocity, keep it for almost 8-10 seconds.
10 | P a g e


Only data reduction procedure is to convert kinetic energy to potential energy with following
formula.

Obtained test results are indicated in figure 7.


Figure 8 Rate of Climb Curve
As it can be seen from the figure, maximum rate of climb of the test platform is approximately 3.3
m/s occurring at the velocity of 15 m/s.

Performance Takeoff Test
During the takeoff, buildings, trees and hills, which are stated in the near environment, may cause
flight safety problems. Because of these, maximum R/C and climb rate of A-UAV should be
determined properly. In the performance takeoff test, which is done for that purpose, aircraft is
climbed to the cruise altitude with full throttle. Test result is shown in figure 8.


Figure 9 Performance Takeoff Test
11 | P a g e

According to result obtained, aircraft is able to climb up to 378 meters within 50 seconds.

Maximum Velocity Test
In this test, aircraft flies in level flight condition with full throttle until it reaches its limit speed. This
test should be repeated in different altitudes. However; if operational altitude envelope of A-UAV is
taken into account as 500200 m, reached maximum speed will stay constant. Therefore, repetition
of flight test is eliminated.


Figure 10 Maximum Velocity Test
According to figure 9, maximum velocity of the aircraft is determined as 27 m/s.
Third Test Campaign
Minimizing the uncertainties in the longitudinal stability tests is important to have successful test.
Therefore, the aircraft should be trimmed to an equilibrium condition before the any stability tests.
One way of understanding whether the aircraft is in equilibrium condition is that all controls are
released for a minimum of 10 seconds. If the aircraft does not deviate from the trim airspeed and
attitude, trim is satisfied. With the light of this information, the aircraft is trimmed around 21 m/s
indicated airspeed.

Exciting Phugoid Mode
Phugoid mode is one of the important longitudinal modes. In this test, damping ratio and natural
frequency of the phugoid mode is determined. That is, pulse disturbance response of the altitude
and airspeed are observed around equilibrium condition.
The aircraft is deviated from the equilibrium condition with varying the elevator angle provided that
indicated airspeed does not increase or decrease as 5% of the trim airspeed. Then, elevator is
returned to its original equilibrium position. In other words, pulse input is imitated in this way. Then,
the transient characteristics of the altitude and airspeed are recorded without applying any
longitudinal inputs.

12 | P a g e


Figure 11 Phugoid Mode Behavior
By using transient peak ratio method,

and

are determined from the recorded airspeed.

Transient Peak Method
In transient peak method, transient peak ratios are obtained as follows.

Figure 12 Transient Peak Method
[1]

Period of the phugoid mode (T) is measured as 7 sec.

Table 4 Transient Peak Ratios

Mean of the Ratios

0.75 0.67 0.71

From the mean of TPRs (table 4), damping ratio is obtained by using the figure 12.

Figure 13 TPR vs. Damping Ratio
[1]
13 | P a g e

Natural frequency is obtained by using the following equation.
[1]

Table 5 Damping and Natural Frequency of Phugoid Mode

0.1 0.9

The phugoid mode natural frequency and damping are not very low (table 5). This is due to the small
inertia of the aircraft. Aircraft approaches its trimmed attitude very fast. This test requires very
smooth weather. Therefore, repeating the test needs really high time. Since phugoid mode occurs
fast, observing short period mode and roll mode seems not possible. Therefore, these tests will not
be conducted.
Future Work
The improvement in the phugoid mode test and many static and dynamic stability tests will be
conducted as future work. They will be done for the AIAC.
References
1. Introduction to Flight Test Engineering Donald T. Ward and Thomas W. Strganac, 2001,
Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, USA

2. Air Data Measurement and Calibration Edward A. Hearing, Jr., December 1995, NASA
Technical Memorandum 104316

3. Advisory Circular AC-20-151 A U.S. Department of Transportation, FAA

4. Flight Test Guide for Certification of Transport Category Airplanes Advisory Circular 25-7B
U.S. Department of Transportation, FAA

5. Flight Test Guide for Certification of Part 23 Airplanes Advisory Circular 23-8B U.S.
Department of Transportation, FAA

6. Horseshoe Heading Technique, David F. Rogers, 2002