energies

Project Report
Electric Propulsion Concepts for an Inverted Joined
Wing Airplane Demonstrator
Cezary Galinski 1, *, Mateusz Lis 1 and Jaroslaw Hajduk 2
1 Instytut Lotnictwa, 02-256 Warszawa, Poland; matlis1@op.pl
2 Instytut Techniczny Wojsk Lotniczych, 01-494 Warszawa, Poland; jarhaj.uav@gmail.com
* Correspondence: cegal@poczta.fm

Academic Editor: Jih-Sheng (Jason) Lai

Received: 6 February 2017; Accepted: 22 May 2017; Published: 31 May 2017

Abstract: One of the airplane design concepts that potentially allows for significantly increased
efficiency, but has not yet been investigated thoroughly, is the inverted joined wing configuration,
where the upper wing is positioned in front of the lower one. We performed wind tunnel and
flight testing of a demonstrator of this concept, first by applying electrical propulsion to simplify
wind tunnel testing, and then the same electrical-propulsion demonstrator performed several flights.
As the chosen propulsion method proved to be too cumbersome for an intensive flight campaign
and significant loss of battery performance was also observed, the electrical propulsion was then
replaced by internal combustion propulsion in the second phase, involving longer-duration flight
testing. Next we identified and analyzed two potentially beneficial modifications to the design tested:
one involved shifting the center of gravity towards the aft, the other involved modifying the thrust
vector position, both with the assumption that electric motors can be applied for propulsion. On this
basis, the paper finishes with some conclusions concerning a new concept of electrical propulsion for
an inverted joined wing design, combining two ideas: hybridization and distribution along the aft
wing leading edge.

Keywords: electric propulsion; inverted joined wing airplane; wind tunnel and flight testing

1. Introduction
The joined wing configuration is an unconventional airplane configuration consisting of two
lifting surfaces similar in terms of area and span. Usually, one of the wings is located at the top or
above the fuselage, with the other at the bottom. Moreover, one of the lifting surfaces is attached in
the front of the airplane’s centre of gravity (CG), with the other significantly behind it. Both lifting
surfaces join each other either directly or through the application of wing tip plates, creating a box
wing. Such a configuration represents a promising scheme for future airplane design due to several
potential advantages resulting from the reduction of mass and induced drag.
The first significant theoretical work on the theory of induced drag estimation is attributed
to Munk [1], who provided some valuable insights into the properties of three-dimensional lifting
surfaces. Among these, the most important in the case of the joined wing configuration is the fact that
from a theoretical point of view, the induced drag does not depend on the longitudinal positions of the
lifting elements. The foundations for further work on closed wing systems were laid by Prandtl [2].
He focused on several non-planar lifting configurations, such as the biplane, triplane, and boxplane,
comparing these in terms of minimum induced drag. While giving an approximate formula for
minimum induced drag, he concluded that the box wing was superior, calling it “the best wing
system”. In [3], the authors studied the box wing with significant stagger to ensure stability without a
tail design to be applied to transonic transport airplanes. They uncovered some problems with flutter
instabilities far below the predicted flutter speed. They managed to partially deal with aero elasticity

Energies 2017, 10, 762; doi:10.3390/en10060762 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2017, 10, 762 2 of 21

issues, but the final conclusions were that the joined wing configuration might be advantageous at
lower Mach numbers only and no significant weight reduction compared to conventional airplane
could be achieved. The concept was further developed by Wolkovitch [4], who proposed a joined
wing configuration with direct connection between the front and aft wings. Many other researchers
have also explored this concept. The authors of [5,6] explored the advantages of the joined wing in
terms of aerodynamic efficiency and performance and gave examples of possible applications for this
innovative configuration. Valuable theoretical research on induced drag has recently been reported
in [7,8]. In the first of these studies, the authors demonstrate the applicability of Munk’s theorem [1]
to closed wing systems and show that optimal circulation distribution on the wings can be modified
by constant circulation with no adverse influence on the induced drag. This property is essentially
important in terms of longitudinal stability adjustment. The latter study, in turn, also draws upon
Prandtl’s work [2] and shows that for a box wing, the minimum induced drag for an infinite vertical
aspect ratio equals zero. This is admittedly inconsistent with Prandtl’s original formula, which would
predict it to be 16% of reference wing drag, but Prandtl did not seek to evaluate such theoretical cases.
In recent years, significant work in the topic of joined wings has been done by researchers from
Pisa, working on the light amphibious project called IDINTOS. In [9], the authors involved in the
project showed that propulsion generates a pitching up moment due to modified airflow above the
front wing and below the aft wing, whereas the directional and lateral aerodynamic characteristics
are slightly or even insignificantly affected. Surprisingly, ground proximity produces a decrease in
the longitudinal moment (a pitching down effect), which is explained by the authors as caused by
downwash effects. The aerodynamic characteristics of the airplane retrieved from wind tunnel tests
and compared with the computer fluid dynamics (CFD) results are presented in [10], showing the
smooth stall characteristics of the airplane. However, the design proved to have poor directional
stability, although this adverse feature was eventually improved by the application of fences on the
rear wing, close to the vertical stabilizer. Reference [11] gives an overview of the project results and
describes the design of a full-scale airplane.
Other interesting work can be found in [12,13]: these are examples of industrial projects finished
with flight testing, conducted in the US and Germany.

2. Inverted Joined Wing Concept

Researchers in Poland became interested in joined wing configurations in the early 1980s. Some
results were presented in [14,15], where the author focused on the concept of a firefighting airplane,
arguing that it had the potential to provide a 10% better climb rate, 50% higher payload, and 10%
wider range between minimum and maximum airspeed. Some flights were also performed with a
scaled model of an ultralight airplane in the joined wing configuration that revealed good longitudinal
static and dynamic stability, but was very sensitive to center of gravity position change. Some other
publications [16,17] concluded that the front wing of the joined wing airplane should be designed in a
high wing configuration and the aft wing in a low wing configuration, which is opposite to the most
frequently considered case. This is because, as one of conclusions in [7,8] states, the gliding ratio of
the joined wing airplane increases together with the vertical aspect ratio. Figure 1 shows that in the
case of a conventional joined wing airplane, the vertical distance between the wings decreases with
the angle of attack, whereas the same dimension increases with the angle of attack in the case of such
an inverted joined wing airplane. In general, the induced drag increases quadratically with the lift
coefficient, so it is insignificant when CL is small. At low CL the other drag components are larger
than the induced drag, so induced drag reduction attained at the expense of increased friction and/or
interference drag does not pay off. However, at large angles of attack, when the lift coefficient is large,
on the other hand, the induced drag becomes dominant and so any induced drag reduction that can be
attained is valuable. That is exactly the case for the inverted joined wing configuration.
Energies 2017, 10, 762 3 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 3 of 21

Figure
Figure 1. Distance
1. Distance between
between wings
wings in conventional
in conventional andand inverted
inverted joined
joined wings.
wings. Variation
Variation withwith angle
angle of
of attack.
attack.
Moreover, the authors of this paper have concluded that the inverted joined wing shows
Moreover, the authors of this paper have concluded that the inverted joined wing shows
superiority over the conventional one because of the adverse interference effects at high angles
superiority over the conventional one because of the adverse interference effects at high angles of
of attack. When the conventional joined wing configuration flies at very high angles of attack, the aft
attack. When the conventional joined wing configuration flies at very high angles of attack, the aft
wing is nearly at the same level as the forward wing and thus, it is possible that flow separation on the
wing is nearly at the same level as the forward wing and thus, it is possible that flow separation on
latter can affect airflow on the former. As a consequence, this can upset the longitudinal trim and is
the latter can affect airflow on the former. As a consequence, this can upset the longitudinal trim and
especially possible close to the stall point. Figure 11 in Reference [11] shows significant CL and CM
is especially possible close to the stall point. Figure 11 in Reference [11] shows significant CL and CM
nonlinearity at α = 14◦ , which in the author’s opinion could be the case.
nonlinearity at α = 14°, which in the author’s opinion could be the case.
Lastly, we propose that the application of an inverted joined wing configuration could also
Lastly, we propose that the application of an inverted joined wing configuration could also help
help in solving the problem of global buckling of the joined wing airplanes reported by several
in solving the problem of global buckling of the joined wing airplanes reported by several
researchers [18–20]. The direction of critical load (lift + drag in point A of the load envelope) points
researchers [18–20]. The direction of critical load (lift + drag in point A of the load envelope) points
upwards and forwards. The smallest moment of inertia of a conventional joined wing airplane goes
upwards and forwards. The smallest moment of inertia of a conventional joined wing airplane goes
in this direction, so in this case global buckling is a problem. The much larger moment of inertia
in this direction, so in this case global buckling is a problem. The much larger moment of inertia of
of an inverted joined wing airplane goes in this direction, meaning that the problem should be
an inverted joined wing airplane goes in this direction, meaning that the problem should be avoided.
avoided. In other words, in this configuration the aft wing is under tension and not under compression,
In other words, in this configuration the aft wing is under tension and not under compression, and
and consequently it cannot be buckled at high angles of attack. Nevertheless, this hypothesis has not
consequently it cannot be buckled at high angles of attack. Nevertheless, this hypothesis has not yet
yet been confirmed.
been confirmed.
In any event, the joined wing configuration is generally a difficult design to implement, due to
In any event, the joined wing configuration is generally a difficult design to implement, due to
the strong aerodynamic coupling [21] and static indeterminacy. We undertook a dedicated research
the strong aerodynamic coupling [21] and static indeterminacy. We undertook a dedicated research
programme to explore its properties [22–24], utilizing previous experiences in optimization [25–30]
programme to explore its properties [22–24], utilizing previous experiences in optimization [25–30]
and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) flight testing [31–34]. Poland’s Institute of Aviation was chosen to
and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) flight testing [31–34]. Poland’s Institute of Aviation was chosen
lead this effort because of its specialization and previous experience in general aviation [35,36].
to lead this effort because of its specialization and previous experience in general aviation [35,36].
At the beginning of the project, an unmanned demonstrator (Figure 2) was designed and
At the beginning of the project, an unmanned demonstrator (Figure 2) was designed and
aerodynamically optimized. Then its flight characteristics were thoroughly investigated [37,38] with the
aerodynamically optimized. Then its flight characteristics were thoroughly investigated [37,38] with
application of data from both CFD analysis and wind tunnel measurements [39,40]. Simultaneously,
the application of data from both CFD analysis and wind tunnel measurements [39,40].
further multicriterial aerodynamic optimization was performed to explore the limits of the
Simultaneously, further multicriterial aerodynamic optimization was performed to explore the
configuration’s performance potential [41]. Finally, software for multidisciplinary optimization was
limits of the configuration’s performance potential [41]. Finally, software for multidisciplinary
developed and applied so as to take structural analysis into consideration as well [42,43]. The overall
optimization was developed and applied so as to take structural analysis into consideration as well
conclusion was that the applied airplane configuration does allow for the construction of an airplane
[42,43]. The overall conclusion was that the applied airplane configuration does allow for the
with better performance, although, as the results presented in [44] show, its advantage against
construction of an airplane with better performance, although, as the results presented in [44] show,
conventional airplanes is nevertheless marginal.
its advantage against conventional airplanes is nevertheless marginal.
Energies 2017, 10, 762 4 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 4 of 21

(a) (b)

Figure 2. (a) Three views of the inverted joined wing demonstrator; and (b) demonstrator in the wind
Figure 2. (a) Three views of the inverted joined wing demonstrator; and (b) demonstrator in the
tunnel.
wind tunnel.
3. Electrical System Architecture in the Current Demonstrator
3. Electrical System Architecture in the Current Demonstrator
The demonstrator was designed as a scaled model of a personal airplane accommodating a pilot
and demonstrator
The three passengers, was therefore
designed theaspropulsion configuration
a scaled model was determined
of a personal both by the issue of
airplane accommodating a pilot
“visibility from the pilot’s seat” and by the application of the inverted
and three passengers, therefore the propulsion configuration was determined both by the issue of joined wing configuration.
Joined wing airplanes usually have their CG position located significantly behind 50% of the mean
“visibility from the pilot’s seat” and by the application of the inverted joined wing configuration.
aerodynamic chord (MAC) of the front wing (Figure 2). The pilot should sit behind the front wing to
Joined wing airplanes usually have their CG position located significantly behind 50% of the mean
obtain this CG position if a tractor propeller were to be applied, but as a result the front wing would
aerodynamic chord (MAC) of the front wing (Figure 2). The pilot should sit behind the front wing to
constrain the pilot’s visibility quite significantly. In the case of conventional airplanes, this issue does
obtainnot
this CG position
create any if a because
problem tractor propeller
their CG iswere to be
located applied,
close to 1/4 ofbut as a so
MAC, result the front
the pilot wingthe
sits below would
constrain
wingthe andpilot’s visibility
his forward quite issignificantly.
visibility not constrained In the
by case of conventional
the wing. airplanes,
A pushing propeller this issue does
configuration
not create
allows any
theproblem because
pilot to sit in front their CGfront
of the is located
wing, close
since to 1/4 of MAC,
significant mass so
of the
the pilot sits below
propulsion systemtheiswing
located
and his forwardin the aft part is
visibility of not
the constrained
airplane. In view of the
by the above,
wing. we applied
A pushing a pushing
propeller propulsion in
configuration our the
allows
demonstrator. However, the large diameter of the conventional propeller
pilot to sit in front of the front wing, since significant mass of the propulsion system is located in the in the pushing
configuration
aft part of the airplane.usually
Increates
view ofthe the threat
above,of collision
we applied withathe runway
pushing during takeoff
propulsion in ourrotation and
demonstrator.
during touchdown. Because ducted fans usually allow for the same efficiency as a conventional
However, the large diameter of the conventional propeller in the pushing configuration usually creates
propeller but with a smaller diameter, we considered, designed, and tested a ducted fan design [45–
the threat of collision with the runway during takeoff rotation and during touchdown. Because ducted
50]. At that time, however, it became possible to buy a motor with high optimal revolutions per
fans usually allow for the same efficiency as a conventional propeller but with a smaller diameter,
minute (RPMs) allowing for application of a market propeller with slightly better efficiency than the
we considered,
designed ducteddesigned,
fan and and tested
with onlyaslightly
ductedgreater
fan design
diameter.[45–50].
At theAt thattime
same time, however,
it was it became
significantly
possible
lighter. As a result, the ducted fan propulsion was tested only in the wind tunnel, whereas the of a
to buy a motor with high optimal revolutions per minute (RPMs) allowing for application
market propeller
propeller waswith slightly
tested both in better efficiency
the wind tunnelthan
andthe
in designed ductedthe
flight. However, fanducted
and with fan only
was slightly
not
ultimately
greater diameter. abandoned
At the samefor reasons
time itspecified in Section 4lighter.
was significantly below. As a result, the ducted fan propulsion
was testedThe onlydemonstrator
in the wind was built as
tunnel, a dual purpose
whereas researchwas
the propeller device, both
tested for wind
both in thetunnel
windtesting
tunnelandand in
flight. However, the ducted fan was not ultimately abandoned for reasons specified in Section 4 in
for flight testing. This is a common approach taken in scaled airplane model methodology studies below.
Poland. It allows considerable time savings because only one research device has to be
The demonstrator was built as a dual purpose research device, both for wind tunnel testing
manufactured instead of two: one dedicated for wind tunnel testing, the other for flight testing.
and for flight testing. This is a common approach taken in scaled airplane model methodology
studies in Poland. It allows considerable time savings because only one research device has to be
manufactured instead of two: one dedicated for wind tunnel testing, the other for flight testing.
Energies 2017, 10, 762 5 of 21

However, the application of a single research device creates a quite significant challenge resulting from
the low mass requirement for flight testing combined with the higher strength requirements for wind
tunnel testing. Fortunately, the application of modern composite materials reinforced with carbon
fiber allowed both of these two contradictory requirements to be satisfied. As a result, the total mass of
the demonstrator ready to fly was equal to 24.5 kg, which allowed flight tests to be performed without
registration with the aviation authorities (in Poland, any UAV with a mass greater than 25 kg had to be
registered at the time when this project was conducted).
An electrical propulsion was initially applied, despite it usually having twice the mass of an
internal combustion system. The most obvious reason for the greater mass of electrical systems is
the lower density of energy stored in batteries than in chemical fuels. However, the demonstrator
in this project was tested first in the wind tunnel, where it is important to have propulsion which is
easy to control and generates small vibration. In particular, the starting of the propulsion is critical
since vibrations of large amplitude (typical for starting an internal combusting engine) may impair
the aerodynamic balance applied for the precise measurements of aerodynamic forces. Moreover
an electrical propulsion is cleaner, which is particularly important in the closed circuit wind tunnel,
since an internal combustion engine would be forced to breathe its own exhaust gases instead of clean
air. Exhaust gases could be led out of the tunnel, but even the flexible piping necessary to do this
would interfere with the measurement of aerodynamic forces. Application of the same propulsion
both in the wind tunnel and in flight was perceived as a good way to save time in transferring
the demonstrator from the wind tunnel to flight testing. However, the characteristics of electrical
propulsion generated another significant challenge in the case of flight testing. According to previous
experiences, a climb rate of 3 m/s is necessary to perform a safe flight of the research model. In the
case of internal combustion engines, this is an initial climb rate achievable immediately after takeoff.
The climb rate rises over the flight time due to the fuel consumption and resulting mass reduction.
Therefore, the final climb rate is usually greater than the initial one allowing for safe abort landings if
necessary. An electrical airplane, by contrast, has a constant mass over the whole flight, yet its batteries’
voltage is decreasing (more than 10%), therefore the power available for flight is also decreasing (more
than 20%). As a result, a climb rate of 3 m/s should be available just before touch down (with an
almost fully discharged main battery) should an abort landing be necessary. It was assumed that an
electric propulsion providing an initial climb rate greater than 5 m/s would allow for a final climb
rate of 3 m/s. This means that the electrical propulsion had to be more powerful than an internally
combusting one, thus further increasing its mass.
Properties of the electric propulsion system applied for both wind tunnel tests and initial flight
tests are summarized in Table 1. Demonstrator characteristics were retrieved from wind tunnel tests,
presented in Figure 3, and also the resulting airplane performance in Figure 4. As can be seen from
these figures, the maximum climb rate achievable close to the ground was greater than 5 m/s and the
maximum flight endurance was greater than 20 min. These values were evaluated as acceptable for
flight testing.

Table 1. Electric propulsion system applied in the joined wing demonstrator.

Voltage (V) 37
Maximum current (A) 80
Motor: Turnigy RotoMax 1.60 [51]
Mass (g) 849
Nominal power/RPM 2960/8550
Maximum Continuous Current (A) 120
Electronic Speed Controller: YEP 120 [52]
Mass (g) 100
Nominal Voltage (V) 39.6
Capacity (Ah) 9.6
Battery: Li-Fe 4p12s (48 Cell)
Maximum Continuous Current (A) 200
Mass (g) 4100
Propeller: Fiala 20 × 10 E [53]
Energies 2017, 10, 762 6 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 6 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 6 of 21

Energies 2017, 10, 762 6 of 21

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 3. (a) Propulsion unit characteristics: Pe—motor electric power, PN—effective power, η—total
Figure 3. (a) Propulsion unit characteristics: Pe —motor electric power, PN —effective power, η—total
Figure 3. (a)T—thrust;
efficiency, Propulsion
andunit
(b)characteristics: —motor
power availablePeversus electricfor
airspeed power, PNflight
several —effective power, η—total
altitudes.
efficiency, T—thrust; and(a)
efficiency, T—thrust; and
(b)(b)
power available versus airspeed for several flight
power available versus airspeed for several flight
altitudes.
(b)altitudes.

Figure 3. (a) Propulsion unit characteristics: Pe—motor electric power, PN—effective power, η—total
efficiency, T—thrust; and (b) power available versus airspeed for several flight altitudes.

(a) (b)

Figure 4. (a) Maximum(a) climb rate versus airspeed for several flight altitudes; (b) and (b) maximum
range and
Figure endurance
4. (a) Maximum versus
climbairspeed for simple
rate versus cruise
airspeed formission.
several flight altitudes; and (b) maximum
Figure 4. (a) Maximum climb(a) rate versus airspeed for several flight altitudes;(b) and (b) maximum range
range and endurance versus airspeed for simple cruise mission.
and endurance
The versus airspeed for simple cruise mission.
propulsion system was not the only electric device onboard the demonstrator. It was also
Figure 4. (a) Maximum climb rate versus airspeed for several flight altitudes; and (b) maximum
equipped
The
range withendurance
propulsion
and a radio
systemcontrol system
wasairspeed
versus not (RCS),
theforonly autopilot
electric
simple cruise device and data the
onboard
mission. acquisition systemIt(ADAS),
demonstrator. was also
Radiomodem,
The
equipped with and
propulsion charge-coupled
system
a radio was not
control device (CCD)
the (RCS),
system only Camera.
electric
autopilot Theonboard
device
and whole
data electric/electronic
the demonstrator.
acquisition system
system (ADAS), It was
architecture
The is presented
propulsion systemin Figure
was not5. Each
the of
only the vital
electric systems
device of
onboardthe demonstrator
the demonstrator.wasIt supplied
was also
alsoRadiomodem,
equipped with anda radio
charge-coupled device (RCS),
control system (CCD) autopilot
Camera. Theandwhole electric/electronic
data acquisition system system
(ADAS),
from a separate apower
radio source because previous experience shows
equipped
architecture
Radiomodem, with
is presented
and control
in
charge-coupled Figure system
5. Each
device (RCS),
of the autopilot
(CCD) vital and
systems
Camera. Theof thethat
data
whole
a supplysystem
acquisition
demonstrator from separate
was (ADAS),
electric/electronicsupplied
system
sources is important
Radiomodem, and for the safety anddevice
charge-coupled accuracy of recorded
(CCD) Camera. measurements.
The whole electric/electronic system
from a separate power source because previous experience shows that a supply
architecture is presented in Figure 5. Each of the vital systems of the demonstrator was supplied from from separate
architecture
sources is presented
is important theinsafety
forbecause Figure 5. accuracy
and Each of the vital systems
of recorded of the demonstrator was supplied
measurements.
a separate power source previous experience shows that a supply from separate sources is
from a separate power source because previous experience shows that a supply from separate
important foristhe
sources safety and
important accuracy
for the of recorded
safety and accuracy ofmeasurements.
recorded measurements.

Figure 5. Electric/electronic system architecture of the demonstrator. CCD: charge-coupled device.

Figure 5. Electric/electronic system architecture of the demonstrator. CCD: charge-coupled device.

Figure 5. Electric/electronic system architecture of the demonstrator. CCD: charge-coupled device.

Figure 5. Electric/electronic system architecture of the demonstrator. CCD: charge-coupled device.
Energies 2017, 10, 762 7 of 21

Application of an autopilot allowed for autonomous flights, but this was used only as an
Energies 2017, 10, 762 7 of 21
emergency option in the case of loss of radio contact. If radio contact was lost, the autopilot would
guide the airplane
Application around
of an the airfield
autopilot until for
allowed radio contact was
autonomous recovered.
flights, but this wasDirect
usedradio
only control
as an was
appliedemergency
as the main optionmodein the
ofcase of lossbecause
control of radio the
contact. If radio contact
demonstrator waswas lost, the
tested autopilot would
to evaluate its handling
guide
properties, sothetheairplane
“pilot’saround the airfield
impression” wasuntil radio contact
an important was of
source recovered. Directtogether
information, radio control
withwasdata from
applied as the main mode of control because the demonstrator was tested to evaluate its handling
various sensors installed onboard. Usually these data are used by the autopilot to calculate signals
properties, so the “pilot’s impression” was an important source of information, together with data
for servomotors
from various and the propulsion
sensors speed Usually
installed onboard. controller.
theseIndata
thisare
project,
used bythe
theautopilot
autopilot only stored them
to calculate
for further analysis
signals and sentand
for servomotors some data to thespeed
the propulsion ground control
controller. In station (GCS)
this project, to be displayed
the autopilot only storedfor those
supervising
them foreach test.analysis
further A CCDand camera wasdata
sent some alsotoinstalled
the ground onboard since the
control station (GCS) view
to befrom the airplane
displayed for is
those supervising
quite helpful in flight data each analysis.
test. A CCD camera was
However, alsonot
it was installed onboard to
transmitted since
GCS theinview
real from
timethesince the
airplaneairplane
was flyingis quite helpful
close in flight
to the pilot,data analysis.according
so control However, ittowas thenot transmitted
visual line oftosight
GCS(VLOS)
in real time
rules was
since the airplane was flying close to the pilot, so control according to the visual line of sight (VLOS)
applied (Figure 6).
rules was applied (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Picture taken from the demonstrator during the approach for landing after the first flight.
6. Picture
Figure Distance taken the
between from theand
pilot demonstrator during
the airplane was thepoint
at this approach forthelanding
close to furthestafter the that
distance first flight.
Distance between
occurred the pilot
during and flight
the whole the airplane was at this point close to the furthest distance that occurred
test program.
during the whole flight test program.
4. Project Implementation and Results
4. Project Implementation andtunnel
Two sessions of wind Results
tests were performed before the flight test campaign began. Both
of them took place in the early months of 2014. The first was dedicated to propulsion testing, and the
Two sessions
second to theofwhole
winddemonstrator
tunnel tests testing.
were performed before
The first flight wasthe flight test
performed campaign2014
in September began.
andBoth of
them took
thenplace in the
the flight test early
campaignmonths of 2014. The
was continued in thefirst was of
summer dedicated to propulsion
2015. An additional testing,
wind tunnel testand the
secondsession
to thededicated
whole demonstrator testing.was
for propulsion testing The first flight
performed was
in the performed
spring in September
of 2015. Electrical 2014 and
propulsion
appeared particularly convenient during wind tunnel testing, but charging
then the flight test campaign was continued in the summer of 2015. An additional wind tunnel of the whole set of test
batteries before each wind tunnel test or flight test proved to be quite time-consuming.
session dedicated for propulsion testing was performed in the spring of 2015. Electrical propulsion Therefore
several sets of batteries were charged before each test/flight day and were then only replaced when
appeared particularly convenient during wind tunnel testing, but charging of the whole set of batteries
necessary, although this was also cumbersome to some extent (Figure 7). The same batteries were
before each wind tunnel
used during the wholetestproject.
or flight test proved
In mid-2015, theytostarted
be quite time-consuming.
to exhibit worse and worse Therefore several sets
performance
of batteries were charged before each test/flight day and were then only replaced
and so they were tested on a ground test bench. Each cell in each battery turned out to have different when necessary,
although this was
discharge also cumbersome
characteristics (see Figureto8),
some
which extent
had not(Figure
been the7).case
Theatsame batteries
the beginning of were used during
the project.
the whole project. In mid-2015, they started to exhibit worse and worse performance and so they
were tested on a ground test bench. Each cell in each battery turned out to have different discharge
characteristics (see Figure 8), which had not been the case at the beginning of the project.
Energies 2017, 10, 762 8 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 8 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 8 of 21

Energies 2017, 10, 762 8 of 21

(a) (b)

Figure 7. (a) Replacement of the (a)batteries in the wind tunnel; and (b)(b)
replacement of the batteries
Figure 7. (a) Replacement of the batteries in the wind tunnel; and (b) replacement of the batteries
during
Figure flight
7. (a) testing—compartment previously
Replacement of the batteries used
in the fortunnel;
wind the aerodynamic balance wasofnow
and (b) replacement the used for
batteries
during flight testing—compartment previously used for the aerodynamic balance was now used for
the battery
during installation
flight (photos (a)
testing—compartmenttook by Adam Dziubiński).
previously (b) balance was now used for
used for the aerodynamic
the battery installation (photos took by Adam Dziubiński).
the battery
Figure 7. (a)installation
Replacement(photos took
of the by Adam
batteries Dziubiński).
in the wind tunnel; and (b) replacement of the batteries
during flight testing—compartment previously used for the aerodynamic balance was now used for
the battery installation (photos took by Adam Dziubiński).

Figure 8. Example of discharge characteristics of the propulsion battery after 1.5 years of use.
Discharge
Figure 8. current:
Example2.3ofA.discharge characteristics of the propulsion battery after 1.5 years of use.
Figure 8. Example of discharge characteristics of the propulsion battery after 1.5 years of use. Discharge
Discharge current: 2.3 A.
current: 2.3 A. discharge characteristics are usually a symptom of battery aging; therefore, it was
Different
Figure 8. Example of discharge characteristics of the propulsion battery after 1.5 years of use.
necessary to decide
Different whether
discharge a new set of
characteristics arebatteries
usually should
a symptom be acquired.
of battery Market
aging;analysis indicated
therefore, it was
Discharge current: 2.3 A.
Different discharge characteristics are usually a symptom of battery aging; therefore, of
that a suitable
necessary to piston
decide engine
whether would
a new be lighter
set of and
batteriescheaper.
should Moreover,
be acquired.the maintenance
Market advantage
analysis indicated it was
an
thatelectrical
aDifferent
suitable propulsion
piston system
engine would during
be a flight test campaign is questionable. Refueling takes
necessary to decide whether
discharge a new set
characteristicsoflighter
batteriesandshould
are usually cheaper. be
a symptom Moreover,
acquired. the maintenance
Market
of battery aging; advantage
analysis indicated
therefore, it wasof that
significantly
an electrical less time than
propulsion exchanging
system during batteries
abatteries so more
flight test flightsisaquestionable.
campaign day can be performed
Refueling with
takes
necessary
a suitable pistonto decide
engine whether
would a new
be set of
lighter and cheaper. should be acquired.
Moreover, Market analysis
the maintenance indicated
advantage of an
internally
significantlycombusting
less time propulsion.
than Therefore
exchanging it wasso
batteries decided
more to replace
flights a electrical
day can bepropulsion
performed with a
with
that apropulsion
electrical suitable piston engine
system would
during a be lighter
flight test and cheaper.isMoreover,
campaign questionable. the maintenance
Refueling advantage
takes of
significantly
piston engine.
internally It was then
combusting used until
propulsion. the end itofwas
Therefore the decided
flight test tocampaign.
replace The electrical
electrical propulsion
propulsion with
an
less time electrical
than propulsion
exchanging system so
batteries during
more aflights
flightatest
day campaign
can is questionable.
be performed with takesa
Refuelingcombusting
internally
system
piston was used
engine. It againthen
was during
used the final
until wind
the end tunnel
of the test
flight session
test in 2016. AThe
campaign. summary of the
electrical electric
propulsion
significantly less time than exchanging batteries so more flights a day can be performed with
propulsion.
system Therefore
propulsion was system it
used again was decided
application
during in
the to
this replace
project
final electrical
windisittunnel testpropulsion
presented in Figure
session withAasummary
in9.2016. piston engine. It was then
of the electric
internally combusting propulsion. Therefore was decided to replace electrical propulsion with a
used propulsion
until the end of
system the flight
applicationtest campaign. The electrical propulsion system was used again during
piston engine. It was then usedinuntil
this project
the endisofpresented
the flightintestFigure 9.
campaign. The electrical propulsion
the final wind tunnel test session in 2016. A summary of the electric propulsion
system was used again during the final wind tunnel test session in 2016. A summary of the electric system application in
this project
propulsionis presented in Figurein9.this project is presented in Figure 9.
system application

Figure 9. Schedule of batteries’ application in the research project.

Figure 9. Schedule of batteries’ application in the research project.

Figure
Figure 9. Scheduleofofbatteries’
9. Schedule batteries’ application
applicationininthe research
the project.
research project.
Energies 2017, 10, 762 9 of 21

Energies 2017, 10, 762 9 of 21

The most challenging tests for the batteries are marked red in this figure. These tests were so
challenging Thebecause a high discharge
most challenging current
tests for the wasare
batteries used for extended
marked red in thisperiods of time
figure. These inwere
tests thesesocases.
In the case of complete airplane investigation in the wind tunnel, a much smaller currentcases.
challenging because a high discharge current was used for extended periods of time in these was used
sinceIn the caseconditions
cruising of complete airplane
were investigation
simulated. In thesein the wind tunnel,
conditions, a much smaller
the airplane current
needs the was used
smallest power to
since cruising conditions were simulated. In these conditions, the airplane needs the smallest power
fly. During flight testing, on the other hand, full power is used only during takeoff, so in this case a
to fly. During flight testing, on the other hand, full power is used only during takeoff, so in this case
high discharge current was used neither frequently nor for an extended period of time. Finally, the test
a high discharge current was used neither frequently nor for an extended period of time. Finally, the
standtest
(Figure 10) used for propulsion testing could accommodate only a 12S2P battery configuration
stand (Figure 10) used for propulsion testing could accommodate only a 12S2P battery
instead of the 12S4P
configuration configuration
instead applied
of the 12S4P for complete
configuration airplane
applied testing.airplane
for complete As a result the current
testing. drained
As a result
from the
the current
batteries during
drained propulsion
from testing
the batteries withpropulsion
during full power was usually
testing with fulltwice
power that
wasasusually
duringtwice
complete
airplane
that testing.
as duringThis means airplane
complete that either five months
testing. of extensive
This means that eitherusefive
exhausted
months of theextensive
useful lifeuseof the
exhausted
batteries, or theythewere
useful life ofalso
aging theduring
batteries, or theyperiods
storage were aging also proper
(despite during storage
storageperiods (despite
conditions). In any
event,proper storage
this result conditions).
was In any event,since
quite disappointing this result
Li-Fe was quite were
batteries disappointing
selected since
in viewLi-Feof batteries
their greater
weredurability
expected selected inthan
viewLi-poly
of theirbatteries
greater expected
(anotherdurability than safety).
reason being Li-poly batteries (anothertoreason
The conclusion be drawn
being safety). The conclusion to be drawn from this experience is that electrical propulsion is quite
from this experience is that electrical propulsion is quite useful in aeronautical research programs,
useful in aeronautical research programs, albeit only in their early stages. However, when long
albeit only in their early stages. However, when long lasting extensive flight testing begins, an internal
lasting extensive flight testing begins, an internal combusting propulsion is still more reliable and
combusting propulsion is still more reliable and easy to use.
easy to use.

(a) (b)

Figure 10. Test stand for propulsion testing. (a) Side view; and (b) aft view.
Figure 10. Test stand for propulsion testing. (a) Side view; and (b) aft view.
Two other lessons were learned from this project, concerning potential modifications to the
Two other
general lessons were
configuration learned
of the fromDuring
airplane. this project, concerning
the flight potential
test campaign, the modifications to the general
craft was discovered to
exhibit correct longitudinal stability but relatively low directional stability
configuration of the airplane. During the flight test campaign, the craft was discovered to exhibit (acceptable but not
comfortable
correct longitudinal for the pilot). Because
stability of this, itlow
but relatively wasdirectional
decided to move the CG
stability in the forward
(acceptable direction
but not to
comfortable
improve directional stability, so that the airplane was eventually flying
for the pilot). Because of this, it was decided to move the CG in the forward direction to improvewith the CG located in front
of its planned position. As a result, the aft wing provided too little lift to maintain an optimal lift
directional stability, so that the airplane was eventually flying with the CG located in front of its
distribution. Therefore, it was not possible to attain the expected performance advantage. However,
planned position. As a result, the aft wing provided too little lift to maintain an optimal lift distribution.
this could be improved in the future, for instance through the application of ducted fan propulsion,
Therefore,
because it the
wasduct
notwould
possible to attain
provide the expected
an additional performance
stabilizing advantage.
surface behind the tail However, this This
of the airplane. could be
improved in the future, for instance through the application of ducted fan propulsion,
would improve both the directional and longitudinal stability of the airplane and allow for a more because the duct
would provide an additional stabilizing surface behind the tail of the airplane.
aft CG position. As a result, the aft wing would deliver greater lift. However, this solution may not This would improve
both be
theoptimal
directional andthrust
since the longitudinal
axis of thestability
ducted fan of the airplane
is still andabove
quite high allowthe forground
a moreand aftover
CG CG.
position.
Eccentricity
As a result, between
the aft wing the CG position
would deliver and thrust
greater axis
lift. generates this
However, a significant
solutionpitching
may not moment whichsince
be optimal
has toaxis
the thrust be balanced by thefan
of the ducted elevator
is stilldeflection,
quite highagain above decreasing
the ground the and
lift from
overthe CG.aftEccentricity
wing. It wouldbetween
the CG position and thrust axis generates a significant pitching moment which has towing
seem that the application of propulsion distributed along the leading edge of the aft would by
be balanced
solve both problems. Without an engine and propeller/fan at the end, the fuselage could be longer so
the elevator deflection, again decreasing the lift from the aft wing. It would seem that the application
that the distance between the CG and the vertical stabilizer could be greater, providing sufficient
of propulsion distributed along the leading edge of the aft wing would solve both problems. Without
stability with the optimal CG position. Moreover, small motors applicable in the case of distributed
an engine and propeller/fan
propulsion would require smallat the end, theThis
propellers. fuselage
wouldcouldallow be
for longer
the thrust so axis
thattothebe distance between
located below
the CG
the CG, so that increased lift from the aft wing would be necessary to obtain the equilibrium. These CG
and the vertical stabilizer could be greater, providing sufficient stability with the optimal
position. Moreover, small motors applicable in the case of distributed propulsion would require small
propellers. This would allow for the thrust axis to be located below the CG, so that increased lift from
Energies 2017, 10, 762 10 of 21

the aftEnergies
wing 2017,
would be necessary to obtain the equilibrium. These considerations were initially
10, 762 verified
10 of 21
with the application of simple CFD methods showing an advantage of distributed propulsion [54].
considerations
Energies
In Section 4 2017, 10, 762were initially verified with the application of simple CFD methods showing
of this paper, we show with the application of wind tunnel data that this result is10plausible. an
of 21
advantage of distributed propulsion [54]. In Section 4 of this paper, we show with the application of
Assuming an airplane
considerations wereconfiguration
initially like the
verified withonethepresented
application in of
Figure
simple 11,CFD
however,
methodsleads us backanagain
showing
wind tunnel data that this result is plausible. Assuming an airplane configuration like the one
to an advantage
electric
presented ofpropulsion
in distributed system, since
propulsion
Figure 11, however, small
[54].
leads electric
usInback
Section
again motors
4 of
to this are
paper, we
an electric much more
show with
propulsion reliable and
the application
system, since easier
small of to
operate
windthan
electric internally
tunnel
motors data combusting
are that
much this
moreresult ones. The
is plausible.
reliable and simultaneous
easier Assuming
to operatean starting
airplane
than and regulation
configuration
internally combustinglike of many
ones. onesmall
theThe
internally combusting
presented
simultaneous in Figure engines
starting11, and is
however, almost
leadsimpossible.
regulation us back
of manyagain smallMoreover
tointernally it would
an electric be dangerous
propulsion
combusting isinalmost
system, since
engines the case of
small
electric motors
impossible. are
Moreover much it more
would reliable
be and
dangerous easier
in the to operate
case of than
crosswind internally
crosswind landings because one wing is much closer to the ground in these cases, thus creating a threat landings combusting
because one ones.
wing The
is
simultaneous
of collision closer tostarting
much between the
theground
runwayandinregulation
these
and an cases, ofthus
externalmany small
creating
propeller. internally
a threat combusting
of collision
Fortunately idle engines
between
only isisused
the runway
power almost
andduring
approach, so the more external electric motors could be switched off completely and restartedis if an
impossible.
an external Moreover
propeller. it would
Fortunately be dangerous
only idle in
power the case
is usedof crosswind
during landings
approach, sobecause
the more one wing
external
much closer
electric motorsto the ground
could in theseoff
be switched cases, thus creating
completely a threatifofancollision
and restarted abortedbetween the runwaywas
landing maneuver and
aborted landing maneuver was necessary. They should be equipped with foldable propellers to avoid
necessary.
an externalThey shouldFortunately
propeller. be equipped withidle
only foldable
powerpropellers to avoid
is used during collision with
approach, so thethemore
runway, so
external
collision with the runway,
their nacelles
so their nacelles should be atradius least as long for as the propellerfolding
radiusand to allow
electric motorsshould
could be be at least as off
switched longcompletely
as the propeller
and restartedtoifallow an aborted unhampered
landing maneuver was
for unhampered
unfolding They
necessary. folding
propellers. and
should On beunfolding
the other propellers.
equipped hand,foldable
with On
the immediate the other
propellers tohand,
restart of athe
avoid immediate
small
collisioninternal
with the restart
combusting
runway, of asosmall
internal combusting
engine
their anengine
duringshould
nacelles be atduring
aborted least asan
landing aborted
as theislanding
maneuver
long maneuver
again impossible.
propeller radius to allowis again impossible.folding and
for unhampered
unfolding propellers. On the other hand, the immediate restart of a small internal combusting
engine during an aborted landing maneuver is again impossible.

Figure 11. Concept of the inverted joined wing airplane with distributed propulsion.
Figure 11. Concept of the inverted joined wing airplane with distributed propulsion.
Another issue connected with these considerations is their practical application in a large scale
Figure 11. Concept of the inverted joined wing airplane with distributed propulsion.
Another
airplane. issue
In thisconnected with these
case, all-electric considerations
propulsion would not is betheir practical
reasonable. Theapplication
energy densityin a of
largean scale
airplane. Another
In this case,
all-electrical all-electric
propulsion system
issue connected propulsion
is
with
still would not
approximately
these considerations
eight
is be
times
theirreasonable.
lower than The energy
the energy
practical application density
density
in a large
of
scaleof an
an
internally
all-electrical combusting propulsion system, even if the best Li-ion batteries are used [55], so in a large
airplane.propulsion
In this case,system is still
all-electric approximately
propulsion would not eight
be times lowerThe
reasonable. than the energy
energy density density
of an of
scale utility
an internally airplane, liquid
combusting fuel should
propulsion be used
system, evenfor if
energy
the storage.
best On batteries
Li-ion the other hand,
are the issue
used [55], ofso in a
all-electrical propulsion system is still approximately eight times lower than the energy density of an
crosswind landings is still important, so electrical motors should be applied to deliver the thrust
large internally
scale utility airplane,propulsion
combusting liquid fuelsystem,
shouldeven
be used
if thefor
bestenergy storage. are
Li-ion batteries Onused
the other
[55], sohand, the issue
in a large
necessary to fly. This leads to the conclusion that hybrid distributed propulsion may be optimal for
scale utility
of crosswind airplane,
landings is liquid
still fuel shouldso
important, beelectrical
used for energy
motors storage.
should Onbe the other hand,
applied to the issue
deliver the of
thrust
large scale airplanes in the proposed configuration.
crosswind
necessary to fly.landings
This leadsis still important,
to the conclusionso electrical motors
that hybrid should be propulsion
distributed applied to deliver
may be theoptimal
thrust for
large necessary
scale to fly.Improvement
airplanes
5. Performance This
in theleads to the
proposed conclusion that hybrid distributed propulsion may be optimal for
configuration.
Analysis
large scale airplanes in the proposed configuration.
Above we have considered several possible modifications to improve the performance of the
5. Performance Improvement Analysis
joined wing demonstrator
5. Performance Improvement which we actually tested. However, any and every change needs to be
Analysis
made with
Above specialconsidered
we have care to keepseveral
the airplane’s stability
possible and handling
modifications propertiesthe
to improve at aperformance
suitable level. of the
Above
Figure 12 we have
explains theconsidered
convention several
of the possible
axis systemmodifications
used to to the
define improve
CG the performance
position, neutral of of
point the
joinedjoined
wingwing
demonstrator which we actually tested. However, any and every change needs totobe made
stability (CN) position, and thrust vector (T) position used in this paper. It is worth mentioning thatbe
demonstrator which we actually tested. However, any and every change needs
with special
made care
with to keep
special the airplane’s
care to δH
keep stability
the airplane’s and handling properties at a suitable level. level. 12
Figure
positive elevator deflection is down deflectionstability and handling
and corresponds to theproperties at adown
nose pitching suitable
effect.
explains the12convention
Figure explains theof the axis system
convention used
of the axis to define
system used to the CG position,
define neutral
the CG position, pointpoint
neutral of stability
of
(CN) stability
position, andposition,
(CN) thrust vector (T) position
and thrust vector (T)used in this
position usedpaper.
in this It is worth
paper. mentioning
It is worth that that
mentioning positive
positive
elevator elevatorδH
deflection is downδH
deflection is down deflection
deflection and corresponds
and corresponds to the tonosethe pitching
nose pitching
down down effect.
effect.

Figure 12. Center of gravity, neutral point position, and local axis system convention (Łukasz
Stefanek).

Figure 12. Center of gravity, neutral point position, and local axis system convention (Łukasz
Figure 12. Center of gravity, neutral point position, and local axis system convention (Łukasz Stefanek).
Stefanek).
Energies 2017, 10, 762 11 of 21

As Figure
Energies 12762
2017, 10, shows, the CG is located unusually far aft from the front wing as compared 11 of 21 to
a conventional airplane. However, this is typical for a joined wing configuration because of the
As Figure 12 shows, the CG is located unusually far aft from the front wing as compared to a
specific lift distribution between the front and aft wings. Analyses presented below are based on
conventional airplane. However, this is typical for a joined wing configuration because of the
a set specific
of extensive wind tunnel
lift distribution tests
between theperformed inwings.
front and aft 2014 and 2016 presented
Analyses which included different
below are based onaircraft
a
configurations including: plain configuration, with controls deflected, asymmetric
set of extensive wind tunnel tests performed in 2014 and 2016 which included differentflight configurations,
aircraft
with configurations
propeller and ducted fan propulsion.
including: plain configuration, with controls deflected, asymmetric flight
configurations, with propeller and ducted fan propulsion.
5.1. Center of Gravity Position Impact on the Airplane Performance
5.1. Center of Gravity Position Impact on the Airplane Performance
The CG position for every airplane is defined by several factors: the required stability margin,
The CG
controllability, and position for everyThe
performance. airplane is defined
first one by several
describes the most factors: the required
aft position relativestability margin,
to the CN position,
controllability, and performance. The first one describes the most aft position
with some reserve factor called the stability margin hn , that satisfies static stability requirements. relative to the CN
position, with some reserve factor called the stability margin ݄ തതത
௡ , that satisfies static stability
The second one defines the most forward position in view of the controllability, and depends mostly on
requirements. The second one defines the most forward position in view of the controllability, and
the elevator effectiveness. The forward location of the CG is also driven by aerodynamic performance
depends mostly on the elevator effectiveness. The forward location of the CG is also driven by
constraints. That is because the more forward the center of gravity position is, the more elevator
aerodynamic performance constraints. That is because the more forward the center of gravity
deflection
positionis required
is, the more to elevator
balancedeflection
and control the airplane,
is required andand
to balance thuscontrol
the total
the drag is increased.
airplane, and thus the
In the case of the
total drag is increased. airplane being analyzed herein, the CG position was ultimately defined according
to the firstInflight tests of
the case that
therevealed
airplanean acceptable
being analyzedbutherein,
small directional
the CG positionstability.
wasThat is whydefined
ultimately the location
of theaccording
CG wastoshifted the first flight
from antests
initial c = −0.879
thatxrevealed an macceptable
to xc = but−0.91small
m, directional stability.the
which increased That is
distance
why the
between the location
vertical of the CG was
stabilizer shifted fromcenter
aerodynamic an initial
andxc =the
−0.879
CG m andto xtherefore
c = −0.91 m, which increased
improved directional
the distance
stability, but on the between
other the
hand vertical stabilizer
affected aerodynamicIn
the performance. center
orderand the CG and
to quantify thetherefore
impact of improved
CG position
directional stability, but on the other hand affected the performance. In order to quantify the impact
on performance, we performed the evaluations shown below. First of all, plots of elevator deflection to
of CG position on performance, we performed the evaluations shown below. First of all, plots of
trim the airplane in steady level powered flight versus the airspeed and angle of attack were defined
elevator deflection to trim the airplane in steady level powered flight versus the airspeed and angle
usingofthe SDSA software developed by Warsaw University of Technology, Poland [56,57] as shown in
attack were defined using the SDSA software developed by Warsaw University of Technology,
Figure 13a,b, respectively.
Poland [56,57] as shown in Figure 13a,b, respectively.

(a) (b)

Figure 13. Elevator deflection required to trim the airplane in steady level powered flight: (a) with
Figure 13. Elevator deflection required to trim the airplane in steady level powered flight: (a) with
respect to the angle of attack; and (b) with respect to the airspeed.
respect to the angle of attack; and (b) with respect to the airspeed.
Calculations were made for the baseline propulsion configuration (see Figure 2) and five different
Calculations were
CG positions werestaggered
made forby 10%
the of MAC.
baseline The first one
propulsion (xc = −0.91 m (see
configuration ) indicates
Figurethat the modified
2) and five different
CG position
CG positions weredoes not reallyby
staggered match
10%the ofassumed
MAC. The cruise
firstairspeed
one (xcof=25 −m/s
0.91since an elevatorthat
m ) indicates deflection of
the modified
about −1.9° is required to maintain steady level flight. This negative elevator
CG position does not really match the assumed cruise airspeed of 25 m/s since an elevator deflection deflection induces a
negative lift
◦ increment resulting in lower total lift. The former, being plotted in the domain of the angle
of about −1.9 is required to maintain steady level flight. This negative elevator deflection induces
of attack, gives a brief insight into the airplane’s static longitudinal stability level with respect to the
a negative lift increment resulting in lower total lift. The former, being plotted in the domain of the
angle of attack in the range of −6° < α < 6°. Because of the fact that the negative slope of δ(δH)/δα
angleindicates
of attack, gives astability,
positive brief insight into the
the airplane is airplane’s staticfor
statically stable longitudinal stability
the full achievable levelofwith
range respect
angles of to
the angle of attack in the range of − 6 ◦ < α < 6◦ . Because of the fact that the negative slope of δ(δH)/δα
attack for almost every CG position considered, except for the most aft case (xc = −0.802 m), where the
indicates
slopepositive stability,
becomes positive forthe airplane
angles is statically
of attack below α = −4°.stable forthat,
After thethe
full achievable
location range point
of the neutral of angles
xn of
attackwas
fordefined
almost in every CG position
a similar manner andconsidered,
is shown except
in Figurefor14.
theAccording
most aft to case c = −below,
the(xfigure 0.802 m),
the where
most the
slope becomes positive for angles of attack below α = −4◦ . After that, the location of the neutral point
xn was defined in a similar manner and is shown in Figure 14. According to the figure below, the most
Energies 2017, 10, 762 12 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 12 of 21

◦ equals x = −0.836 m. Therefore, while assuming a minimum

forward position for=α−=6 −6°
2017, 10, for stability
position α
Energies 762 12 of 21
forward equals nxn = −0.836 m. Therefore, while assuming a minimum stability
Energies 2017, 10, 762 12 of 21
margin h
margin = തതത
0.05MAC (0.0135 m), the most aft CG position should be set to
n ݄௡ = 0.05MAC (0.0135 m), the most aft CG position should be set to xc = −0.85xc = − 0.85
m. m.
forward position for α = −6° equals xn = −0.836 m. Therefore, while assuming a minimum stability
margin ݄
forward തതത
position for α(0.0135
௡ = 0.05MAC = −6° equals
m), thexmost
n = −0.836
aft CGm. Therefore,
position while
should assuming
be set a minimum
to xc = −0.85 m. stability
margin ݄തതത
௡ = 0.05MAC (0.0135 m), the most aft CG position should be set to xc = −0.85 m.

Figure 14. Neutral point position variation with the angle of attack (note that reference system begins
Figure 14. Neutral point position variation with the angle of attack (note that reference system begins
at the “engine frame”, see Figure 12).
at theFigure
“engine14. frame”, see Figure
Neutral point 12).
position variation with the angle of attack (note that reference system begins
Figure 14. Neutral
at the “engine point
frame”, position
see Figure variation
12). with the angle of attack (note that reference system begins
In order to assess the CG position’s impact on the airplane’s performance, additional analyses
at the “engine frame”, see Figure 12).
In order
were to assess
performed forthe
two CG position’s
additional CGimpact on thewere
cases. These airplane’s performance,
the most additional
aft position that satisfiesanalyses
the
In order to assess the CG position’s impact on the airplane’s performance, additional analyses
were assumed
performed for
stability two
margin തതത
additional
(݄ ௡ ) and CG
equalscases.
x These
c = −0.85 m were
and the the
most most
forwardaft position
position that
used satisfies
during the the
wereInperformed
order to assess
for two theadditional
CG position’sCG impact on thewere
cases. These airplane’s performance,
the most additional
aft position analyses
that satisfies the
assumedlast flight
stabilitysession:
margin x =
c (h −0.91
) and m. A
equals comparison
x = − 0.85 of
m the
and results
the mostwith the
forward baseline
positioncharacteristics
used
were
assumedperformed
stabilityfor twon(݄
margin തതത
additional CG ccases.
௡ ) and equals These
xc = −0.85 m and were
thethe most
most aft position
forward positionthat during the the
during
usedsatisfies
presented
last flight before
session: in Figure
−x0.91
xc =margin 4
തതത is
m.௡ ) Ashown in
comparisonFigures 15
of themand 16.
assumed
last flightstability
session: (݄
c = −0.91 and
m. equals xc = −0.85
A comparison ofresults
and
the thewith
mostthe
results baseline
forward
with characteristics
the position
baselineused duringpresented
the
characteristics
before in flight
last Figure
presented 4 is shown
session:
before xc = in
in Figure 4Figures
−0.91 m. A15in
is shown and 16. 15 of
comparison
Figures andthe16.results with the baseline characteristics
presented before in Figure 4 is shown in Figures 15 and 16.

(a) (b)

Figure 15. The airplane’s

(a) aerodynamic characteristics’ variation with the (b) centre of gravity (CG)
(a) and (b) power coefficient CL3/CD2 with respect to the airspeed.
position: (a) CL/CD ratio; (b)
Figure 15. The airplane’s aerodynamic characteristics’ variation with the centre of gravity (CG)
Figure 15. The airplane’s aerodynamic characteristics’3variation with the centre of gravity (CG) position:
Figure
position:15.
(a)The
CL/Cairplane’s aerodynamic
D ratio; and characteristics’
(b) power coefficient /CD2variation withto the centre of gravity (CG)
(a) CLposition:
/CD ratio; and (b) power coefficient C 3 /C 2CLwith with respect
respect
the airspeed.
to the airspeed.
L D
(a) CL/CD ratio; and (b) power coefficient CL3/CD2 with respect to the airspeed.

(a) (b)

Figure 16. Variation (a)

in the airplane’s performance with the CG position: (a) (b)maximum climb rate;
(a) duration with respect to the airspeed.
and (b) range and flight (b)
Figure 16. Variation in the airplane’s performance with the CG position: (a) maximum climb rate;
Figure
and (b) 16. Variation
range in the
and flight airplane’s
duration with performance
respect to thewith the CG position: (a) maximum climb rate;
airspeed.
Figure 16. Variation in the airplane’s performance with the CG position: (a) maximum climb rate; and
and (b) range and flight duration with respect to the airspeed.
(b) range and flight duration with respect to the airspeed.
Energies 2017, 10, 762 13 of 21

Results show
Energies 2017, a small improvement in performance. The climb rate remained more or less
10, 762 the
13 of 21 same
within the full airspeed range and varies only for very low airspeeds close to the stall point, which in
Results show a small improvement in performance. The climb rate remained more or less the
reality does not give any benefits. It is a bit different for the range and duration characteristics, which
same within the full airspeed range and varies only for very low airspeeds close to the stall point,
reveal some advantage in shifting the CG backwards. The maximum range extension is possible for an
which in reality does not give any benefits. It is a bit different for the range and duration
airspeed of about 21.5
characteristics, which m/s andsome
reveal equals 2% as compared
advantage in shiftingtothe theCGrange for xc =The
backwards. −0.91 m. Improvement
maximum range
of flight endurance
extension is also
is possible forpossible.
an airspeed Nevertheless,
of about 21.5 m/sit is and
achievable
equals 2% forasacompared
lower airspeed and equals
to the range for xc 2%
for an= −0.91 m. Improvement of flight endurance is also possible. Nevertheless, it is achievable for a lower over
airspeed of 19 m/s. In every case, performance improvement diminishes for airspeeds
the assumed
airspeed cruise
and equals airspeed
2% forof 25 anm/s. The reason
airspeed of 19 m/s.for the low increase
In every in performance
case, performance in general is
improvement
diminishes
the fact that thefor airspeeds over
longitudinal the assumed
equilibrium cruise airspeed
is significantly of 25 m/s.
affected The the
when reason for the
center low increase
of gravity is shifted.
in performance
As a result, this requires in general
proper is the fact that
elevator the longitudinal
deflection to maintain equilibrium
the balanceis significantly affected when
and consequently generates
the centerdrag
an additional of gravity is shifted.
increment. A moreAs aeffective
result, this
wayrequires
to recoverpropertheelevator
balancedeflection
is by makingto maintain the
an appropriate
balance and consequently generates an additional drag increment. A more effective way to recover
change to the rear wing incidence angle; however, this was not possible in this case, given that a basic
the balance is by making an appropriate change to the rear wing incidence angle; however, this was
assumption was that the analysis was based on the wind tunnel results.
not possible in this case, given that a basic assumption was that the analysis was based on the wind
Another issue that may be affected by the CG travel is the longitudinal and directional stability of
tunnel results.
the airplane, both
Another issue staticthat
andmaydynamic. It has
be affected by been
the CGalready
travel is shown that the longitudinal
the longitudinal and directional static stability is
stability
satisfied,
of thebut additional
airplane, bothwork
staticisand
required
dynamic.to assess
It hasthebeendynamic
alreadystability.
shown that Because the airplanestatic
the longitudinal revealed
insufficient
stabilitydirectional
is satisfied, stability,
but additional which workwasis initially
required the reason
to assess thefor moving
dynamic the CGBecause
stability. forward, the after
movingairplane
the CG revealed
backwardsinsufficient
to xc directional
= −0.85 m,stability,
there iswhich
a needwas initially
to shift thethe reasonstabilizer
vertical for moving the CG by
backwards
aboutforward,
0.06 m after
to keepmoving the CG backwards
approximately the sameto xc distance
= −0.85 m,between
there is a need
the CG to shift
andthe vertical stabilizer
stabilizer aerodynamic
backwards by about 0.06 m to keep approximately the same
center. Based on this, the numeric model as shown in Figure 17 was created to assess distance between the CG and stabilizer
the airplane
aerodynamic center. Based on this, the numeric model as shown in Figure 17 was created to assess
aerodynamic characteristics in sideslip cases using the PANUKL software developed by Warsaw
the airplane aerodynamic characteristics in sideslip cases using the PANUKL software developed by
University of Technology, Poland [58].
Warsaw University of Technology, Poland [58].

(a) (b)

Figure 17. The airplane geometry mesh used for aerodynamic calculations: (a) baseline geometry;
Figure 17. The airplane geometry mesh used for aerodynamic calculations: (a) baseline geometry; and
and (b) vertical stabilizer moved 0.06 m aft.
(b) vertical stabilizer moved 0.06 m aft.
Using results from PANUKL, input data for the analysis was updated and the stability
computation
Using resultswasfrom
performed
PANUKL,in SDSA [56–58]
input data forfor
geometry with a new
the analysis wasvertical
updatedstabilizer
and position
the stability
and most aft CG position. The basic results are presented in Figure 18
computation was performed in SDSA [56–58] for geometry with a new vertical stabilizer position and compared with the and
properties of the airplane with the initial geometry and most forward CG position.
most aft CG position. The basic results are presented in Figure 18 and compared with the properties of
According to Figure 18a, the time to halve the amplitude in phugoid motion is higher for low
the airplane with the initial geometry and most forward CG position.
airspeeds below 21 m/s, which means weaker damping close to the minimum airspeed. However, the
According to Figure 18a, the time to halve the amplitude in phugoid motion is higher for low
motion becomes highly damped compared to the basic configuration for airspeed range above 21 m/s,
airspeeds below
which confirms 21the
m/s, which means
improvement weaker damping
in longitudinal close
stability after CGtoand
thetail
minimum airspeed.
modification. However,
It should be
the motion
pointedbecomes
out that thehighly damped
irregular shape compared
of the curvetois the basic
caused byconfiguration
limitations of theforsoftware
airspeed range
that solvesabove
21 m/s, whichequations
linearized confirms of the improvement
motion in longitudinal
and thus, discontinuities of the stability after
final output areCG and Nevertheless,
possible. tail modification.
it is enough
It should to quantify
be pointed out that thethe
design impact
irregular on the
shape of overall
the curveairplane qualities.
is caused Because a joined
by limitations of thewing
software
configuration seems to inherently have good longitudinal dynamic stability properties
that solves linearized equations of motion and thus, discontinuities of the final output are possible. as shown in
[59,60], there is no risk of phugoid or short period oscillation instability with CG
Nevertheless, it is enough to quantify the design impact on the overall airplane qualities. Because alocation change until
static stability requirements are satisfied. It is a bit different in terms of lateral-directional stability
joined wing configuration seems to inherently have good longitudinal dynamic stability properties as
because a combination of dihedral and wing sweep angles together with side connecting plates and
shown in [59,60], there is no risk of phugoid or short period oscillation instability with CG location
usually a relatively small area of vertical stabilizer makes it difficult to predict airplane qualities. That
change until static stability requirements are satisfied. It is a bit different in terms of lateral-directional
is why the results presented in [59] revealed spiral instability and a satisfactory level of Dutch roll
stability because a combination of dihedral and wing sweep angles together with side connecting
plates and usually a relatively small area of vertical stabilizer makes it difficult to predict airplane
Energies 2017, 10, 762 14 of 21

Energies 2017, 10, 762 14 of 21

qualities. That is why the results presented in [59] revealed spiral instability and a satisfactory level of
stability.
Dutch rollDutch roll Dutch
stability. damping rollwas also crucial
damping was alsoin the casein
crucial ofthe
ourcase
airplane.
of ourBoth spiralBoth
airplane. and spiral
Dutchandroll
were stable with the original CG location, but any spiral motion was always
Dutch roll were stable with the original CG location, but any spiral motion was always accompanied accompanied by Dutch
rollDutch
by oscillations, which waswhich
roll oscillations, not convenient for the pilot,
was not convenient forinthe
particular
pilot, inin gusty weather.
particular in gusty This was a
weather.
reason
This was fora the CG for
reason shiftthe
forward
CG shift during the flight
forward during test
thecampaign.
flight testTherefore,
campaign.the increase of
Therefore, theDutch roll
increase
damping was perceived as advantageous and is analyzed in this paper. As
of Dutch roll damping was perceived as advantageous and is analyzed in this paper. As shown in shown in Figure 18b, after
the proposed
Figure 18b, after modification,
the proposeddamping was significantly
modification, damping wasincreased in the
significantly full airspeed
increased in the fullrange. It is
airspeed
because of the vertical stabilizer shift that the adverse effect due to the CG location
range. It is because of the vertical stabilizer shift that the adverse effect due to the CG location change change was
overcome.
was overcome.Therefore, sincesince
Therefore, the directional stability
the directional was generally
stability improved,
was generally it can be
improved, it said that
can be there
said is
that
no risk
there is of
nostability loss if only
risk of stability lossthe appropriate
if only stabilizerstabilizer
the appropriate position and area and
position are maintained.
area are maintained.

(a) (b)

Figure 18. Dynamic stability characteristics of the airplane with the most aft CG and vertical stabilizer
Figure 18. Dynamic stability characteristics of the airplane with the most aft CG and vertical stabilizer
location. Time
location. Time to
to halve
halve the
theamplitude
amplitudeof
ofthe
theoscillations:
oscillations: (a)
(a) phugoid
phugoid motion;
motion; and
and (b)
(b) Dutch
Dutch roll
roll motion.
motion.

5.2. Thrust Vector Position Impact on the Airplane Performance

5.2. Thrust Vector Position Impact on the Airplane Performance
For the reasons discussed in Section 2, the thrust vector is located high above the CG position,
For the reasons discussed in Section 2, the thrust vector is located high above the CG position, so
so that it generates a pitching down (negative) moment and greatly affects the longitudinal trim and
that it generates a pitching down (negative) moment and greatly affects the longitudinal trim and thus
thus performance in general. Possible solutions as to how to modify the propulsion unit to minimize
performance in general. Possible solutions as to how to modify the propulsion unit to minimize this
this adverse effect were highlighted above and thus some calculations are needed to evaluate the
adverse effect were highlighted above and thus some calculations are needed to evaluate the possible
possible benefits from this concept. Two different positions were considered: nominal zT = 0.216 m
benefits from this concept. Two different positions were considered: nominal zT = 0.216 m and a lower
and a lower position located approximately in plane of the aft wing zT = 0 m (refer to Figure 12). The
position located approximately in plane of the aft wing zT = 0 m (refer to Figure 12). The latter was
latter was combined with two different CG positions, so that three different cases were analyzed.
combined with two different CG positions, so that three different cases were analyzed. The final results
The final results are presented in Figures 19 and 20. This time of the total extension of the range was
are presented in Figures 19 and 20. This time of the total extension of the range was approximately
approximately 3%, whereas the total extension of flight endurance proved to be 4%. Performance
3%, whereas the total extension of flight endurance proved to be 4%. Performance improvement is
improvement is visible only for low airspeed values. However, it is worth pointing out that the
visible only for low airspeed values. However, it is worth pointing out that the minimum airspeed
minimum airspeed was reduced due to the positive pitching moment increase generated by the
was reduced due to the positive pitching moment increase generated by the thrust, which allowed for
thrust, which allowed for increased lift. Any benefits diminish with increasing airspeed. Similar to
increased lift. Any benefits diminish with increasing airspeed. Similar to the previous findings, this is
the previous findings, this is caused by an inappropriate aft wing incidence angle not adjusted to the
caused by an inappropriate aft wing incidence angle not adjusted to the new concept. This should
new concept. This should be changed to trim the airplane with a new thrust vector position for the
be changed to trim the airplane with a new thrust vector position for the assumed cruise airspeed.
assumed cruise airspeed. We propose that after the incidence angle is changed so that it
We propose that after the incidence angle is changed so that it compensates for the change in pitching
compensates for the change in pitching moment due to the thrust effect, the performance would be
moment due to the thrust effect, the performance would be improved within the full range of airspeed.
improved within the full range of airspeed.
5.3. The Airplane Performance with the Ducted Fan Propulsion
5.3. The Airplane Performance with the Ducted Fan Propulsion
Another concept discussed above is propulsion with a ducted fan, as shown in Figure 21. Wind
tunnelAnother concept
tests were discussed
performed forabove is propulsion
the airplane withnew
with this a ducted fan, as shown
propulsion, in Figure 21.for
and additionally Wind
the
tunnel tests were performed for the airplane with this new propulsion,
propulsion unit separately to check its performance without the airframe. and additionally for the
propulsion unit separately to check its performance without the airframe.
Energies 2017, 10, 762 15 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 15 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 15 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 15 of 21

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 19. Variation in the airplane’s aerodynamic characteristics with the CG position: (a) CL/CD
Figure 19. Variation in the
(a) airplane’s aerodynamic characteristics with the CG position: (a) CL /CD
(b)
ratio;
Figureand
19.(b) power coefficient
Variation C3L /CD 2 with
3
in the airplane’s2 respect tocharacteristics
aerodynamic the airspeed. with the CG position: (a) CL/CD
ratio; and (b) power coefficient CL /C
3 D2
with respect to the airspeed.
ratio; and
Figure 19.(b) power coefficient
Variation CL /CD aerodynamic
in the airplane’s with respect to the airspeed. with the CG position: (a) CL/CD
characteristics
ratio; and (b) power coefficient CL3/CD2 with respect to the airspeed.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 20. Variation in the airplane’s performance with the thrust vector position: (a) maximum
climb (a) and flight duration with respect to the airspeed. (b)
Figurerate;
20. and (b) range
Variation in the airplane’s performance with the thrust vector position: (a) maximum
Figure 20. Variation in the airplane’s performance with the thrust vector position: (a) maximum climb
climb rate;
Figure 20. and (b) range
Variation andairplane’s
in the flight duration with respect
performance with to thethrust
the airspeed.
vector position: (a) maximum
rate; and (b) range and flight duration with respect to the airspeed.
climb rate; and (b) range and flight duration with respect to the airspeed.

Figure 21. The airplane with ducted fan propulsion (photo took by Krzysztof Bogdański).
Figure 21. The airplane with ducted fan propulsion (photo took by Krzysztof Bogdański).
BasedFigure
on the 21. aerodynamic
The airplane withcharacteristics of the airframe
ducted fan propulsion andbypropulsion
(photo took unit characteristics,
Krzysztof Bogdański).
Figureon
both Based Theaerodynamic
21.from
retrieved the airplane
the windwithtunnelducted
tests fan propulsion
(Figure
characteristics of22),
thethe (photo tookperformance
airplane’s
airframe and by Krzysztof
propulsion Bogda
was
unit ński). in a
calculated
characteristics,
similar wayonasthe
both Based
retrieved described
from previously
the wind
aerodynamic tunnel and (Figure
tests the results
characteristics of22), are
the the presented
airplane’s
airframe in Figures 23
and performance
propulsion and
was
unit 24. The first
calculated in a
characteristics,
picture
similar shows
way as that
from there
described
the windis very
previously
tunnel minor
and
tests influence
the results
(Figure 22), of
are
the the ducted
presented
airplane’s fan
in on the
Figures
Based on the aerodynamic characteristics of the airframe and propulsion unit characteristics,a both
both retrieved performance 23airplane’s
wasand 24. overall
The
calculated first
in
aerodynamic
picture
similar
retrieved fromwaytheascharacteristics.
shows that tunnel
described
wind Comparison
therepreviously
istests
very(Figure
minor with
and 22),
the theairplane’s
influence
results
the airplane
of
arethe in the in
ducted
presented baseline
fan
performance configuration
on was
Figuresthe airplane’s
23calculated
and 24. The reveals
overall
in first
a similar
only a small
aerodynamic
picture shows difference
that in C
characteristics.
there isL/C D forminor
Comparison
very the high
withairspeed
influence of range
the airplane
the above
in the 29
ducted m/s.
baseline
fan on Similar to the baseline
configuration
the airplane’s reveals
overall
way as described previously and the results are presented in Figures 23 and 24. The first picture shows
configuration,
aerodynamic the CG shift
only a small difference in Cin
characteristics. L/C the aftthe
D for
Comparison direction
high
with gives
airspeed a range
significant
the airplane theCLbaseline
above
in /CDm/s.
29 andSimilar
CL3/CD2toratio
the increase
configuration baseline
reveals
that there is very minor influence of the ducted fan on the airplane’s overall aerodynamic characteristics.
configuration, the CG shift in the aft direction gives a significant C /C and
only a small difference in CL/CD for the high airspeed range above 29 m/s. Similar to the baseline
L D C L3/CD2 ratio increase
Comparison with the airplane in the baseline configuration reveals only a small difference in C /C
configuration, the CG shift in the aft direction gives a significant CL/CD and CL3/CD2 ratio increaseL D
for the high airspeed range above 29 m/s. Similar to the baseline configuration, the CG shift in
the aft direction gives a significant CL /CD and CL 3 /CD 2 ratio increase near the minimum airspeed.
 Energies 2017, 10, 762 16 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 16 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 16 of 21
nearEnergies
the minimum
2017, 10, 762 airspeed. The graphs presented in Figure 24 do not confirm that the airplane 16 of 21 with
near the minimum airspeed. The graphs presented in Figure 24 do not confirm that the airplane with
the ducted fan is superior over one with conventional propulsion. That is because the propulsion
the near
ducted fan is superior
the minimum airspeed.overTheone withpresented
graphs conventional propulsion.
in Figure That is that
24 do not confirm because the propulsion
the airplane with
unitgraphs
The being presented
tested andinused in the
Figure 24 doanalyses
not has smaller
confirm that thethrust and with
airplane efficiency
the than afan
ducted conventional
is superior
unitthe
being
ducted tested
fan is and used over
superior in theoneanalyses has smaller
with conventional thrust and
propulsion. efficiency
That is becausethan
the apropulsion
conventional
propeller
over used in the flight test
one being
with program That
(withisgreater diameter than the ducted fan).tested
Therefore, it is
propeller
unit usedconventional
in theand
tested flight propulsion.
test
used inprogram (with
the analyses has because
greater
smaller the propulsion
diameter
thrust than
and unitthan
the ducted
efficiency being
fan). and used
Therefore,
a conventional it is
visible
invisible that
thepropeller
analyses bothhasinthe maximum
smaller thrust climb rate and
and efficiency range/endurance
than adiameter
conventional are worse
thepropeller than
used in the case with
that both
used thethemaximum
flight climb
test program rate and
(with range/endurance
greater than are worse fan).
ducted than ininthe
thecase
Therefore, flight test
it iswith
baseline
program
visiblepropulsion.
(with
that greater
both thediameter
maximum than the
climb ducted
rate and fan). Therefore,
range/endurance it
areis visible
worse that
than inboth
the the
case maximum
with
baseline propulsion.
climbbaseline
rate and propulsion.
range/endurance are worse than in the case with baseline propulsion.

Figure
Figure 22.22.
The The ductedfan
ducted fanpropulsion
propulsion performance:
performance: PPNN
—effective
—effectivepower, Pe—motor
power, electric
Pe—motor power,
electric power,
Figure 22.The
Figure22. Theducted
ductedfanfanpropulsion performance: P
propulsionperformance: PN —effective power, Pe —motor
N—effective power, Pe—motor
electric
electric power,
power,
η—total
η—total efficiency,
efficiency, T—thrust.
T—thrust.
η—total efficiency, T—thrust.
η—total efficiency, T—thrust.

(a) (b)
(a)
Figure 23. Variation (b)
(a) in the airplane’s aerodynamic characteristics with CG (b) position for the
configuration with a ducted fan: (a) CL/CD ratio; and (b) power coefficient CL3/CD2 with respect to the
Figure 23. Variation in the airplane’s aerodynamic characteristics with CG position for the
Figure 23. Variation in the airplane’s aerodynamic characteristics with CG position for the
airspeed.
Figure 23. Variation in the airplane’s aerodynamic characteristics with CG position 2for the configuration
configuration with a ducted fan: (a) CL/CD ratio; and (b) power coefficient CL3 /CD2 with respect to the
3
configuration with a ducted fan: (a) CL/CD ratio; and (b) power coefficient CL /CD with respect to the
with a ducted fan: (a) CL /CD ratio; and (b) power coefficient CL 3 /CD 2 with respect to the airspeed.
airspeed.
airspeed.

(a) (b)

Figure 24. Variation in the airplane’s performance with the thrust vector position: (a) maximum
climb rate; (b) range
(a)and flight duration with respect to the airspeed. (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 24.Variation
Figure Variation in
in in the
thethe airplane’s
airplane’s performance
performance with
withwith the thrust
the thrust vector
vector position:
position: (a) maximum
(a) maximum climb
Figure24. 24. Variation airplane’s performance the thrust vector position: (a) maximum
climb rate; (b) range and flight duration with respect to the airspeed.
rate;
climb(b)rate;
range(b)and flight
range andduration with respect
flight duration to the airspeed.
with respect to the airspeed.
Energies 2017, 10, 762 17 of 21
Energies 2017, 10, 762 17 of 21

Together
Together with with performance
performance analysis,
analysis, we we also
also evaluated
evaluated basicbasic stability,
stability, as
as shown
shown inin Figure
Figure 25.
25.
We expected that additional surface of the duct would improve both the longitudinal
We expected that additional surface of the duct would improve both the longitudinal and directional and directional
stability,
stability,yetyetthethecalculations
calculationsindicated
indicatedthat thatthe duct’s
the duct’s contribution
contribution to to
thethe
stability does
stability notnot
does seem to be
seem to
as great as was thought. This is because of the specific airflow conditions inside
be as great as was thought. This is because of the specific airflow conditions inside and over the duct. and over the duct.
First
Firstofofall,all,
whenwhenthe the
throttle is narrowly
throttle openedopened
is narrowly or evenor closed,
evenitclosed,
is possible
it isthat the fan that
possible significantly
the fan
reduces the airflow inside the duct [48], so that it cannot act as a lifting surface nor
significantly reduces the airflow inside the duct [48], so that it cannot act as a lifting surface nor give give a stabilizing
effect in the case
a stabilizing of non-axial
effect airflow.
in the case On the other
of non-axial hand,On
airflow. whenthe the throttle
other hand,is significantly opened,
when the throttle is
increased
significantly velocity inside
opened, and around
increased theinside
velocity duct does not allow
and around thethe
ductairflow to be
does not asymmetric
allow in close
the airflow to be
proximity
asymmetric of in
theclose
duct,proximity
and thus ofit does not give
the duct, and any
thusrestoring
it does not moment.
give any restoring moment.

(a) (b)

Figure 25. Dynamic stability characteristics of the airplane with ducted fan propulsion. Time to halve
Figure 25. Dynamic stability characteristics of the airplane with ducted fan propulsion. Time to halve
the amplitude of oscillations: (a) phugoid motion; and (b) Dutch roll motion.
the amplitude of oscillations: (a) phugoid motion; and (b) Dutch roll motion.

6. Conclusions
6. Conclusions
In the project reported herein, we constructed an airplane with the inverted joined wing
In the project reported herein, we constructed an airplane with the inverted joined wing
configuration and performed wind tunnel and flight testing of a demonstrator of this concept.
configuration and performed wind tunnel and flight testing of a demonstrator of this concept.
In the first part of this paper, we focused on the issue of the pros and cons involved in selecting
In the first part of this paper, we focused on the issue of the pros and cons involved in selecting
the propulsion system for such a demonstrator. Initially we used an electrical propulsion in the
the propulsion system for such a demonstrator. Initially we used an electrical propulsion in the
demonstrator to simplify wind tunnel testing, then the same electrical-propulsion model performed
demonstrator to simplify wind tunnel testing, then the same electrical-propulsion model performed
several flights. Given the cumbersomeness and significant loss of battery performance we observed
several flights. Given the cumbersomeness and significant loss of battery performance we observed
during these test flights, however, the electrical propulsion was next replaced by internal
during these test flights, however, the electrical propulsion was next replaced by internal combustion
combustion propulsion for further flight testing. From this experience and related considerations,
propulsion for further flight testing. From this experience and related considerations, we concluded
we concluded that electric propulsion is quite useful in aeronautical research programs involving
that electric propulsion is quite useful in aeronautical research programs involving such scaled
such scaled demonstrators, but only in their early stages (wind tunnel testing and first flights). We
demonstrators, but only in their early stages (wind tunnel testing and first flights). We found that
found that electric propulsion used in such a research airplane is both powerful enough to provide
electric propulsion used in such a research airplane is both powerful enough to provide the required
the required climb rate and also a flight duration of over 20 min, which seems appropriate in the
climb rate and also a flight duration of over 20 min, which seems appropriate in the flight testing
flight testing stage. Nevertheless, once a longer lasting, extensive flight test program begins, internal
stage. Nevertheless, once a longer lasting, extensive flight test program begins, internal combusting
combusting propulsion proves to be more reliable and easy to use.
propulsion proves to be more reliable and easy to use.
In the next part of this paper, we considered two major potential modifications of the existing
In the next part of this paper, we considered two major potential modifications of the existing
airplane in search of better aerodynamic characteristics and performance. The first one was a shift in
airplane in search of better aerodynamic characteristics and performance. The first one was a shift in the
the center of gravity towards the aft, which we found allows for better performance due to the
center of gravity towards the aft, which we found allows for better performance due to the increased
increased lift on the aft wing. We showed that performance can be improved even when the
lift on the aft wing. We showed that performance can be improved even when the longitudinal trim is
longitudinal trim is maintained only by appropriate elevator deflection. We also proposed that when
maintained only by appropriate elevator deflection. We also proposed that when incidence angles on
incidence angles on the forward and aft wings are optimized for the new CG position and best lift
the forward and aft wings are optimized for the new CG position and best lift distribution, further
distribution, further benefits would be gained. However, it is very important to keep in mind the
benefits would be gained. However, it is very important to keep in mind the stability requirements,
stability requirements, both longitudinal and directional. In Section 5.1, we conclude that this should
both longitudinal and directional. In Section 5.1, we conclude that this should not be difficult if
not be difficult if propulsion is taken away from the fuselage rear and the vertical stabilizer is moved aft.
propulsion is taken away from the fuselage rear and the vertical stabilizer is moved aft.
The second idea was to evaluate the influence of thrust vector position on the airplane design’s
performance. Our results did not show significant improvement, but some benefits appear to be
attainable in this way. Similarly, a general modification of the lifting surfaces could be required to
Energies 2017, 10, 762 18 of 21

The second idea was to evaluate the influence of thrust vector position on the airplane design’s
performance. Our results did not show significant improvement, but some benefits appear to be
attainable in this way. Similarly, a general modification of the lifting surfaces could be required to
obtain satisfactory results. This would be even more advantageous if a number of smaller propulsion
units were to be allocated on the aft wing’s leading edge, since this may contribute to the improvement
of airflow around the aft wing and thus increase its effectiveness. Moreover, this would be beneficial
in terms of safety during landing and takeoff, since the tips of smaller propellers can be kept away
from the runway.
All this led us to the conclusion that propulsion distributed along the leading edge of the aft
wing seems to be optimal for an inverted joined wing airplane, and this in turn takes us back to the
advantages of using electric motors in such a case. As a result, we envision that all-electric distributed
propulsion could be used in a scaled demonstrator of such a design, whereas a hybrid distributed
propulsion should be used in a full scale utility airplane in the proposed configuration.

Acknowledgments: This work was supported by Poland’s National Centre for Research and Development
under Grant No. PBS1/A6/14/2012. Special thanks to all members of the team from the Institute of Aviation,
Warsaw University of Technology, Air Force Institute of Technology, and MSP Company who contributed to this
program. The authors are grateful to Daniel J. Sax (of Sax Translations) for assistance in preparing this paper
for publication.
Author Contributions: This particular paper was written by Cezary Galiński, Mateusz Lis, and Jarosław Hajduk.
Cezary Galiński was the leader of the whole project and wrote the first four paragraphs of this paper. Mateusz Lis
was responsible for the stability and performance simulations, wrote Section 5 and finally reviewed and improved
it. Jarosław Hajduk was the test pilot who was also responsible for a large part of the demonstrator’s transfer
from the wind tunnel to flight testing. He formulated the most important lessons learned in this paper and finally
reviewed and improved it before submission.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Munk, M. The Minimum Induced Drag of Aerofoils; NACA-TR-121; National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA): Washington, DC, USA, 1923.
2. Prandtl, L. Induced Drag of Multiplanes; NACA-TN-182; National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA): Washington, DC, USA, 1924.
3. Lange, R.H.; Cahill, J.F.; Bradley, E.S.; Eudaily, R.R.; Jenness, C.M.; MacWilkinson, D.G. Feasibility Study of the
Transonic Biplane Concept for Transport Aircraft Application; NASA-CR-132462; Lockheed-Georgia Company:
Marietta, GA, USA, 1974.
4. Wolkovitch, J. The joined wing—An overview. J. Aircr. 1986, 23, 161–178. [CrossRef]
5. Frediani, A.; Cipolla, V.; Rizzo, E. The PrandtlPlane Configuration: Overview on Possible Applications to Civil
Aviation, Variational Analysis and Aerospace Engineering: Mathematical Challenges for Aerospace Design; Springer:
New York, NY, USA, 2012; Volume 66, pp. 179–210.
6. Cavallaro, R.; Demasi, L. Challenges, ideas, and innovations of joined-wing configurations: A concept from
the past, an opportunity for the future. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2016, 87, 1–93. [CrossRef]
7. Demasi, L.; Monegato, G.; Dipace, A.; Cavallaro, R. Minimum induced drag theorems for joined wings,
closed systems, and generic biwings: Theory. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2016, 169, 200–235. [CrossRef]
8. Demasi, L.; Monegato, G.; Rizzo, E.; Cavallaro, R.; Dipace, A. Minimum induced drag theorems for joined
wings, closed systems, and generic biwings: Applications. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 2016, 169, 236–261. [CrossRef]
9. Cavallaro, R.; Nardini, M.; Demasi, L. Amphibious PrandtlPlane: Preliminary Design Aspects Including
Propellers Integration and Ground Effect. In Proceedings of the 56th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures,
Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Kissimmee, FL, USA, 5–9 January 2015. [CrossRef]
10. Cipolla, V.; Frediani, A.; Lonigro, E. Aerodynamic design of a light amphibious PrandtlPlane: Wind tunnel
tests and CFD validation. Aerotec. Missili Spazi. 2016, 94, 113–123. [CrossRef]
11. Cipolla, V.; Frediani, A.; Oliviero, F.; Rossi, R.; Rizzo, E.; Pinucci, M. Ultralight amphibious PrandtlPlane:
The final design. Aerotec. Missili Spazi. 2016, 95, 125–135. [CrossRef]
12. Ligetti-Stratos.com. Available online: http://ligeti-stratos.com/ (accessed on 1 December 2017).
Energies 2017, 10, 762 19 of 21

13. The History of the SUNNY-Boxwing. Available online: http://www.sunny-boxwing.de/ (accessed on

1 December 2017).
14. Danilecki, S. Zamkni˛ete Skrzydło—Zalety i Wady (I); Technika Lotnicza i Astronautyczna, No. 9; Oficyna
Wydawnicza SIMP Simpress: Warszawa, Poland, 1988; pp. 4–6. (In Polish)
15. Danilecki, S. Zamkni˛ete Skrzydło—Zalety i Wady (II); Technika Lotnicza i Astronautyczna, No. 10; Oficyna
Wydawnicza SIMP Simpress: Warszawa, Poland, 1988; pp. 8–10. (In Polish)
16. Galinski, C. Results of Testing of Models of Joined-Wing Utility Class Aircraft; SAE Paper No. 921013;
SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 1992.
17. Mamla, P.; Galinski, C. Basic induced drag study of the joined-wing aircraft. J. Aircr. 2009, 46, 1438–1440.
[CrossRef]
18. Livne, E.; Weisshaar, T.A. Aeroelasticity of nonconventional airplane configurations—Past and future. J. Aircr.
2003, 40, 1047–1065. [CrossRef]
19. Rasmussen, C.C.; Canfield, R.A.; Blair, M. Joined-wing sensor-craft configuration design. J. Aircr. 2006, 43,
1470–1478. [CrossRef]
20. Cavalaro, R.; Demasi, L.; Passariello, A. Nonlinear analysis of PrandtlPlane joined wings: Effects of
anisotropy. AIAA J. 2014, 52, 964–980. [CrossRef]
21. Goraj, Z.; Kulicki, P.; Lasek, M. Aircraft stability analysis for strongly coupled aerodynamic configuration.
J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 1997, 35, 137–158.
22. Galiński, C.; Hajduk, J. Assumptions of the joined wing flying model programme. Trans. Inst. Aviat. 2015,
238, 7–21. [CrossRef]
23. Galinski, C.; Hajduk, J.; Kalinowski, M.; Seneńko, K. The concept of the joined wing scaled demonstrator
programme. In Proceedings of the CEAS ’2013 Conference, Linkoping, Sweden, 16–18 September 2013;
pp. 244–253.
24. Galiński, C.; Stalewski, W.; Lis, M.; Hajduk, J. Overview of the Inverted Joined Wing Scaled Demonstrator
Programme. In Proceedings of the ICAS ’2016 Conference, Daejeon, Korea, 25–30 September 2016.
25. Stalewski, W. Parametric modelling of aerodynamic objects—The key to successful design and optimisation.
Aerotec. Missili Spazi. 2012, 91, 23–31.
26. Stalewski, W.; Żółtak, J. The preliminary design of the air-intake system and the nacelle in the small
aircraft-engine integration process. Aircr. Eng. Aerosp. Technol. 2014, 86, 250–258.
27. Stalewski, W.; Żółtak, J. Design of a turbulent wing for small aircraft using multidisciplinary optimization.
Arch. Mech. 2014, 66, 185–201.
28. Goetzendorf-Grabowski, T.; Mieloszyk, J.; Mieszalski, D. MADO—Software Package for High Order
Multidyscyplinary Aircraft Design and Optimisation. In Proceedings of the ICAS 2012, Brisbane, Australia,
23–28 September 2012.
29. Mieloszyk, J. Handling Optimization Problems on an Example of Micro UAV. In Proceedings of the 3rd
CEAS Air & Space Conference, Venice, Italy, 24–28 October 2011.
30. Kalinowski, M. Structural optimization of box wing aircraft. Arch. Mech. Eng. 2015, LXII, 45–60. [CrossRef]
31. Galiński, C.; Bartkiewicz, P.; Hajduk, J.; Lamers, P. Results of the J-5 Marco Dynamic Similar Model Flight Tests
Program; SAE Paper No. 975551; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 1997.
32. Goraj, Z.; Szender, M. Badania modelu samolotu w locie na dużych katach ˛ natarcia. In Proceedings of the VI
Konferencja “Metody i Technika Badań Statków Powietrznych w Locie”, Mragowo, ˛ Poland, 15–18 June 2004;
pp. 143–153. (In Polish)
33. Goraj, Z.; Szender, M. Techniques and critical technologies applied for small and mini UAVs—State of the
art and development perspectives. Trans. Inst. Aviat. 2005, 183, 41–49.
34. Goraj, Z.; Kittmann, K.; Voit-Nitschmann, R.; Szender, M. Design and Integration of Flexi-Bird—A Low Cost
Sub-Scale Research Aircraft for Safety and Environmental Issues. In Proceedings of the ICAS Congress 2012,
Brisbane, Australia, 23–28 September 2012.
35. Piwek, K.; Wiśniowski, W. Small air transport aircraft entry requirements evoked by FlightPath 2050. Aircr.
Eng. Aerosp. Technol. 2016, 88, 341–347. [CrossRef]
36. Iwaniuk, A.; Wiśniowski, W.; Żółtak, J. Multi-Disciplinary Optimisation Approach for a Light Turboprop
Aircraft-Engine Integration and Improvement. Aircr. Eng. Aerosp. Technol. 2016, 88, 348–355. [CrossRef]
37. Lis, M.; Galinski, C. Predicted performance of the inverted joined wing scaled demonstrator. Aviation 2015,
19, 123–132. [CrossRef]
Energies 2017, 10, 762 20 of 21

38. Lis, M.; Dziubiński, A.; Galinski, C.; Krysztofiak, G.; Ruchała, P.; Surmacz, K. Predicted Flight Characteristics
of the Inverted Joined Wing Scaled Demonstrator. In Proceedings of the ICAS ’2014 Conference,
St. Petersburg, Russia, 7–12 September 2014.
39. Dziubiński, A.; Kuprianowicz, S.; Surmacz, K.; Galinski, C.; Żółtak, J. The Joined Wing Scaled Demonstrator
Results of CFD. In Proceedings of the ICAS ’2014 Conference, St. Petersburg, Russia, 7–12 September 2014.
40. Galinski, C.; Krysztofiak, G.; Miller, M.; Ruchala, P.; Kalski, M.; Lis, M.; Dziubinski, A.; Bogdanski, K.;
Stefanek, Ł.; Hajduk, J. Wind tunnel test results of the inverted joined wing airplane flying model. Aircr. Eng.
Aerosp. Technol. 2016, in press.
41. Stalewski, W. Aerodynamic Optimisation of Joined-Wing Aeroplane. In Proceedings of the 6th International
Conference on 6th Experiments/Process/SystemModelling/Simulation/Optimization, Athens, Greece,
8–11 July 2015.
42. Kalinowski, M. Automatic Design and Sizing of Inverted Joined-Wing Aircraft. In Proceedings of the 58th
AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Grapevine, TX, USA,
9–13 January 2017.
43. Mieloszyk, J. Practical problems of numerical optimization in aerospace sciences. Aircr. Eng. Aerosp. Technol.
2017, 89. [CrossRef]
44. Sieradzki, A.; Dziubinski, A.; Galinski, C. Performance comparison of the optimized inverted joined wing
airplane concept and classical configuration airplanes. Arch. Mech. Eng. 2016, 63, 455–470.
45. Bogdański, K.; Krusz, W.; Rodzewicz, M.; Rutkowski, M. Design and Optimization of Low Speed Ducted
Fan for a New Generation of Joined Wing Aircraft. In Proceedings of the 29th Congress of the International
Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS), St. Petersburg, Russia, 7–12 September 2014.
46. Rodzewicz, M.; Bogdański, K.; Ruchała, P.; Miller, M. Koncepcja i Realizacja Badań Zespołu Nap˛edowego
W Tunelu Aerodynamicznym. In Proceedings of the XVI Konferencji Mechanika w Lotnictwie, Kazimierz
Dolny, Poland, 26–29 May 2014. (In Polish)
47. Głowacki, D. Rodzewicz, Badania Dynamiczne Wirnika Nap˛edu Otunelowanego Samolotu MOSUPS.
In Proceedings of the XVI Konferencji Mechanika w Lotnictwie, Kazimierz Dolny, Poland, 26–29 May 2014.
(In Polish)
48. Bogdański, K.; Głowacki, D.; Rodzewicz, M. Research on the rotor of a ducted fan propulsion system of
MOSUPS aircraft taking into account self balance during operation. Solid State Phenom. 2016, 240, 191–197.
49. Bogdański, K.; Rodzewicz, M.; Ruchała, P. Characteristics of Locked and Free Wheeling Ducted Fan Based on
Wind Tunnel Tests and CFD Analyses. In Proceedings of the 5th CEAS Air & Space Conference Challenges
in European Aerospace, Delft, The Netherlands, 7–11 September 2015.
50. Ruchala, P. Wind tunnel tests of the pusher propeller—An assessment of accuracy. J. KONES Powertrain Transp.
2016, 23, 309–315. [CrossRef]
51. Turnigy RotoMax 1.60 Brushless Outrunner Motor. Available online: https://hobbyking.com/en_us/
turnigy-rotomax-1-60-brushless-outrunner-motor.html (accessed on 29 May 2017).
52. HobbyKing YEP 120A HV (4~14S) Brushless Speed Controller (OPTO). Available online: https://hobbyking.
com/en_us/hobbyking-yep-120a-hv-4-14s-brushless-speed-controller-opto.html (accessed on 29 May 2017).
53. Fiala. Available online: http://vrtule-fiala.cz/en/ (accessed on 29 May 2017).
54. Galinski, C.; Sieradzki, A.; Kalinowski, M. Propulsion configuration effect on performance of an inverted
joined wing airplane. J. KONES Powertrain Transp. 2016, 23, 136–141.
55. Burtton, K. The buzz over batteries. Aerosp. Am. 2016, 54, 16–22.
56. SDSA. Dynamic Stability Analyser. Available online: https://www.meil.pw.edu.pl/add/ADD/Teaching/
Software/SDSA (accessed on 29 May 2017).
57. Goetzendorf-Grabowski, T.; Mieszalski, D.; Marcinkiewicz, E. Stability analysis using SDSA tool. Prog. Aerosp. Sci.
2011, 47, 636–646. [CrossRef]
58. PANUKL. Package to Compute the Aerodynamic Characteristics of an Aircraft Using Low Order
Panel Method. Available online: https://www.meil.pw.edu.pl/add/ADD/Teaching/Software/PANUKL
(accessed on 29 May 2017).
Energies 2017, 10, 762 21 of 21

59. Blair, M.; Robinson, J.; McClelland, W.A.; Bowmann, J.C. A Joined Wing Flight Experiment; AFRL-RB-WP-
TR-2008-3101; Air Force Research Laboratory: Dayton, OH, USA, 2008.
60. Oliviero, F.; Zanetti, D.; Cipolla, V. Flight dynamics model for preliminary design of PrandtlPlane wing
configuration with sizing of the control surfaces. Aerotec. Missili Spazi. 2016, 95, 201–210. [CrossRef]

© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).