Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Mechanical Engineering
Class of 2013
Reformatted:
FEB 2015
University of Maine
SAE Aero Design:
The UMaine SAE Aero Capstone group is designed around an annual competition held by the Society of
Automotive Engineers. The main goal of the competition is to design and construct an aircraft that can lift
more payload than other teams while staying within the rules and restrictions of the SAE Aero Competition
guidelines. This capstone group represents the first iteration of this challenge attempted by the University
of Maine. This team did not attend the competition but rather the aim was to design and build an aircraft
that was competition worthy. The following report is a summary of the design process, decisions, analysis,
substantiation, and final results of the project.
-2-
1. Table of Contents
-3-
4.4.6 Dihedral Angle ............................................................................................................... - 22 -
4.4.7 Taper .............................................................................................................................. - 23 -
4.4.8 Twist............................................................................................................................... - 23 -
4.4.9 Wing Sweep ................................................................................................................... - 23 -
4.4.10 Edge Design ................................................................................................................... - 23 -
4.4.11 Wing Loading................................................................................................................. - 24 -
4.4.12 Externals ......................................................................................................................... - 24 -
4.4.13 Multiple Wings ............................................................................................................... - 24 -
4.4.14 Final Wing Size and Configuration ................................................................................ - 25 -
4.4.15 Construction and Components ....................................................................................... - 26 -
8. Website ............................................................................................................................................ - 26 -
9. Preliminary Modeling ...................................................................................................................... - 26 -
10. Fuselage ....................................................................................................................................... - 27 -
7.1 Sizing ...................................................................................................................................... - 27 -
7.2 Wing-Fuselage Connection ..................................................................................................... - 27 -
7.3 Empennage-Fuselage Connection ........................................................................................... - 28 -
7.4 Motor-Mount........................................................................................................................... - 28 -
7.5 Payload and Maintenance Accessibility .................................................................................. - 29 -
7.6 Fuselage Construction Process ................................................................................................ - 29 -
11. Empennage .................................................................................................................................. - 30 -
8.1 Tail Configuration Selection ................................................................................................... - 30 -
8.2 Horizontal Stabilizer Airfoil Selection .................................................................................... - 30 -
8.3 Horizontal and Vertical Stabilizer Sizing................................................................................ - 30 -
8.4 Empennage Position Relative to Wings .................................................................................. - 31 -
8.5 Incidence Angle ...................................................................................................................... - 31 -
12. Preliminary Testing ..................................................................................................................... - 32 -
13. Design Analysis and Review ....................................................................................................... - 32 -
10.1 Wing........................................................................................................................................ - 32 -
10.2 Wing Structural Analysis ........................................................................................................ - 39 -
10.2.1 Analysis With Design 2 .................................................................................................. - 39 -
10.3 Empennage .............................................................................................................................. - 40 -
10.4 Servo Performance .................................................................................................................. - 40 -
10.5 Weight ..................................................................................................................................... - 40 -
10.5.1 Predicted Performance ................................................................................................... - 40 -
14. Final Testing and Evaluation ....................................................................................................... - 41 -
11.1 Testing .................................................................................................................................... - 41 -
11.2 Results ..................................................................................................................................... - 42 -
11.3 Evaluation ............................................................................................................................... - 42 -
11.3.1 Engine ............................................................................................................................ - 42 -
-4-
11.3.2 Wings ............................................................................................................................. - 42 -
11.3.3 Fuselage.......................................................................................................................... - 42 -
11.3.4 Wireless Systems............................................................................................................ - 43 -
11.3.5 Controls .......................................................................................................................... - 43 -
11.3.6 Empennage ..................................................................................................................... - 43 -
11.3.7 Landing Gear/Externals .................................................................................................. - 43 -
11.4 Evaluation Summary ............................................................................................................... - 43 -
11.5 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. - 43 -
15. References ................................................................................................................................... - 46 -
16. Appendices .................................................................................................................................. - 49 -
13.1 Appendix A - Plans and Specs ................................................................................................ - 49 -
13.2 Appendix B - Wind Tunnel Modification and Testing ........................................................... - 50 -
13.2.1 Design Goals .................................................................................................................. - 50 -
13.2.2 Research ......................................................................................................................... - 50 -
13.2.3 Design Process ............................................................................................................... - 52 -
13.2.4 Abandonment of Modification Idea ............................................................................... - 53 -
13.2.5 Final Results ................................................................................................................... - 53 -
13.3 Appendix C - Budget and Costs .............................................................................................. - 54 -
13.4 Appendix D - Mech. Lab III (MEE 443) Report ..................................................................... - 56 -
13.4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... - 58 -
13.4.2 Experimental Objectives ................................................................................................ - 59 -
13.4.3 Apparatus, Equipment, and Instrumentation .................................................................. - 60 -
13.4.4 Experimental Theory ...................................................................................................... - 62 -
13.4.5 Experimental Procedure ................................................................................................. - 64 -
13.4.6 Experimental Results and Conclusions .......................................................................... - 67 -
13.4.7 Mech. Lab Appendix A: Uncertainty Level Buildup ..................................................... - 73 -
13.4.8 Mech. Lab Appendix B: Beam Calibration .................................................................... - 77 -
13.5 Appendix E - Flight Simulation Code ..................................................................................... - 78 -
13.6 Appendix F - Servo Performance MathCAD Worksheet ........................................................ - 80 -
13.7 Appendix G - Engine Specs .................................................................................................... - 82 -
13.8 Appendix H – Project Timeline .............................................................................................. - 85 -
13.9 Appendix I – Team Photograph .............................................................................................. - 86 -
-5-
2. Table of Figures
-6-
Figure 48 - Broken Landing Gear............................................................................................................. - 42 -
Figure 49 - Current Wind Tunnel Flows .................................................................................................. - 50 -
Figure 50 - Flow Straightening Proposal .................................................................................................. - 51 -
Figure 51 - Flow Mapping Rig ................................................................................................................. - 51 -
Figure 52 - Velocity Contour at Outlet ..................................................................................................... - 52 -
Figure 53 - Flow Streamlines Through Duct ............................................................................................ - 53 -
Figure 54 - Pressure Contours Along Duct Wall ...................................................................................... - 53 -
Figure 55 - Elevation View of Experimental Setup .................................................................................. - 61 -
Figure 56 - Plan View of Experimental Setup .......................................................................................... - 62 -
Figure 57 - LabView VI Schematic .......................................................................................................... - 66 -
Figure 58 - Data Table and Plot of Static Thrust Coefficient v. RPM for APC 11x7 .............................. - 68 -
Figure 59 - Theoretical Propeller Thrust vs. RPM (APC 11x7) ............................................................... - 69 -
Figure 60 - EVO 11x7 Static Thrust vs. RPM .......................................................................................... - 70 -
Figure 61 - EVO 12x6 Static Thrust vs. RPM .......................................................................................... - 70 -
Figure 62 - K Series Master Airscrew Static Thrust vs. RPM .................................................................. - 71 -
Figure 63 - Propeller Trendline Comparison ............................................................................................ - 72 -
Figure 64 - Calibration Data Plot ............................................................................................................. - 77 -
-7-
3. Contributions
Wing Design, SolidWorks of the wing, assisted in other SolidWorks parts, assisted in
airfoil selection, thrust testing, project poster, construction of the aircraft.
Zachary Veilleux
CFD Analysis, Strength Analysis, LabVIEW VI Design, Mech Lab Electronics Design &
Fabrication, Pitch Stability Analysis, Empennage Design, Laser Cutting
Matthew Maberry
Airfoil Selection, Wing Design and Analysis including structural considerations, assisted
in empennage design and analysis, horizontal stabilizer modeling, assisted with thrust
testing, completed many aspects of Mechanical Laboratory writing, completed
empennage construction, assisted wing construction.
Joseph Travaglini
Benjamin Waller
Project Budget and Record Keeping, Project Webpage Design and Maintenance, Wing
Mockup Construction, Fuselage Design and Construction Work, Empennage
Construction, Wing Construction, Mech. Lab Report Writing, Final Aircraft Monokoting
and Preparation
Travis Cushman
Class PowerPoint Presentations, Original Thrust Test, Fall Semester Final Report
Writing, Formatting and Organization, Fuselage Design, Solid Modeling, MechLab Test
Rig Design/Construction, Poster, Construction/Assembly, Final Report
Writing/Formatting and Organization.
-8-
4. Introduction Through effective analysis and research, the
group must determine which characteristics may
4.1 Project Beginnings be sacrificed in order to achieve others, and then
how to build the aircraft to achieve the desired
This project was initially conceived in a performance characteristics. Therein lies the
fundamental form near the end of the 2011-2012 challenge. No single aircraft is suited for all-
academic year. At a basic level, this capstone is around performance, and in this case need not
built on an engineering competition, the essence be.
of which is small scale powered flight. Similar
established projects were known to exist at the 4.3 MEE Capstone Project and Associated
time this undertaking was first envisaged, and it Opportunities
was hoped that an Aero Design group could be
established for students interested in aerospace The feasibility of attending the actual
and flight sciences. This was of course, competition was discussed early on in the project
successful, and the first SAE Aero Design timeline. Ultimately, it was decided that having a
project group has been formed. competitive aircraft by the competition date in
April was not guaranteed given that this group
4.2 SAE Aero Design Competition represents the first iteration from the University
of Maine, and none of the team members have
The central component of the capstone project is aeronautics experience. In order to participate in
the SAE Aero Design competition, the rules of the competition, groups must register some
which are the source of most of the project goals, months ahead of time, and by the registration
guidelines, and regulations. This is an event deadline, the prediction of successful
created and administered by the Society of competition entry was not strong enough to
Automotive Engineers, in which groups of warrant spending a large portion of the team
college level engineering students from around budget in registration fees.
the globe may participate. This event may
adequately be described as an aircraft heavy-lift However, it was also determined that that
competition. success of the project was not hinged upon the
attendance of the competition, for many reasons
Three classes are available for entry: regular, which will be cited below. The goal set forth
micro, and advanced. The class chosen by this from the beginning remains to produce a vehicle
group is the regular class. The objective of the that is “competition worthy”.
regular class is to design, substantiate, construct,
analyze, and test a remote controlled aerial To be “competition worthy” the aircraft would
vehicle of limited specifications with the need to conform to all restrictions outlined in the
capability of completing a circuit with payload official rules. A brief summary of these, for the
beyond its own weight. regular class, is as follows:
The most critical design limitations are the Maximum takeoff distance is 200 ft.
specification of engine size, the total
length/width/height of the plane, the total Maximum landing distance is 400 ft., in
possible weight, the takeoff and landing the same direction as takeoff
distances, and to some degree, the materials
allowed in construction. Creating an aircraft Aircraft must me heavier than air, fixed
based on these restrictions while maintaining the wing construction
ability to lift enough payload to effectively
compete requires evaluation of design tradeoffs Total combined length measurement not
and development of a very specialized exceeding 225 in.
configuration. Focus must be maintained on the
assembly of components such that the vehicle Gross weight restricted to 55 lb.
will be simultaneously stable, structurally sound,
and task-effective. Prohibition of fiber reinforced plastics
and use of lead
-9-
Prohibition of metal propellers Force and moment transmission
Assurance of stability in three
Mandatory completion of 1 360 degree dimensions
aerial circuit
Engine performance, operation and
Controlled flight and intact landing tuning
Score awarded for max payload carried, As such, it requires the usage of skills learned
as well as accurate prediction of prior to and within the fourth year of schooling,
capability as well as the initiative to self-educate where
new skill and concepts are necessary. It presents
Empty payload point bonus engineering situations potentially seen in
industry and in many ways allows for effective
In addition to meeting these physical experience.
requirements, the group has modeled this
document to a large extent on the formal 4.4 Aerospace Studies at the University of
competition report guidelines, including a large Maine
portion of the substantiation required to be
present at competition. Another consideration is the promotion of the
project for continuation in future years. The
It can certainly be seen from the description thus University of Maine is currently not far removed
far, that the Aero Design event presents a from the inception of its Aerospace
significant engineering challenge and requires Concentration. While this is effective in and of
honed design skill. The aircraft design process is itself, this capstone group is interested in
beset with facets of mechanical and aerospace heightening awareness of aerospace studies at
engineering including, but not limited to the the university, and developing them yet further.
following:
One way this can be accomplished to some
Aerodynamics and the loads derived degree is to establish a project within the
from aerodynamic considerations aerospace field which acts as an outlet for
students to experience effective design and use
Usage and analysis of airfoil shapes for of knowledge gained in the classroom. It is
determination of lift and moment intended that this project be perpetuated in future
coefficients, pressure distributions and iterations, and that it work in conjunction with
the like the existing model aircraft club to form a well-
established group.
Fluid flows
4.5 Summary of Focus and Objectives
Electronics and radio control
Overall, the goal of this undertaking is to
Linkages and machinery design compile engineering knowledge and skill, learn
new techniques and information, and apply said
- 10 -
items to the design and fabrication of a flight necessary information about the engine. See
capable radio controlled vehicle, from scratch, Figure 2 below for a picture of the engine.
which matches the requirements established by
the SAE for its Aero Design Competition.
The specifics of the design and how it was Figure 2 - Magnum XLS 0.61A
intended to accomplish these things as well as an
evaluation of whether it was able to do so are 5.3 Wing
contained herein.
The airfoil used in the design of the wing is the
5. Design Description Selig 1223. The total wingspan of the aircraft is
10.2ft.
5.1 Components and Systems
The wing configuration is designed with 4
The aircraft is a total of 65.25 inches length, 129 different aspects in mind: taper, twist, angle of
inches in width, and 15.5 inches in height. It is incidence, and dihedral. For the final design,
powered by a two-stroke gas powered engine. each half wing (pinion) has a starting chord
The entire thing is constructed out of balsa wood length of 16 inches, tapers down to 12 inches and
and piloted wirelessly through a 6-channel remains a constant 12 inches chord length from
transmitter and receiver that control the throttle 2.55 feet (middle of the half wing) out to the tip.
and control surfaces of the aircraft. It is a total of
13.75 in weight without any payload. See Figure
1 for the finished product.
- 11 -
The method in which each wing is affixed to the
fuselage is by a 1 inch x 1inch aluminum tube
that runs from inside of the wing and protrudes
from the first rib by 2.25 inches. This aluminum
tube slides into an aluminum tubing sheath that
is located in the fuselage and is fixed in place by
two bolts and nuts on each half wing.
Figure 4 - Perspective View of Wings Figure 6 - Fuselage FWD End with Hatch Open
The final fuselage is a very basic design with a The wireless system consists of a Spektrum DX-
removable cover on the top of it that allows 6i 6 channel 2.4GHz transmitter and an AR6210
access to the components contained inside of it. 2.4 GHz receiver. See Figure 7 below.
The floor of the fuselage is made of balsa
hardwood where two bolts extend upward to
secure the payload plates during flight. The
engine mount on the nose of the fuselage is also
constructed out of hardwood balsa and is
designed in a way the engine is completely
exposed.
- 12 -
5.6 Controls
- 13 -
goal in mind, the effectiveness of the wing to
6. Design Concept Process produce enough lift within the limiting velocity
will determine how large an area is needed.
6.1 Engine Selection
Along with the thrust available from the engine
There was virtually no design choice to be made and propeller system, it is one of the primary
for the power plant of the aircraft. The SAE Aero limiting factors for the overall aircraft
Rules and Restrictions required anyone performance. So, naturally, it was decided to
competing in the regular class to choose between focus the early part of the project on the wing
two similar engines. The choices are the design. It was thought that obtaining desirable
Magnum XLS .61A and the O.S. 61 FX. and workable performance from the wing was
deserving of time and attention and that due to
Both engines are the same size bore and there are the logic above, many other decisions would
negligible differences in the performances of follow from the final choices made with regard
each engine. The group chose the Magnum XLS to the wing.
.61A for the engine based on cost and
availability as the O.S. 61FX is discontinued in 6.2.2 Research Done
production and the group wanted a brand new
engine to work with. The next question was of course, where to start
designing. Many vital characteristics of the wing
6.2 Airfoil Selection are determined by the two-dimensional section
chosen. That is, the airfoil. These include, the 2D
6.2.1 Design Goal pressure distribution, total wing lift coefficient,
angle of attack performance range, associated
After the initial organization of the project, as pressure drag, manufacturability, flow separation
well as familiarization with the rules, the behavior, etc. There are several tools available
tentative design process lead to the that allow even a modest user to analyze and plot
characterization of the wing. Each component of airfoils.
the aircraft is of great importance and intended to
accomplish a specific task. However, one must Some consideration was given to designing an
always keep in mind one essential rule of aircraft airfoil for our purposes from the ground up.
design – a process of trade-offs and optimization However, given the plethora of preexisting types
is inevitable. There are as many aircraft and reliable test data readily available, this was
configurations as there are tasks for an aircraft to considered a wasteful endeavor in a constrained
complete, and the goal of the engineer should be timeframe.
to arrange for a design that is tailored to the
specific goals at hand. Several computer programs that allow for
analysis of two-dimensional sections were
As such, it is vital to ensure that the various reviewed, and upon usage it was found that
components involved interact well and XFLR5 was the most user friendly. Another
strengthen each other. That being said, there benefit of XFLR5 is that it also incorporates a
must be a starting point, and as mentioned above, “Wing and Plane Design” feature that extends
after some consideration, this is clearly the wing. beyond 2-D plotting. While intuitive, learning to
The wing is the primary mode of generating the utilize this software took some time, and learning
force required to lift the aircraft. In the end, it is the subtleties of its capability is an ongoing
what gets the plane off the ground. It also plays a process.
large role in the stability characteristics of the
vessel, accounts for most of the weight, acts as a 6.2.3 Operating Conditions
payload containment system and several other
things. It was then time to study airfoil geometry from
the perspective of our project. That is, with
The aerodynamic forces which need to be respect to design of a relatively slow flight small
corrected by the tail and control surfaces stem scale craft intended to lift a maximum amount of
from the action of the wing to a large degree, and weight. To do this, certain information which
the behavior of the wing will limit other defines the operational flow must be known.
components. For example, with a specific weight Given the size of the engine selected, and well-
- 14 -
known typical speeds of large models, airspeed building. Several suitable sections were found in
was expected to range from just a few feet per “Model Aircraft Aerodynamics” by Martin
second, up to perhaps 100 feet per second, Simons.
although the latter would be rather extraordinary.
Some rather interesting sections were found in a
Thus, for free and open flow over the wings, the little known book titled “Model Aircraft Design
expected range of Reynolds numbers was and Theory of Flight”, written by Charles
decided as 50,000 up to 900,000+. Individuals Hampson Grant, an early pioneer of self-built
may note that this is a very low Reynolds model aircraft design. No information could be
number regime, over a good deal of which the found with regard to this on the internet. Some
flow could reasonably be expected to be fully time was spent mapping the coordinates
laminar. Laminar flow is accompanied by a provided in the book which define the shape of
lower shear stress on the surface of the wing, the airfoils into a useable text format which
while the churning effects of the turbulent flow could be plotted and inserted into software such
draw higher energy elements toward the as SolidWorks.
boundary layer and increase the skin friction.
Another valuable resource for finding airfoil data
This higher level of kinetic energy also induces a was the University of Illinois maintained
greater tendency for the flow to follow the database, run by Professor Michael Selig (the
contour of the surface over the adverse pressure designer of many of his own sections). This
gradient on the wing. This limits the pressure resource is of particular note, given that one of
drag due to the separated flow. So while the idea its main focuses is the low Reynolds number
of laminar flow may sound desirable, a turbulent regime.
flow would be more ideal. Indeed, model aircraft
often contend with flow separation at early 6.3 Testing
points on the chord, leading to lack of lift. A
common effect is known as a separation bubble, Based on preliminary data from each of the
which is an area of circulation which disrupts the above sources, 10 individual airfoils were chosen
flow without leading to complete detachment. for further examination and testing. Each was
either of very frequent usage among scale
Another issue to contend with was the fact that aircraft design, or was recommended for low
atmospheric conditions are less than stable and Reynolds number flow. The airfoils which were
uniform at sea level. It is not difficult to imagin proceeded with are listed as follows:
an aircraft of small size being forced off-kilter by
a burst of wind, or encountering slight variations Clark Y
in density and temperature over a single flight. Eppler E193
This meant that our choice had to provide Eppler E197
desirable characteristics over a decent range of Eppler E423
angles of attack. NACA 0009
Selig S8036
Clearly the goal was to find and use an airfoil Selig S1223
section that provided the high coefficients Grant G8
needed in a lifting competition over a range of Selig S1210
angles of attack, and was efficient at lift Eppler E64
production in the low Reynolds number regime.
The coordinates for these airfoils were all found
6.2.4 Resources Utilized on the UIUC database mentioned above, with the
exception of the Grant G8 as previously
Several books published on home-built aircraft described. These were loaded into XFLR5 for 2-
design were found and perused for information. D analysis with specific focus on several
Often times, such references come with characteristics. Namely, the lift, drag, and lift to
comprehensive lists of airfoils which designers drag ratio polars, the boundary layer behavior,
commonly use. Perhaps the most well known the center of pressure movement, and the
resource examined was “Theory of Wing pressure distribution across the section.
Sections” by Von Doenhoff and Abbott,
although this book is not intended for model
- 15 -
It was found that viscous approximation led to After the data was compiled a comprehensive
non-convergent results a large percentage of the comparison of the group was made.
time, so inviscid analysis was performed instead.
Based on a paper published by Professor 6.4 Results Discussion
Michael Selig, values of lift coefficient can be
expected as approximately 10 percent different Overall the Clark Y exhibited almost no
due to this. preferable qualities. It was included due to its
wide popularity among model builders on
The analyses were done simulating a range of forums. It was quickly discovered that while it
free streams, not considering tip effects, with may work for general purposes, it is not suited
Reynolds numbers ranging from 100,000 to for the lifting target associated with this project.
600,000 and at angles of attack from -3 degrees
to 15 degrees. This data was then compiled into a The Grant G8 was also somewhat of a
spreadsheet for ease of comparison. An example disappointment. It was strictly middle of the
of a small part of the data collected is presented pack in terms of lift coefficient and drag
below in Figure 14. coefficient.
An example of the pressure lift to drag ratio, as The best performances were in general, by the
well as the pressure distribution plot on an Selig S1223, the Selig S1210, the Eppler E423,
airfoil, is shown Figure 12 and Figure 13 as an and the Eppler E197. The compilation of the data
illustration of the capabilities of the program. used for comparison can be seen in the
appendices of this report.
- 16 -
Figure 14 - Example Data Spreadsheet
So in summary, the Selig S1223 has a high
A definitive choice between these four sections maximum lift coefficient, which is good over a
was halted until after some knowledge range of angles of attack. It should, while
concerning the wing configuration was had. lowering stall speed, shorten takeoff and landing
Instead, all four were used in additional analysis distances, and increase the payload capacity. It
that will be described later. can operate near its peak lift coefficient while
maintaining a mild stall characteristic.
It was initially planned to test several of the best
performing models in the wind tunnel. The 7. Wing Configuration
portion of this project dealing with the wind
tunnel endeavor follows this section. For the 7.1 Wing Design
purposes of completeness in this section, it can
be said that the S1223 was the ultimate airfoil of There are three main parts which constitute the
choice. wing design as a whole. These are, the airfoil(s)
defining the wing section, the configuration of
The Selig S1223 is actually advantageous for the wing, and the size, or dimensions of the
several reasons. Research indicates that it has wing. Each of these parts work together and are
become quite favorable among competitors in tailored for a specific objective. As has been said
the SAE Aero design challenge, and has been thus far and will be stated again, one must
used with great success recently. This of course, always remember the goals of flight and
makes sense given that it was essentially operation for which the aircraft is being
designed with similar restrictions to the designed, because they will directly influence all
competition in mind. But how exactly does the design decisions. Most, if not all aircraft, are
S1223 work so well. What about its shape and specialized. That is, there is no Swiss Army
design makes it perform better? Professor Selig knife of planes.
has described his design efforts. The high
camber and progression of both the upper and A qualitative description of the flight regime for
lower camber throughout the chord produces a which the aircraft is designed is given above.
convex adverse pressure gradient. The trailing
edge is more heavily loaded with lift production, 7.2 Wing Section
which generates a stronger moment over the
chord. Some additional drag is introduced here, The wing section (profile) ultimately decided on
but the benefits outweigh this. Specifically, the was the Selig S1223. The reasoning for this is
point of flow separation moves very slowly discussed above.
forward from the rear as the angle of attack is
increased. Even after the flow separates, the The final design of the wing incorporates a
maximum coefficient of lift rises with angle of uniform wing section throughout the entire span
attack. This allows the coefficient of lift to rise to of the aircraft. That is, no aerodynamic washout
over 2 before stalling begins to occur. is included. All washout in the wing is provided
by mechanical twist. To establish the ailerons
- 17 -
and the flaps on the wing, a division is made in reasonable fuselage length and plane height, a
the airfoil at three inches from the trailing edge, maximum span of approximately 110 inches is
and the rear portion is then used as the structure present. However, it is not necessarily advisable
of the control surface or high lift device, to simply maximize the span of the wing.
respectively. No modifications are made to the
Selig in the way of slots or slats. The lift, drag, Increased wing span has both positive and
and moment coefficient data for the S1223 was negative aspects. A plane achieves flight due to
available to some extent through internet the reaction force that is lift. In simplest terms,
resources, and flow simulations using XFLR5 the wing diverts air downward. A change in
were also generated, which will be discussed in direction represents an acceleration, and this
more detail hereafter. requires a force. Lift as a phenomenon is
commonly attributed to Newton’s third law,
7.3 Design Goal when in reality, the third law only asserts that a
force will be present of equal magnitude, and
The plane was designed for a competition in does nothing to explain the origin of said force.
which as much weight is carried around an aerial
circuit as possible. There are limitations on To understand wing span is involved in lift,
overall dimension, total weight, take-off and consider two planes flying under the same
landing distance, engine power, among other conditions with the same air speed. The craft
things. The goal is to lift a maximum weight at with the larger span will contact more air for a
takeoff, fly the circuit, and successfully land. A given amount of time in flight than will the
more concise list of the objectives in mind is smaller vehicle. Essentially, more air diverted
summarized here: results in more lift. (Remember there has been no
mention of wing area or aspect ratio to this
- Select and design a configuration which point). Thus under set conditions, a longer span
prioritizes lifting capability by is a better producer of lift.
sacrificing adroit maneuverability and
flight speed. One of the chief drawbacks to large wingspans is
directly related to the discussion above. We have
- Design the integral structure of the wing established that the wing is coming into contact
to handle flight loads associated with with more air by virtue of its length. This means
theoretical weight limitations imposed in turn that more material is contacting a surface
by the thrust capacity of the specified of the plane. A longer wing will generate more
engine and the size limits, while skin friction than a short wing due to this fact.
minimizing the inherent structural One might say that a long wing is terrible for
weight. parasite drag. See Figure 14 below.
A large number of resources were used to We now consider the conditions our plane will
examine the benefits and drawback of various operate under through a different lens. We will
configurations and to decide on their relative be travelling at quite slow speed. That is, in the
importance. A compilation of the relevant data Low Reynolds Number regime. A basic facet of
gathered in this process, with comments aerodynamics is that slow speed flight is
concerning the applicability of each item follows dominated by induced drag. Induced drag is the
below. small component of the lift force vector opposed
to the direction of travel, as illustrated by Figure
7.4 Research Done 15. This arises due to the orientation of the
aircraft necessary for the generation of lift.
7.4.1 Wing Span
- 18 -
Figure 15 - Relative Drag Contributions
- 19 -
Higher sensitivity does not necessarily correlate number in aerodynamic testing, we must have
to responsiveness, however. Actually, a longer some information regarding the chord length.
span will have the opposite effect. As an
example, consider an aircraft in an attempt to However, in terms of wing configuration of the
roll. The rotational inertia of the plane will full scale machine, the chord length is most
increase with wing span. We all remember the influential in obtaining the desired wing area and
example of the spinning figure skater from aspect ratio. The lift produced by a wing section
physics? Let us consider our goal in competition is proportional to the severity of the curvature at
once more. Quite frankly, we don’t care about any point and always projected perpendicular to
roll rate. the surface. On highly cambered sections like
those seen in low Reynolds number flow, most
In summary, it is certainly a good idea to attempt of the lift is produced within the first 25% of the
a long span wing. However, there are very real chord. Having excess area which contributes
limits on the maximum length. Perhaps it seems little to the lift is undesirable.
that the negatives outweigh the benefits. But we
have not considered any other related parameters The chord length can be changed to achieve a
at this point. suitable wing area for lift production. The chord
length at the fuselage of the craft will also
- 20 -
length may change with span, adding another sense when considering that a faster moving craft
level of variability. This will be discussed in will displace more air in a unit time. The aircraft
greater detail in the section below concerning being designed will operate at quite slow speed.
wing taper. This problem can be partially remedied by higher
ARs given that for a set speed, using the
7.4.4 Aspect Ratio knowledge above, the AOA can be smaller, and
thus the coefficient of lift necessary to operate at
The aspect ratio of the aircraft wing is defined as said speed will be smaller.
the square of the span, divided by the total wing
area. Changing the aspect ratio will therefore It may seem as though high aspect ratio wings
have a direct effect on the span or the area, or are great for use at slow speed. This is in many
both. A high aspect ratio usually implies a ways true. However, as a cautionary word, the
relatively long span, and conversely a small AR Reynolds number must be considered again. In
typically implies a somewhat short span. Perhaps slow speed flight where the Reynolds number is
the most pertinent relation is that of the span to low, the boundary layer on the wing is not
the chord. energized the same way higher Re flows allow
for, and is prone to separation. Remember that
Increasing the aspect ratio at given angle of the unit length associated with an airfoil is the
attack will raise the total wing coefficient of lift, chord. For a given wing area, a high aspect
up to a point (See Figure 17). However, this ratio will lower the chord, further lowering
action will also decrease the stall speed of the the Re and compounding the effect. Careful
wing, which reduces the useful range of speeds design and consideration of the Reynolds
at which one can operate the machine. This is not number regime is advised. It is due to this fact
overly worrisome from the standpoint of the and others that devices such as vortex generators
competition, as performance models are not the and turbulators are sometimes introduced on
goal, and a very large range of operational speed model wings.
is not necessarily required.
7.4.5 Wing Mounting Style
The aspect ratio of the wing is tied to its
efficiency for lift production. High AR wings There are three primary methods for mounting
may reduce span-wise flow. The circular wingtip the wing in regard to position on the fuselage.
vortices resulting from the spilling of higher These are, intuitively, low mount, mid mount,
pressure air from under the wing are minimized and high mount. The high mount technique is
in strength if the aspect ratio is higher due typically the most desirable for a number of
largely to the shape of the downwash sheet. reasons.
These vortices are the primary cause of induced Thinking about the fuselage as a lumped mass, it
drag, a type of pressure drag. So, higher aspect can be seen that the center of gravity of the plane
ratio is better for induced drag. will lie below the wing if the wing is mounted
high. In effect the fuselage will be suspended
If, as mentioned above, a higher aspect ratio from the lifting points on the wing above. This
increases the lift coefficient for a given angle of gives the wing a measure of effective dihedral.
attack, the wing can meet a lift requirement with Low mounted wings will have the direct
a smaller AOA, which also helps to minimize the opposite effect.
vortex induced drag. It has already been
mentioned that induced drag is a consideration One of the drawbacks of a wing mounted along
given the design goals. The airfoils which have the center of the fuselage is that it makes the
been selected for further testing at this point are modularization of the vehicle more difficult. For
of the high lift variety, and have been considered the purpose of removing the wing quickly and
because of their attractive lift coefficient maximizing payload volume it may be advisable
performance and lift to drag ratios. For airfoils of to devise a method for attaching the wing at the
this type the effects of induced drag are more top where it can be lifted out. Another advantage
pronounced. of the high mounted wing is that it more readily
allows for strut-bracing against the fuselage of
It is known that the induced drag on a wing the aircraft.
varies in proportion to (1 / V^2). This makes
- 21 -
7.4.6 Dihedral Angle fuselage. The airplane slips to the side and down
if uncorrected.
The dihedral angle of an aircraft is defined as the
degree to which the wing is angled from a This is where the dihedral angle is beneficial. If
perpendicular orientation with the fuselage. Only the low wing is angled up, the aircraft presents it
in extreme cases of dihedral angle will the lift of to the off-kilter stream of air at a higher angle of
the wings be significantly affected. attack that the upward tilted wing. This produces
a restorative rolling moment which helps to
Because angling the wings alters the direction of correct the aircraft. This will also increase the
the lift vectors associated with each pinion, the amount of air striking the side of the plane as it
total lift may be decreased, although for general slips to the side.
angles of dihedral, this is not pronounced.
The main purpose of adding dihedral angle is to Another benefit of dihedral is that it will lower
utilize the dihedral effect to enable lateral (or roll the center of gravity of the plane relative to the
stability). Consider an undesired disturbance lifting points on each pinion, which will also
which changes the orientation of the aircraft. If have a positive effect on stability. This is
one wing is lifted up relative to the other, the especially important in our project if our choice
lower wing will therefore be generating less of mounting style is the high mount, because this
relative lift. This induces a sideslip motion where will inherently raise the center of gravity.
the air comes not only from the front of the craft,
but also at some angle off the axis of the One possible negative effect of adding dihedral
angle is that if one gets carried away and the
- 22 -
upward slope is too severe, yaw-roll coupling 7.4.8 Twist
may be present. This is commonly referred to as
“Dutch Roll”. Remember that the lift rises in The wing may be twisted aerodynamically or
proportion to drag, and so the restorative lift will mechanically. In both cases, the amount of lift is
pull the wing back as the lateral correction adjusted as a function of the spanwise location.
occurs, yawing the plane. This can be countered Aerodynamically this is done by selection a
be designing for the minimum dihedral necessary different airfoil section for parts of the wing.
and in some cases by increasing the vertical Mechanically, the angle of attack is adjusted as
stabilizer area. the span progresses. Wing twist is most
commonly seen in low Re regimes as
7.4.7 Taper compensation for highly loaded wing-tips.
Wing taper is the adjustment of chord length Decreasing the angle of attack near the tips
over the span of the wing. The most prominent offsets this to some degree. This is known as
characteristic associated with taper is the wing “washout”. If the wing is tapered it may be
loading over the span. Physically, taper may be beneficial to design twist, although this is an
used to decrease the amount of material and additional complication.
therefore weight of the wing as the moment arm
grows from the fuselage. 7.4.9 Wing Sweep
It has been shown analytically that the lift Wing sweep is a design consideration often seen
distribution over the average wing span is on high speed aircraft which approach mach
greatest at the root, and trails off to near zero at speeds. This is largely due to attempts to
the tips, in an elliptical fashion. The most minimize the thickness to chord ratio by
efficient chord variation would therefore increasing the effective chord, and avoiding
decrease the amount of chord-wise material in interference with shock waves.
conjunction with the decrease in lift. Several
elliptical taper designs have been built. This These are obviously not things we must consider
design may be difficult to manufacture however, for our project. However, sweep has other
and often a straight taper is preferred. See Figure effects.
18 for a variety of different taper distributions.
Sources report that approximately 5 degrees of
The taper, or amount of taper strongly effects the sweep is effectively equivalent to 1 degree of
distribution of loads on the wing. Highly tapered dihedral. Sweepback will also provide some
wings are prone to negative effects such as measure of directional (yaw) stability. By the
dangerous tip stall, especially at high aspect same type of logic that correlates with dihedral -
ratio. under a disturbance, if the airplane is yawed, the
wing swung forward will face the incoming air
For our purposes, it is suggested that at most, a more directly than the other and will therefore
moderate amount of taper be used. have more accompanied drag, pulling it back
around restoratively. Yaw-roll coupling is
Another consideration is the idea of partial taper. evident here.
That is, part of the wing could be constant chord,
while another part is sloped. Similar to this is the 7.4.10 Edge Design
notion of compound taper. This makes
calculation of the wing area and aspect ratio The design of the wing edge is important in
more complicated. Typically, the region closest controlling the amount of air that spills around
to the fuselage is held constant while the outer the edge from the high pressure surface. To
portion is tapered. If taper is to be used, it is understand this think about how a wing
suggested that the leading edge slope backwards generates lift. The shape of the wing is a means
while the trailing edge is constant. This will for producing a pressure differential across the
make the implementation of the control surfaces upper and lower surface. Regardless of this
somewhat easier. means, this difference is present, and the more
highly pressurized air underneath will tend to
spill up and over around the tip. This decreases
the efficiency for lift of the wing.
- 23 -
One method of reducing this spilling effect is to and more narrow range of angle of attack. They
square off the edge of the wing. An extension of are have less inertia in flight and are more easily
this is to extend sheeting on the top surface out disturbed, which is a characteristic which blends
past that of the bottom surface, connecting the well with high aspect ratios. For our purposes, a
two with a shallow angled piece. If one is to lower relative wing loading is deemed
visualize two streams of essentially span-wise advantageous. Figure 19 shows wing loadings
flow over the top and bottom, it can be seen that progressing to the tips of the wing.
the point of interception of these streams will in
fact be somewhat beyond the edge of the wing. 7.4.12 Externals
This will extend the lifting capability of the wing
closer to the tip, increasing its effectiveness, but External additives would, for the purposes of this
also loading it more severely. document, include devices such as stall strips
Perhaps a more notorious device employed for and turbulators. That is, items which may “trip”
the same purpose if the winglet, which ultimately the boundary layer flow on the surface of the
accomplishes the same thing, although the wing, rendering it turbulent at some predictable
winglet itself has some weight. The design location, and allowing it thereby to adhere to the
proposed does not utilize winglets due to their surface at higher angles of attack.
additional complexity. However, an angled edge
will be utilized. Figure 18 shows a variety of Stall strips are generally rough material lined
wing edges. chord-wise at some point along the span, which
will ensure that stalling will occur first at a more
7.4.11 Wing Loading desirable location, generally the inner area.
These types of devices should not be necessary
The loading of the wing is the total weight with proper design and are usually added after
carried by the aircraft, which the wing must some testing has been done, and alterations are
support, divided by the area of the wing. found to be in order.
The pros and cons of high and low wing loading 7.4.13 Multiple Wings
are as follows: A highly loaded wing requires
more air flowing over it to attain the same lifting A vast amount can be said concerning the design
power as a lightly loaded wing. It will have a of aircraft with multiple wings. This class
higher stall speed but also will required faster includes biplanes, triplanes, sesquiplanes and
take off and landing speeds. Highly loaded wings other types of multiplane vehicles.
have in general less parasite drag. They are also
harder to maneuver with simple control surface Most of the design challenge here results from
input and undergo larger centrifugal forces while the interaction of one wing with the other.
turning. Remembering that a wing has by its nature a
lower pressure over its top, one can easily see
Lightly loaded wings are capable of slow that adding another wing above it would hinder
takeoff and landing, but have a lower stall speed the usefulness of that top wing. In fact for each
- 24 -
additional wing added the efficiency of the that a properly designed single wing craft could
sandwiched wings decreases. This effect can be accomplish the job well.
somewhat mitigated by staggering the wings
forward or back. Overall, each individual wing is 7.4.14 Final Wing Size and Configuration
less efficient than any monowing plane.
The total span of the wing is 10.8 feet. Each
However, because the lifting area is obviously pinion of the wing is 5.1 feet in length, from its
increasing, the total lift is raised. There are root to tip, and the wings are mounted to the
several issues to account for however. Multiple sides of a fuselage six inches in width. The wing
sets of wings would require additional bracing is tapered such that the ratio of tip chord to root
structure leading to some increased drag, and chord is 0.8. For the designed 16 inch root chord,
would also increase weight for the same area. this means the tip section is 12.8 inches.
In fact, one of the great ironies of aviation is that This tapering is not carried out in a constant
in the early era, it was clear that monowing fashion, however. A basic type of compound
planes would require internal bracing. It was taper is used, where all of the decrease in chord
thought that due to this, the wings would need to length occurs linearly in the first half of the
be so thick, the additional drag would ruin the wing, and the outer half remains at constant
performance. So designers stayed with extremely chord.
thin wings with cross bracing and wire. In
reality, the drag on these structures was far larger The wing is fabricated with all of the taper in the
than thick single wings! leading edge. The trailing edge is straight and
perpendicular to the plane of the fuselage side
Biplane design is often seen with aerobatic wall. The decrease in chord length is
planes due to the fact that for the same total accomplished by overall scaling of the section
lifting area, the span can be reduced, which is about the centroid of the S1223, rather than
good for high speed planes which need large merely decreasing the chord-wise dimension of
alpha ranges for maneuvers and low roll inertia the wing.
for snapping the plane over. Although this is not
the only benefit, it was determined early on that Otherwise the group would encounter attendant
due to some of the drawbacks mentioned above, changes in aerodynamic characteristics. A side
designing a biplane was not worth the effort, and effect of this is that the wing is also tapered in
- 25 -
the z axis, meaning the lowest point of the airfoil mounting locations for the control surface
surface is elevated above the lowest point at the hinges. Both flaps and ailerons are incorporated.
root, if only by a small amount, even when The ribs are made of 3/32 inch this balsa sheet,
ignoring the dihedral angle. and are fitted with lightening holes in an attempt
to reduce as much mass as possible.
A dihedral angle of two degrees is used in the
wing. This is a simple linear dihedral achieved The spars making up the beam structure are
by physically tilting the wing upward by its sunken into the edge of each rib far enough that a
mounting tube, where it is fastened to the layer of 3/32 inch sheeting may be laid over the
fuselage assembly. desired portions of the wing while maintaining
the original contour of the S1223. In fact, much
As mentioned above, a mechanical twist exists, of the airfoil is reduced by this thickness such
and is a relatively small 2 degrees. All of the that when the sheeting is added, the section
twist occurs in the outer half of the wing, where surface meets the basswood leading edge with no
the section is constant chord. Constructing the rise or drop in need of sanding.
wing with the designed twist sees the trailing
edge raised linearly, with each rib rotating about 8. Website
a fixed point at the leading apex of the S1223.
The outermost edge of the wing, at the tip, is As part of the capstone requirements, a website
designed to be square without the upper and for the design project was required. The first
lower surfaces converging to a single line, and time around, the group tried to construct a
without any rounding of the planform. website from a website called
http://www.moonfruit.com/ where templates of
7.4.15 Construction and Components websites were already made with easy to
navigate drop-down box menus and image
The frame of each wing is a fairly standard array spaces etc.
of balsa ribs connected by a network of beam-
like support structure and spars. Each half of the However, there was some speed issues
wing is made up of 21 ribs spaced three inches associated with the website. Per request, the
apart, with one alternate spacing accounting for website was re-designed and formatted into an
the discrepancy that a strictly linear pattern html code. This code can easily be modified and
would create with the overall span intended. updated whenever some changes need to be
made to show the progress of the project. The
Three quarters of an inch has been removed from website contains all important documents that
the leading edge of the S1223 on every rib in were written throughout the academic year,
order to make room for a manufactured leading competition rules for the year that project was
edge of much stiffer basswood. The main spars designed around, some pictures of progress
of the wing are placed in a pair at the quarter made, final designs etc. Below is the link to the
chord. These are quarter-inch square balsa stock UMaine SAE Aero website.
pieces epoxied together for length extension.
http://www.umaine.edu/MechEng/mo/2012-
Given the availability of a laser cutting tool, the 2013%20Capstone/AeroDesign%20Website/Aer
two main spars are connected with four balsa odesign.html
sheets mounted on the spars as side walls.
Together, these four pieces run the span of each 9. Preliminary Modeling
half-wing and form a hollow rectangular beam.
As this beam structure passes through the seven In the design process, some modeling was
most inboard ribs, clearance is left at its center to needed to get an idea of how things fit together
allow square aluminum stock to be inserted for and how things looked, space-wise. Preliminary
use in mounting the wing. Several of the ribs in SolidWorks was done for one-half of the wing to
the vicinity of the aluminum beam are help determine how large and how complicated
manufactured from hardwood, rather than balsa. the wing would be to fabricate. The preliminary
model incorporated the twist, the taper, and the
Consistent spacing at the trailing edges is rib/spar technique that was used in the
maintained by the addition of several balsa construction process.
braces between the ribs, which will also serve as
- 26 -
This model was then used to build a mock-up of
the half wing and to guide the construction of the
mock-up. The model helped the group determine
how long the construction would take for at least
the wing of the aircraft. See Figure 21 thru
Figure 23 for graphics of the preliminary model
and the final product of the mock-up.
10. Fuselage
Sizing
Wing-Fuselage Connection
Empennage-Fuselage Connection
Motor-Mount
Accessibility
Figure 22 - Wing SolidWorks End View
Construction Process
10.1 Sizing
- 27 -
earlier. Thus, there needed to be some way to
connect these two pieces to the fuselage that was 10.3 Empennage-Fuselage Connection
sturdy enough to support the weight of the wing
and the forces it would experience while still The empennage-fuselage connection has one of
remaining easily assembled and disassembled. two options that are commonly accepted: single
boom and twin boom. Both, if done correctly,
At first, the idea of using the wing as the actual serve to stabilize the empennage during flight.
cover to the main part of the fuselage was
considered but this idea was dismissed because Due to the simpler design and fabrication of a
this method would be too difficult to effectively single boom, the group opted for the single boom
fabricate without sacrificing strength. option. The boom is a PVC pipe that extends out
from the rear of the fuselage back to the tail
Then the idea of using plates of some sort empennage. The PVC pipe is supported by the
mounted to the fuselage with a hole through it rib design of the fuselage (discussed later) which
arose. This hole would have the dihedral of the gives enough rigidity for the tail assembly to not
wing built in and some sort of piping would be moving around during flight.
make a sheath for the main spar of each wing to
fit into. The spar and sheath would then have a The PVC being hollow also gives an advantage
bolt driven through them and be nutted on both to running the wiring from the fuselage to the
sides to secure the spar and sheath. control surfaces of the empennage as the wire
can be run right through the piping.
PVC was discussed for the sheathing however
after much debate, it was decided that the See Figure 27 and Figure 28 for the empennage-
sheathing and wing spar would be made out of fuselage connection graphics.
1x1 aluminum tubing. The plates attached to the
fuselage are made of balsa hardwood for extra
support in the fuselage when holding the weight
of the wing.
10.4 Motor-Mount
- 28 -
Figure 31 - Payload Bay Closed
- 29 -
Horizontal and vertical stabilizer sizing
11. Empennage Empennage position relative to wing
Incidence angle of horizontal stabilizer
The empennage, also known as a “tail
assembly”, is the part of the aircraft responsible 11.1 Tail Configuration Selection
for four important flight characteristics:
The twin-tail configuration was selected as the
Pitch stability tail configuration for the advantages it offered
Yaw stability for our particular aircraft. This configuration
Pitch control eliminates the effect of the prop wash (a helical
Yaw control wind around the fuselage caused by the
propeller) on the yaw of the plane. Furthermore,
Pitch stability is achieved by aerodynamic forces it allows for a horizontal stabilizer that is wide
on the horizontal stabilizer (see Figure 33) and, consequently, has a lot of surface area. The
producing a restoring pitch moment on the more surface area the horizontal stabilizer has,
aircraft when it is angled away from trim. the less distance there needs to be between the
tail and the wings. Shortening that distance is
Yaw stability is achieved in a similar way by advantageous since it reduces the length, width,
using aerodynamic forces on the vertical and height constraint.
stabilizers to restore the aircraft when perturbed
from the trim state. 11.2 Horizontal Stabilizer Airfoil Selection
Pitch control is provided to the pilot by actuation Based on advice given by experienced remote
of the elevator, a control surface located at the control aircraft hobbyists, the choices of airfoils
trailing edge of the horizontal stabilizer. were narrowed down to symmetrical airfoils.
Deflecting the elevator downward will tend to These airfoils are called “symmetrical” because
pitch the entire aircraft downward and vice of their symmetry along the chord line.
versa. There are several airfoils in the NACA 4-digit
series that are symmetrical and have
Yaw control is provided to the pilot by actuation aerodynamic data readily available. The
of the rudders. Rudders are control surfaces NACA0012 was chosen because it had just
located at the trailing edge of the vertical enough thickness to house the elevator and
stabilizers. Deflecting the rudder right tends to rudder servos with a 10-inch chord.
yaw the aircraft right and vice versa.
11.3 Horizontal and Vertical Stabilizer
Sizing
- 30 -
volume coefficient is defined in equation 11.5 Incidence Angle
Equation 1 below:
The incidence angle of the horizontal stabilizer is
the angle between the chord line of the
horizontal stabilizer and the roll axis of the body.
The tail boom is parallel to this axis and may be
considered the roll axis for all intents and
Equation 1 purposes.
Since the velocity of the flow in the wake of the Figure 34 - Tail Angle Adjustability
wings is slower, the surfaces in the tail will have
less of an effect if placed there. So, the height of
the empennage is bumped up so that it is well out
of the wake of the wings. A height of 3 inches
was found to be sufficient based on the method
outlined for estimating the position of the wake.
- 31 -
12. Preliminary Testing
Preliminary testing was done on the engine of 13. Design Analysis and Review
the aircraft to determine how much thrust force it
could produce. This value was crucial in 13.1 Wing
determining the size of the wings that were to be
used in order to produce the lift that the aircraft The analysis done with regard to the wing
needed. section utilized is mentioned above, as it was
part of a larger comprehensive analysis
This process was done in a crude manner early performed to assist in the selection of one
on in the 1st semester and then the experiment particular airfoil. It is not given here directly, but
was reproduced in the spring as part of the instead is treated as part of the wing design as a
requirement for the Mech Lab III experiment. whole.
Essentially several different propellers were After a careful review of the above compiled
tested on the engine that was attached to a cart information, it was determined that a relatively
with minimal friction that was attached to a high aspect ratio was desirable. An engineering
cantilever beam with a strain gage. The beam decision was made to start by fixing the aspect
was then used as a scale to determine how much ratio a nine for comparison purposes.
thrust force the engine was producing.
It was desired that some experimentation be done
A copy of the Mech Lab III report is attached in with regard to the effects of twist, taper and
the Appendices. The results of the experiment dihedral. Iterations of design analysis was
are summarized below in Figure 34 and Table 3. performed for these parameters as described:
6
Thrust (lbf)
0
6500 7500 8500 9500 10500 11500 12500 13500
RPM
Table 1- Max Thrust Data The general characteristics were clear, but their
Propeller Maximum Thrust @ relative amounts (i.e. amount of twist, starting
Obtained RPM point along the span for the taper, etc.) were not.
Evo 11x7 5.87916 lbf 13338.2 An abundance of possibilities existed in this
Evo 12x6 5.1496 lbf 11050.4 regard. For some measure of accessibility the
K-Series Master 5.1824 lbf 11098.1 starting/ending point for both taper and twist was
Airscrew set at half of the span. The dihedral was always
started directly at the root, or at the half span.
- 32 -
Increments of adjustment (i.e. 2 degrees, 4 A summary of the simulation strategy is given
degrees) were kept relatively large and at integer below:
values.
With the Selig 1223 chosen as the best possible
Upward of fifty different combinations of these airfoil, the amount that it can lift needs to be
parameters were tested under the same calculated. The lift is defined as:
conditions with XFLR5.
- 33 -
increases; the drag is a function of the velocity, to about 8 lbf, the program iterates through a
which is a function of the time. range of thrusts as well.
M is the mass of the airplane. After the final geometry was decided on,
computational fluid dynamics software was
The acceleration in the y-direction will remain 0 utilized to generate results. Specifically, this was
until the lift force is higher than the weight of the done with Ansys Fluent. Two different programs
aircraft. The acceleration in the x-direction can were used as a check on the reliability of the data
be written as below: generated. The results garnered from this were
values of lift coefficient, drag coefficient, and
moment coefficient.
- 34 -
Figure 37 - Takeoff Simulink Schematic
- 35 -
Figure 39 - Velocity Streamlines
- 36 -
Figure 41 - Velocity Contours
- 37 -
Figure 43 - Turbulence
- 38 -
Ansys gives results for the total lift and sustained internally. The wing is effectively
produced by the wing, the total drag on a cantilever beam fixed at one end. The largest
the wing and many other stresses are in the structural components which
considerations. However the data output allow for connection to the fuselage.
is in a coordinate system referenced by
Ansys during computation. The leading edge is a stiff member which gives
the wing rigidity, but there is no load path from
These results were converted to an appropriately the leading edge directly to the fuselage.
configured coordinate system using a MathCAD
worksheet. Comparisons have been made to both All twisting loads are transferred through the
the data gathered for the airfoil sections by our ribs. Aside from that consideration, the main
group, as well as published data for the Selig purpose of the ribs is to provide a platform for
S1223. As expected, the 3-dimensional wing the spars. Thus, while the wing can be
underperforms the 2-D analysis. However, the conceptualized as a cantilever beam, there are
lift figures are aligned with our necessities. inherent differences.
A full scale mockup of the wing was constructed Initially, the attachment apparatus consisted of
to gain experience in practical fabrication. The two sleeved PVC pipes. This arrangement was
layout of this differed considerably from the final set at some distance from the main spars of the
design. A wooden dowel was used in place of wing. The load transfer between these two
stock leading edges, the ribs were all ¼ of an components was a large source of difficulty in
inch, and the elevator was considerable larger. analysis. The parts of the wing (the PVC and the
balsa) also obviously have different properties.
An angled jig was used to set the appropriate The balsa itself is an anisotropic material,
twist and dihedral, where in later models, the meaning that its strength is dependent on the
mechanical twist was accomplished solely by direction in which it is loaded. Simplifications
proper implementation of rib height. were made by finding average properties
weighted by the cross sectional area percentage
The largest difference was seen in the cutting along the span, and also by finding an effective
technique. The mockup was fabricated moment of inertia of the “beam”.
completely by hand whereas the final design was
cut using the laserjet printer housed at the Attempted analyses using the fluid/structure
advanced manufacturing center. This was interaction capabilities of Ansys were
accomplished by importing the solid models unsuccessful. Eventually, for several reasons, the
made in SolidWorks to software known as beam structure was altered.
CorelDraw. These files are read by the laser
printer and cut to scale. Overall, the mockup was The second design utilizes lengths of thin-walled
an effective tool for the group to refine its aluminum tubing mounted in the wings and
construction technique before the final built. fuselage which nest together as with the PVC.
This tubing is rectangular in cross section. The
13.2 Wing Structural Analysis second version moves this into alignment with
the built-up beam structure in the outer portion
Another primary consideration of the wing of the wing, and space is cut in the ribs to allow
design was the capabilities of the wing structure. for this. The built-up beam is comprised of the
upper and lower spars running the length of each
Balsa wood, while very lightweight, is inherently wing, bonded to balsa sheeting on either side of
weak, especially transverse to the grain. It was the spars. This makes for a thin-walled
critical that the wing be able to support adequate rectangular structure.
distributed loads upward. The wing as designed,
and as built, is in reality quite a complex 13.2.1 Analysis With Design 2
geometry. The joint at the fuselage where the
beam members sleeve together supports bending. A finite element analysis was set up using the
Examining the load path, one will see that the FEA 3-in-1 code given to UMaine students in
distributed load generated by aerodynamic forces their Finite Element Analysis course. The
causes the wing to lift upward. This load is analysis was limited to under 100 elements, and
transferred to the aforementioned beam members due to the simplifications necessary, results are
- 39 -
ultimately not overly reliable. However, they do positions based on user input for servo arm
provide some sense of scope. The results are as angle. Then, it uses force and moment
follows in Figure 45: equilibrium to solve for the applied torque on the
8.00E-01
7.00E-01
Vertical Displacement (inches)
6.00E-01
5.00E-01
4.00E-01
3.00E-01
2.00E-01
1.00E-01
0.00E+00
0.00E+0 1.00E+0 2.00E+0 3.00E+0 4.00E+0 5.00E+0 6.00E+0 7.00E+0
-1.00E-01
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
X Position (inches)
An analysis was conducted to determine whether As stated earlier, the Magnum XLS .61A that is
or not the servo would hold elevator position at utilized in this aircraft produced only 5.8lbs of
high airspeed. Should the drag on the control thrust at its peak. This could be an error in
surface impart a torque on the servo arm that testing, an error in the testing rig/interface of
exceeds the servo’s rated torque, elevator control LabView or even simply just a weak engine in
would be lost. comparison to other groups. Never the less, the
thrust force that was determined through testing
The analysis, performed in a Mathcad sheet drove the results that are summarized below in
shown in the Appendices, solves for link the predicted performance of the aircraft.
- 40 -
These results are produced by a Flight Let it be noted that the final aircraft as built is
Simulation Matlab code generated by one of the not a perfectly balanced aircraft in regards to the
team members. This code can be seen in the pitch axis. The center of gravity of the aircraft is
Appendices. slightly aft of the quarter chord line of the wings
which causes the aircraft to be tail heavy. A
- Max Thrust: 5.8lbs perfectly balanced aircraft could be held up at
the quarter chord point and be perfectly
This number is generated from the 11x7 balanced. But the final design as built tends to
propeller at its peak. However, in the final design have more weight toward the tail. This caused
the aircraft will be using the 12x6 propeller the aircraft’s pitch to be difficult to control.
because as stated in the conclusions of the Mech
Lab III final report, the 12x6 had overall more The test day was unfortunately very windy (7-
stable and better performance. 12mph winds) which as explained later on,
seemed to cause some difficulty.
That being said, the maximum thrust that the
final design configuration will produce is Before testing, the empennage was off kilter for
5.15lbs. some reason and needed to be adjusted so as to
align the horizontal stabilizer parallel with the
- Predicted Lift: 35lbs ground. Upon trying to adjust this, the PVC pipe
came loose and broke all of the support rings on
Unfortunately this number is a bit lower than each of the fuselage ribs which would have been
what was hoped for, 55lbs. Compared to other catastrophic if it had happened during flight.
teams, 35lbs is a competitive number. This will
be explained below. Some emergency repairs were made using
packing tape and quick dry epoxy that repaired
- Predicted Payload and stiffened the empennage-fuselage
connection. Unfortunately the repairs added even
The aircraft itself weighs 13.75lbs and it can lift more weight to the aircraft. See Figure 46
35lbs. Thus, the total payload the aircraft should
be able to lift is 21.25lbs. Winning teams in past
years have won the competition by lifting 15lb-
25lbs so by design, this aircraft is competitive.
14.1 Testing
- 41 -
with payload and attempt flight with extra
weight.
14.3 Evaluation
14.3.1 Engine
Figure 47 - Off-kilter empennage
The engine had plenty of power had more than
enough power for the purposes of getting the
None the less, flight testing resumed.
aircraft off the ground.
14.2 Results
14.3.2 Wings
With the wind blowing into the face of the
The wings were by far the most thoroughly and
aircraft, the aircraft had no problem taking off.
best designed components of the aircraft. They
The competition requires take off within 200ft
held together well and connected to the fuselage
and our aircraft with no payload in it took off in
with ease and sturdiness. Every aspect of the
less than 40ft.
wings were designed well. According to the
pilot, Brian Barainca, “Even with no wind
With the crooked empennage and a heavy tail,
assistance, the aircraft would have taken off no
the aircraft was difficult to control in the air. Of
problem. The wings produced more than enough
course, the high winds did not help this situation
lift, the thing wanted to climb.” He also stated
any. But as competition required, a full 360º turn
that the flaps were sized correctly, but the
was made and the landing approach began.
ailerons could have been sized a little bigger to
While trying to land the aircraft, the wind picked
help alleviate the control issues with the tail
up and blew the aircraft of course and spun the
heavy design. The wings of the aircraft were
tail end around, causing a very rough landing
designed exactly how they needed to be
which upon impact, broke off the landing gear
designed.
from under the fuselage. See Figure 48.
14.3.3 Fuselage
- 42 -
This project met the standards of the competition
14.3.4 Wireless Systems and guidelines it was supposed and although the
aircraft might not have scored well, the project
The wireless systems acted just as they should can be looked at as a success.
have and provided quick, reliable response time
between commands. 14.5 Conclusion
Overall, the aircraft was designed to competition Sacrificing strength for weight was not a good
specifications. The aircraft would have no trade off. Filet all corners, add more ribs, spars,
problem passing the inspections of the and sheet everything. Balsa is a very weak wood
competition judges. This was a successful design so the more ribs, the better. Also, pay attention
process. During testing however, some to the grain orientation of each rib when
components proved to be under-designed, as laser-cutting and assembling, balsa is
explained above, and this led to issues.
- 43 -
anisotropic so it is stronger with the grain
than it is transverse to the grains.
Wing Design:
Balance:
- 44 -
Figure 49 - Take Off During Flight Testing
- 45 -
15. References
Abbott, Ira H., and Albert E. Von. Doenhoff. Theory of Wing Sections: Including a Summary of Airfoil
Anderson, David F., and Scott Eberhardt. Understanding Flight. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001. Print.
Anderson, John D. Introduction to Flight. New York: McGraw Hill, 2012. Print.
Ashley, Holt. Engineering Analysis of Flight Vehicles. New York: Dover, 1992. Print.
Basic Aircraft Design Rules, Unified Teaching Staff, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/aeronautics-and-astronautics/16-01-unified-engineering-i-ii-iii-iv-fall-
2005-spring-2006/systems-labs-06/spl8.pdf
Bertin, John J., and Michael L. Smith. Aerodynamics for Engineers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,
1979. Print.
Bisplinghoff, Raymond L., Holt Ashley, and Robert L. Halfman. Aeroelasticity. New York: Dover
Bruhn, E. F. Analysis and Design of Flight Vehicle Structures. Cincinnati, OH: Tri-State Offset, 1965.
Print.
Etkin, Bernard, and Lloyd D. Reid. Dynamics of Flight: Stability and Control. New York: Wiley, 1996.
Print.
Gere, James M., and Barry J. Goodno. Mechanics of Materials. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning, 2009.
Print.
Grant, Charles Hampson. Model Airplane Design and Theory of Flight; a Complete Exposition of the
Aerodynamics and Design of Flying Model Aircraft, with Fundamental Rules, Formulas and
- 46 -
Hartog, Jacob P. Den. Strength of Materials. New York: Dover Publ., 1977. Print.
Hibbeler, R. C. Engineering Mechanics: Statics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2010. Print.
Hibbeler, Russell C. Engineering Mechanics: Dynamics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2010.
Print.
Hoerner, Sighard F., and Henry V. Borst. Fluid-dynamic Lift: Practical Information on Aerodynamic and
Hoerner, Sighard F. Fluid-dynamic Drag: Practical Information on Aerodynamic Drag and Hydrodynamic
rm n, Theodore Von. Aerodynamics: Selected Topics in the Light of Their Historical Development.
Kermode, Alfred Cotterill., R. H. Barnard, and D. R. Philpott. Mechanics of Flight. Harlow, England:
Lennon, Andy. RC Model Airplane Design. Osceola, WI, USA: Motor International, 1986. Print.
Mises, Richard Von. Theory of Flight. New York: Dover Publications, 1959. Print.
Niu, Ch un-y n. Airframe Structural Design: Practical Design Information and Data on Aircraft
Norton, Robert L. Machine Design: An Integrated Approach. Boston: Prentice Hall, 2011. Print.
Nyhoff, Larry R., and Sanford Leestma. FORTRAN 77 for Engineers and Scientists: With an Introduction
to FORTRAN 90. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1996. Print.
P., Den Hartog J. Advanced Strength of Materials. New York: Dover Publications, 1987. Print.
P., Den Hartog J. Mechanics. New York: Dover Publications, 1961. Print.
ProAdvice 2: THE WING PLANFORM (n.d.): n. pag. Great Owl Publishing, 2010. Web.
ProAdvice 3: AILERON SIZING (n.d.): n. pag. Great Owl Publishing, 2010. Web.
- 47 -
Rao, Singiresu S. Mechanical Vibrations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2011. Print.
Raymer, Daniel P. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach. Reston, VA: American Institute of
Rivello, Robert M. Theory and Analysis of Flight Structures. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1969. Print.
Selig, Michael S., and James J. Guglielmo. "High-Lift Low Reynolds Number Airfoil Design." Journal of
Selig, Michael S. Low Reynolds Number Airfoil Design Lecture Notes (n.d.): n. pag. Web.
Selig, Michael S. Summary of Low Speed Airfoil Data. Virginia Beach, VA: SoarTech Publications, 1995.
Print.
Shapiro, Ascher H. Shape and Flow; the Fluid Dynamics of Drag. Garden City, NY: Anchor, 1961. Print.
Shevell, Richard Shepherd. Fundamentals of Flight. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989. Print.
Simons, Martin. Model Aircraft Aerodynamics. Swanley: Nexus Special Interests, 1999. Print.
White, Frank M. Fluid Mechanics. New York, NY: McGraw Hill, 2011. Print.
- 48 -
16. Appendices
16.1 Appendix A - Plans and Specs
- 49 -
16.2 Appendix B - Wind Tunnel Modification and Testing
As part of the design testing, the group wanted to utilize the wind tunnel in Crosby Lab as a resource to
collect realistic data during wing design and configuration stages of the process.
Access to the wind tunnel in the Air Flow Lab in Crosby Hall gave the group an opportunity to test model
wing configurations and compare the results to our 2D XFLR5 data. This experimental data would provide
more realistic numbers for aerodynamic coefficients (such as lift coefficient, drag coefficient, etc.) than the
XFLR5 data which ignore the aerodynamic effects of finite wing span. The goals of the wind tunnel testing
are as follows:
Collect aerodynamic data for different wing configurations over the design range of Reynolds
numbers between 50,000 and 500,000.
Compare performance of different wing configurations and select the optimal configuration for
our craft.
16.2.2 Research
Once the group agreed that the wind tunnel experiments would be valuable, the flow in the tunnel was
probed with a hot film anemometer to determine the characteristics of the flow. The results made clear that
the current setup, shown in Figure 51, of the wind tunnel was inadequate for the following reasons:
Airspeed was too slow to match design Reynolds numbers with reasonably sized models.
Flow just downstream of the fan swirled significantly and passed through a sudden enlargement,
causing a wasteful pressure loss and recirculating flow.
The velocity was very unsteady throughout the tunnel, meaning the quality experimental results
would be diminished by vibrational effects.
In order to achieve the flow characteristics desired, modifications would need to be made to the wind
tunnel.
The flow needed to be conditioned in some way to provide the flow characteristics necessary for the
experiments. These modifications, shown in Figure 52, were proposed as additions to the wind tunnel to
improve flow quality and speed.
- 50 -
Figure 52 - Flow Straightening Proposal
To get an estimate of what the velocity of the flow would be at any part of the modified tunnel, an estimate
of the mass flow rate throughout the tunnel was needed. This was obtained by mapping the flow in the 3ft
by 3ft square hole downstream from the fan.
A grid was made out of kite string and duct tape to indicate where the 25 equally-spaced sample points
would be to probe the flow. The intersections of grid strings indicate measurement points as shown in
Figure 53.
The results, shown in Figure 54, show the non-uniformity of the speed over the cross section. The average
speed of 91.3 ft/s was used for calculating the average mass flow rate through the tunnel.
The required size of the test section was dictated by several design constraints:
Mach number in test section must not exceed 0.3 to avoid compressibility effects.
Velocity in the test section must yield Reynolds numbers throughout the design range from 50k to
500k.
- 51 -
The size of the test section should be large enough to accommodate wings with chord lengths
sized to meet the Reynolds number criteria.
Width of the test section should be 150% larger than the wingspan (eight to nine times the max
chord) to avoid side wall interference.
Height of the test section should be five times the max chord to avoid top and bottom wall
interference.
The cross section of the test section was kept rectangular for simplicity. An acceptable range for height and
width of the cross section was found by formulating the constraints on size (the five stated above) as
mathematical statements and solving for the dimensions. The dimensions of 36”x10” were within the
ranges and were chosen so that the nozzle only needed to converge vertically.
The duct was modeled in Solidworks and exported to ANSYS FLUENT for a detailed analysis of the flow
through the duct geometry. The inlet boundary condition was simply set to constant average velocity and
the flow direction and speed were visualized in CFD-Post as shown in Figure 55 and Figure 56.
The results of the CFD analysis indicated that speeds encountered in the test section might be higher than
expected and not as uniform over the entire cross section.
Figure 55 shows the streamlines through the duct and a velocity contour on the exit to show the
distribution of airspeed.
Figure 56 shows the contours of gage pressure on the duct walls. The pressure integrated over the bottom of
the converging duct created an aerodynamic force of nearly 1300 pounds, suggesting the need for a brace
structure underneath.
- 52 -
Figure 55 - Flow Streamlines Through Duct
After an advisor meeting with Professor Boyle, where the wind tunnel modification ideas were discussed,
he suggested that the fan would perform differently than expected since it would be pushing air through a
different pressure drop. That is, the fan would move a larger or smaller mass flow rate through the duct
depending on the pressure drop it drives against. This consideration suggested the need for more fluid
mechanics related information including:
Fan performance data for the Joy Manufacturing Axivane Fan (used in the Crosby wind tunnel)
Minor loss coefficients for the modifications placed in the duct
And a resource for useful tips on low speed wind tunnel design.
Unfortunately, the necessary resources that actually existed were unavailable until sometime in the spring
of 2013. This was determined to be too much of a set-back and the wind tunnel modification was
abandoned altogether. Modifications to the wind tunnel that would have cost hundreds of dollars and hours
of construction were too risky if they might not yield the flow needed for testing.
The data from XFLR5 was settled on as what would lead to the decision of what wing configuration to use.
Moving forward with that data had less associated risk than the wind tunnel modification and testing idea,
so it was regrettably abandoned.
- 53 -
16.3 Appendix C - Budget and Costs
- 54 -
Build Cost
Purch
Date Appoved QTY Description Unit $ Total $ Req #
2/12/2013 1 Asorted Balsa Wood $114.60 $114.60 6
2/12/2013 2 Epoxy $7.19 $14.38 6
2/12/2013 15 1/4" x 1/4" Squre Dowel $0.61 $9.15 6
2/12/2013 2 6 Pack Hinges $3.53 $7.06 6
2/12/2013 1 15 Pack Hinges $6.12 $6.12 6
2/12/2013 1 6 oz Gas Tank $4.35 $4.35 6
2/12/2013 1 Sealing Iron $19.99 $19.99 6
2/12/2013 1 Servo $13.99 $13.99 6
2/12/2013 2 Y Servo Wire Splitter $6.29 $12.58 6
2/12/2013 2 CA Glue $6.00 $12 6
2/12/2013 3 36" Servo Wire Extension $4.79 $14.37 6
2/12/2013 2 18" Servo Wire Extension $3.49 $6.98 6
2/12/2013 1 12" Servo Wire Extension $2.99 $2.99 6
2/12/2013 1 Servo $13.99 $13.99 6
2/12/2013 1 36" Servo Wire Extension $4.79 $4.79 6
2/12/2013 2 Flat Hinge Packs $5.00 $10 6
2/12/2013 4 18" Servo Wire Extensions $3.00 $12 6
2/12/2013 2 Servo Horn Extensions $3.00 $6 6
2/12/2013 1 Assorted Balsa $25.40 $25.40 6
3/28/2013 2 3/4" x 3/4" Aluminum Square Tube $2.95 $5.90 7
3/28/2013 2 1" x 1" Aluminum Square Tube $3.28 $6.56 7
4/17/2013 5 Monokote, Black, LXHV26 $13.99 $69.95 8
4/17/2013 1 Monokote, Trans Blue, LXHW63 $59.99 $59.99 8
- 55 -
16.4 Appendix D - Mech. Lab III (MEE 443) Report
Crosby Laboratory
University of Maine, Orono
MEE 443
April / May 2013
- 56 -
Table of Contents
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………….. 57
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………… 58
Experimental Objectives…………………………………………………………………………. 59
Experimental Theory……………………………………………………………………………… 62
Experimental Procedure…………………………………………………………………………. 65
- 57 -
16.4.1 Introduction
The MEE capstone project group authoring this report is the SAE Aero Design Team. The members
comprising this team are Ben Waller, David Chandpen, Joe Travaglini, Matt Maberry, Travis Cushman,
and Zach Veilleux. The goals of the group with respect to the project undertaken are guided by the rules
and restrictions of the competition involved. Specifically, the SAE Aero Design competition held annually
as an international event for college groups. This competition requires the design, testing, construction and
flight of small scale radio-controlled aerial vehicle. This is essentially a heavy lift competition, given that
points are awarded for the amount of mass carried around an aerial circuit with restraints on take off and
landing distances. The maximum weight of any vehicle is 55 pounds, and thus designing the lightest
possible aircraft capable of takeoff with desired payload is necessary. The powerplant of the aircraft must
be a designated 0.61 cubic inch displacement two stroke model aircraft engine running on nitromethane
fuel. Size restrictions on the vehicle are only a maximum combined length-width-height measurement of
225 inches. The main restriction on materials for construction is the outlaw of fiber reinforced plastics. The
vehicle must obtain lift under its own power within 200 feet, and must safely land again in a space of 400
feet. Accurate prediction of the aircraft capabilities are essential, as additional points are given for closely
matching the limits of theoretical lifting ability. These limitations and demands focus the design work of
the team, and have required a range of engineering considerations, from aerodynamic characteristics and
loads, to structural design planning for component integration. It is decided at this time that entering the
competition is not feasible for several reasons. However, the goal of the group remains to produce a
competition-worthy vessel of decent performance. Figure 1 shows an example of the type of aircraft
typically designed for the competition.
The experimental work constituting the MEE 443 project which has been performed involved measurement
of the capabilities of the aircraft power plant. It was desirable to obtain an accurate and real knowledge of
the thrust performance provided by the aircraft’s engine, which was already acquired, when mated with
several different propellers of slight variation. The amount of force with which the engine and propeller
combinations can pull is critical information for the project. While the aircraft has been kept light in
weight, there is undoubtedly be friction and inertia to be overcome on upon run up and take off.
Aerodynamic data regarding the chosen wing section and designed wing are known, and a target therefore
exists in terms of the speed required for takeoff. The thrust of the engine is the key parameter determining
whether this can be accomplished inside of the limited distance afforded by the competition rules. The
engine thrust also plays a large role in the performance of the aircraft once it is aloft and relying on the
energy transferred from the engine to the air as a motive force. Design of the aircraft proceeded with
technical estimates and predictions of the engine performance, but experimental data is desired.
Specifically, the group has produced a number of data curves, plotting pulling force of the engine/propeller
combination versus RPM, for several different propellers. The competition rules do not designate any
specific propeller for usage. That is, no propeller is mandated. The group acquired several propellers of
varying pitch and diameter, including one with three blades as opposed to the standard two-blade jobs. The
group has prepared visualization of the thrust provided by each of the propellers over a range RPM
conceivable for the engine to operate at. This data is comparable to the estimates made and allows for
assurance that the aircraft will be able to obtain appropriate groundspeed to generate sufficient airflow over
the wings for takeoff with the current wing design.
The independent variables measured are the forward pulling force generated by the apparatus (propellers
coupled to the engine), and the rotational speed of the propeller, in revolutions per minute.
- 58 -
16.4.1.4 NATURE OF EXPERIMENT
The experiment required several people to operate successfully. One person was needed to control the light
source, one person was be required to operate the throttle of the engine, and one person was needed to
monitor the recording of the data.
The details of the assembly and the experimental process are described in more detail below.
The objectives for the thrust test experiment of the Magnum engine and propeller combinations were
broken into two categories as follows:
The following results are desired for each of the four propellers currently in the group’s possession.
The above measurement and results have been sufficient to allow the group to compare the propellers
directly, as well as predict takeoff capabilities of the aircraft by utilizing the data. Overall, meeting the
objectives has produced a more accurate idea of the aircraft performance.
- 59 -
16.4.3 Apparatus, Equipment, and Instrumentation
In order to fulfill the requirements designated by the objectives portion of the proposal documentation, the
experimental setup and apparatus touched on above were developed. The arrangement, as it was utilized, is
described as follows:
The whole system was arranged and contained on a relatively large, level surface Namely, a laboratory
workbench desktop outside Crosby Hall. Clamped securely to one end of the lab bench was be an
aluminum beam mounted with strain gauges and wired to accept leads to an ADC. This arrangement was
very similar to that of a laboratory experiment performed in one of the Mechanical Laboratory classes, and
as such was advantageous to the group members. This aluminum beam was mounted longitudinally parallel
to the desk top, such that the direction weakest to bending was subjected to a force from the engine thrust.
The beam was calibrated before the test began.
The force on the beam resulted from the aircraft engine, linked to the beam by the fishing line. Some of the
aluminum beams used in the laboratory have small holes drilled near the ends, through which a cable could
be passed and tied to a pin on the other side, preventing it from passing back through, and modeling the
contact as a point load. This appeared to be the most convenient method for fastening to the beam, and was
indeed employed. On the other end was a stand made from square steel tubing cut to accept the linkage in a
similar manner. This was anchored to the bench using C-clamps. Also fixed to this platform was the engine
and propeller combination. This setup was suited so the propeller tip had necessary clearance over the
surface of the bench. The platform to which the engine attached was only able move perpendicular to the
aluminum beam, such that no component of the thrust acted at an angle to the measurement device, thereby
diminishing the accuracy of the reading. This was assured by utilizing a pair of conventional drawer slides
mounted to the platform, and contained on either side by a section of 2x4 holding the corresponding tracks
for the slides.
At the other end, the aluminum beam arrangement was be wired to an ADC connected to the DAQ device
for automated storage of data.
Data to be taken in addition to the thrust was the RPM of the propeller as well as the fuel consumption of
the engine. The fuel tank was placed on the same platform as the engine due to length restrictions on the
fuel lines. The RPM was measured by a simple voltage divider circuit with one resistor as a reference
resistor and the other as a light-sensitive photoresistor. A light source was set on the opposite side of the
propeller from the photoresistor circuit so that the blades interrupted the light every time they passed
between them. The output from the voltage divider was a time-varying, periodic, analog signal sent to the
ADC. The frequency of the signal was computed by a LabView VI from which the RPM was calculated
based on the number of blades on the propeller.
Engine fuel consumption was be measured by weighing the full fuel tank before the run and the partially
depleted tank after the run. This determined the weight of fuel consumed. The specific weight of the fuel
was measured by weighing a known volume of fuel and dividing that weight by the volume. Then, the
volume of fuel consumed in the test was calculated based on the difference in fuel tank weight before and
after the experiment and the specific weight of the fuel.
- 60 -
16.4.3.2 INSTRUMENTATION
(Cont’d)
- 61 -
Figure 58 - Plan View of Experimental Setup
The idea behind this experiment was essentially to mirror a simple cantilever beam experiment, the type of
which has been included in the Mechanical Laboratory curriculum here at the University. The goal was to
use the cantilever beam as a scale to measure unknown thrust forces produced by the engine. By first
applying known loads to the beam and measuring the response, unknown loads may later be determined by
examining the behavior of the beam when loaded.
The theory and derivation of using a rectangular beam’s strain as a scale is as follows:
It can be shown through basic strengths of materials type analysis that by calibration, Equation 6 can be
used to relate the loads P and T on a rectangular beam to the strain at some location.
εA = k1P
Equation 6
Where P represents the load force. Note that for the experimental setup proposed, the load path from the
engine to the beam is such that at the attachment to the beam, where the load is applied, pure bending is
approximated, and negligible torsion of the aluminum will occur. No element of the structure undergoes a
torsional load and thus torsional effects are ignored.
Equation 7
Equation 8
- 62 -
Where:
= Stress(lb/in2)
E = Young’s Modulus for the material (lb/in2).
= Strain (dimensionless)
Equation 9
Where:
I = (bh3)/12
Equation 10
Where:
b = width of cross-section(in)
h = height of cross-section, its thickness(in)
z = h/2
Equation 11
Where:
Substituting this equation for the bending moment into Equation 9 Equation 9 the
result is:
Equation 12
Or in a different form:
Equation 13
- 63 -
Substituting Equation 13 into Equation 8 yields the strain at a given point along the beam:
ɛ= Equation 14
Thus:
ɛ = k1P
Equation 15
ɛ=
So we have:
k1P
k1 =
Before the experiment, as noted in the introduction, the beam was calibrated. The process in which the
beam is calibrated will be explained later on in greater detail in the procedure section. However, it is
important to note the significance of the calibration process. By placing a variety of known loads on a point
of the beam, a series of strains is induced. Each different load will have a matching strain that can be read
and recorded for later use.
Repeating this loading process yields a series of data that can be adapted into a graphical format. This
graph, theoretically, will be a straight line of constant slope, as described above in Eq. 7. Using the
equation of the line that can be generated easily by programs such as Excel, one will see that there will be
some error in the data collected from calibration, a “y-intercept”.
ɛA = k1P + b
Equation 16
where ɛA is the induced strain from the applied load, P, k1 is the slope of the line and b is the y-axis
intercept(error).
During the thrust testing, a series of strain values was collected from unknown thrusts. And as the equation
of the line is known from calibration, on top of those strain, ɛ values collected from the experiment, the
unknown thrust values, P, for each strain reading have been determined.
- 64 -
16.4.5.1 EXPERIMENTAL METHOD
The first step in the experimental procedure was to inspect the setup and ensure that all components were
secure. The aluminum beam was calibrated to be accurate and useful for experimentation per the above
discussion. To do this, it was clamped in the same position where it was used while the engine arrangement
was linked to it. A reading of strain with zero load was recorded while in this position. Following this, the
beam was turned so that the short cross sectional dimension was perpendicular to the load direction. A
mass hanger was placed near the end of the beam (the same point at which it was pulled later). Several data
points will be taken by placing increasing amounts of mass on the hangar and recording the stain indicated
by LabView. These data points were used to find the calibration slope as described in the previous section.
The zero load strain taken first was be used as the curve intercept. It was assumed that the slope of the
calibration curve will independent of load orientation During the experiment, the beam was again situated
as it was for the zero-load reading of strain.
The fuel was be measured out, pumped into the fuel tank, and then weighed. The tank was then secured to
the cart and fed to the engine.
The light source was turned on and directed at the photoresistor, with the propeller arc between the two.
The computer was started and LabView opened. Any conversions or computations which the program
needed to do while recording data were set up in the interface beforehand. Data acquisition was set up to
record information for the propeller attached to the engine at that time. In all, three different propellers
were tested. The ability to measure the frequency and strain was checked before proceeding.
The National Instruments data acquisition chassis (NI cDAQ-9174) was located and set near the in-house
built setup. The two analog signal input modules, the NI 9205 and NI 9129, are placed into slots 1 and 2 on
the cDAQ chassis, respectively. The power adapter needed to power the chassis was then connected
between a standard 120 VAC outlet and the appropriate power receptacle located on the front face of the
cDAQ chassis. After connecting the power adapter, the green "POWER" and orange "ACTIVE" lights
appear, indicating the cDAQ chassis has power and is operational. The USB cable was then connected
between the workstation computer and the appropriate USB port, also located on the front face of the
chassis.
The next step was to connect the tachometer cables to the NI 9205 Analog Module. Using alligator clips,
connections were made between the output and ground pins on the tachometer circuit board to the
appropriate terminals on the NI9205. Using the two banana plugs with one end stripped to the wire, output
to Pin 1 on the NI 9205 Module was connected. Another connection was made in the same manner for the
grounded signal to Pin 19 on the NI 9205 Module. These connections ensure the measurements are being
recorded on the differential channel configuration; the output signal voltage is referenced to negative signal
voltage, which then mathematically relates to a differential analog signal.
All that's left was to connect the strain gage setup and the Elenco Power Supply to the NI 9219 Analog
Module. The male end of the banana plug, with the other end stripped to the wire, was connected to the
Variable 2-20V output on the Elenco Power Supply. The connection from the red variable output was
connected to the stripped end to Pin 2 on the NI 9219 Module. The connection from the black "Com"
terminal of the variable output was connected this to Pin 20 on the NI 9219 Module. Taking the stripped
wires that were connected to the appropriate strain gage slots on the end of the strain bridge, connections
were made for the red positive wire to Pin 4, the black negative wire to Pin 5, and the white output wire to
pin 6 on Channel 0 on the NI 9219 Module.
Once all connections were made, the thrust test setup was nearly complete; the next step was to create the
virtual interface which will run the programmable experiment and record the desirable responses. This was
achieved by utilizing the data acquisition software LabView previously installed on the workstation
computer.
- 65 -
Once LabView has been started, a new Virtual Interface (VI) can be created to begin programming and
acquiring data for any given experiment. Using the Functions Palette, the DAQ Assistant function can be
used to setup the input signals from the two sensors which is read and processed by LabView once the
program is running. This function allows for unit configuration, signal input ranges, terminal configuration,
max and min voltage settings, number of samples to read, the rate at which data is recorded, and many
other parameters.
Once the DAQ Assistant function block is setup, the frequency detected by the tachometer and the thrust
force acquired through the strain calibration can be graphed as functions of time that are approximately
real-time readings. However, the output signal reading from the tachometer needs to be converted from Hz
to RPM by a factor of 60 and a factor of 1665 is applied to accurately convert between the strain
experienced and the force generated by the engine.
Once the Waveform Graph function shows accurate readings for frequency and force responses, the last
step before running the experiment was to use the Write To Measurement File function from the Functions
Palette. This allows for recorded data to be saved to a file or drive for easy access to analyze data. A
completed version of the VI Bock Diagram for recording the frequency and force transients is shown below
in Figure 59.
From the figure above, the DAQ Assistant is setup to read the strain and appropriately convert it to thrust
force through proper calibration techniques. The DAQ Assistant2 is setup to read from the analog
tachometer reading and channel it through 14 different filters to eliminate 60 Hz noise, set high and low
frequency filters, and eliminate any offset disturbances. The resulting frequency is then extracted and
converted to RPM in order to determine which prop can be used to generate the most thrust throughout the
throttle's range of operation.
Remote control of the throttle was ensured, and the needle valve of the engine was adjusted for startup. The
glow plug igniter was taken from its charger, and here used to warm the glow plug
- 66 -
The engine was then primed and started, given that all group members were in safe positions. Good data
being recorded, the engine was run at speed for some recorded time. The engine was then stopped, and the
fuel tank weighed again.
The next step was to start the engine again. The throttle was slowly opened to increase the rotational speed
of the engine and propeller, and thus the thrust. This continued until the engine reached the highest
obtainable RPM, at which point the throttle was closed, all while recording data.
The propeller was then be interchanged with the next, and the previous steps were repeated for each as
necessary.
Repetition of the tests was not necessary as for each throttle position, multiple sets of data are recorded for
that one position. As the throttle is fixed, the DAQ system records multiple different readings in small time
intervals. The repetition is done within the experiment itself, so there was no need to run through the entire
throttle range multiple times.
In the general interest of the group, and due to the fact that basic predictions were able to be made with
relative ease, the theoretical static thrust of one of the available propellers was calculated prior to
completion of the experiment. The goal of this calculation was to obtain a quantitative feel for the validity
of the results garnered in the laboratory experiment afterward. In the absence of another location in which
to discuss these predictions, a brief description of how they were made, and the theoretical results follows,
before the laboratory results.
An excellent source of aerodynamic data for low Reynolds number airfoils is the UIUC Data site,
maintained by University of Illinois professor Michael Selig. It was found that this data site also contains
performance data for select common “small” scale aircraft propellers. One of these is in fact, in possession
of the group. The propellers are listed by brand, diameter, and pitch.
The data given on the site graphically displays the propeller thrust coefficient versus RPM. Due to the
limited number of thrust coefficient-RPM data pairs, these were plotted and fitted with a trendline.The
specific propeller is the APC brand 11x7.
(Cont’d)
- 67 -
RPM
C_to APC 11x7 Static Thrust Coefficient vs. RPM
1800 0.144
0.165
2100 0.145
2400 0.1465
0.16
2700 0.148
3000 0.1495 0.155
C_to
3300 0.151 y = 8E-11x 2 + 4E-06x + 0.1361
3600 0.1525 0.15
3900 0.1535
4200 0.1545 0.145
4500 0.1565
0.14
4800 0.158
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
5100 0.16 RPM
5400 0.161
Ct0 vs. RPM Poly. (Ct0 vs. RPM)
5700 0.1625
Figure 60 - Data Table and Plot of Static Thrust Coefficient v. RPM for APC 11x7
As can be seen from the trendline equation on the plot, the trendline fitted to the data is:
This was used to acquire data points for a wider range of RPM and with increased resolution, due to the
fact that predictions were desired at values of RPM between those given with the thrust coefficients. With
virtually any thrust coefficient in hand, all was ready to utilize the thrust equation:
T = ((0.5)*(rho)*((omega)^2)*(pi)*((D)^4)*(C_t))
Equation 18
where:
T = thrust
Rho = air density
Omega = propeller rotational rate, RPM
D = propeller diameter, in inches
C_t = thrust coefficient
Calculations of thrust were made with this formula over a range of 0 to 10,000 RPM, with standard sea
level density. The results are plotted below:
- 68 -
Theoretical Propeller STATIC Thrust vs. RPM (APC 11x7)
18
16
14
12
Thrust (lbf)
10
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Angular Rate (RPM)
As can be seen above, the thrust seems to vary parabolically with RPM as might be expected from the
(omega)^2 term in the thrust equation.
It should be noted that the APC 11x7 propeller was not actually tested in the experiment due to the fact that
is was found to be designed for electric motors, and also had several chips. However, another 11x7 was
tested.
The experiment was completed over the course of a single day. Three propellers were tested. These are as
follows:
First, the calibration of the beam scale was completed. The results of the calibration are included in the
appendix of the report.
A description of the LabView VI and the experimental setup for data acquisition was not fully included in
the preliminary sections written before this point due to the fact that it could they could not be known with
certainty at that point, beyond the hardware needed. These will be included in the “Apparatus, Theory and
Procedure” Section of the final report, rather than here in the results, where such information would be out
of place.
The VI was used to acquire data in real time at a high sampling rate, and so a large amount of data points
were generated. For this reason, all of the data obtained in the thrust testing will not be included in the
report. The data was written to a spreadsheet. The data is presented graphically below.
- 69 -
1. Evo Brand 11x7:
0
6500 13000
RPM
thrsut vs rpm Poly. (thrsut vs rpm)
0
5500 6500 7500 8500 9500 10500 11500 12500
RPM
- 70 -
3. K-Series Master Airscrew
K Series Master Aiscrew Thrust vs. RPM
5
y = 1E-07x 2 - 0.002x + 8.4639
4
Thrust (lbf)
0
6500 7500 8500 9500 10500 11500 12500
RPM
Initially examining the results of the testing for each propeller, one can make a number of observations.
First, the pattern of each plot is relatively successful in matching the parabolic behavior predicted by the
initial calculations based on thrust coefficient data. This lends a measure of validity to the thrust
experimentation.
Second, there is some significant scatter in the data. This in reality was to be expected, as in the dynamic
system of even a restrained propeller / engine combination, some motion and play in the system is evident.
One cannot expect a clean pattern of curves to result. This is one reason the group aimed to use data
acquisition to sample a large number of thrust/RPM pairs over time. Trend lines (second order quadratic)
have been fitted to each plot to model the behavior of each propeller. These trend lines are used later for a
direct comparison of the propellers. The curve fit equations are presented on the plots above.
Third, one will note that for any given value of RPM, the values of thrust obtained in the experiment are
much lower than those predicted theoretically. It should be noted that a direct comparison of the theoretical
results and the experimental results is not made because the propeller used for theoretical predictions was
unable to be tested. Reliably sourced data is as yet unknown for making prediction of thrust with the
propellers which were used in experimentation. However, qualitatively, one can see that in the upper range
of RPM, experimental results only yield approximately 25-30% of the predicted magnitude. There are
many potential reasons for this. The rolling track system utilized in the experiment is not by any means
friction less, although good effort was made in minimizing the resistance to motion. The test was
performed outdoor, and so the propeller was subject to crosswind conditions etc. as it would be in actual
flight. The non-rigid linkage between the beam scale and the rolling cart allowed for small backward
motion in some instances and the line would perhaps have a tendency to pull taught and then slacken
repeatedly, which may account for some scatter in the data.
The beam scale was properly calibrated before the test began. However, during calibration it was noted that
once loaded and unloaded, the beam would respond with different output if loaded again. During
calibration there was significant scatter in the output measurements which made fitting a curve for
calibration relatively difficult. This most like contributed to some inaccuracy when comparing the
experimental and theoretical results. Again, the beam calibration data can be seen in the appendix rather
- 71 -
than here in the results section. However, results remain in a reasonable range for competition standard and
are expected to be completely usable values of thrust for the aircraft configuration.
One of the goals of the experiment was to determine the maximum value of thrust afforded by the engine /
propeller system. Listed below are the maximum values of thrust given by each of the tested propellers, and
the corresponding RPM value.
Based on the above table, the Evo 11x7 clearly gave the highest value of thrust recorded at any point in the
experimentation, and achieved this thrust at a higher value of RPM than the other two in the testing.
A second goal of the experiment was to determine the most adequate propeller for use in flight. Although
the data in Table 2 is taken into consideration when determining this, the highest value of thrust seen is not
the only parameter looked at. The three trend lines generated above are plotted below for a better
simultaneous comparison of the propellers over a typical RPM range.
6
Thrust (lbf)
0
6500 7500 8500 9500 10500 11500 12500 13500
RPM
Cleary, while the Evo 11x7 generated the highest overall single value of thrust, if a curve is fit to its scatter
data points, an overall lower trend than the other two propellers emerges. The other two propellers contend
for highest overall trended thrust value.
In the application of the project, it is intended to optimize maximum pulling force, due to the fact that in
takeoff this is desirable. For very heavy scale aircraft, such as the one to which the engine will be fixed, it
is likely that a large percentage of flight time will be spent with the throttle a good deal of the way open
and the prop blades turning in the higher range of RPM. Thus, it is a good idea to prioritize performance in
the higher half of the x-axis of Figure 6. Throughout essentially all of the tested and useful range of RPM,
the Evo 12x6 propeller produces the greatest pulling force. Although the K-Series Master Airscrew begins
to overtake as the rate continues to grow, the choice of the group for actual implementation is the Evo 12x6
- 72 -
The level of uncertainty in the thrust measurements was found using the data taken throughout the
calibration of the beam scale used. A linear curve was fit to the plot of load vs. voltage ratio to model the
behavior of the beam for later reference. Values from this calibration curve equation were used in
conjunction with the methods presented in the uncertainty level portion of this document, above. The
uncertainty for any given measurement of thrust was found to be +/- 0.527 lbf. This is very close to the
uncertainty level desired by the group during initial formulation of the experiment. A plot of the calibration
curve created for the experiment can be seen in the appendices of the report.
A third goal of the experimentation was to measure the fuel consumption of the engine. To do this, the
experimental procedure above was followed. The fuel consumption was measured after preliminary
examination of the other experimental data.
Initially the tank was filled with 50 mL of nitromethane fuel. The engine was fitted with the Evo 12x6
propeller the group plans to use during flight, and was left running at half throttle for a timed 5 minutes.
The amount of fuel left in the tank was then measured again and found to be 13.5 mL. Thus the average
rate of fuel consumption was calculated as 7.3 mL/min.
The tank size implemented in the fuselage, when completely full, will hold 6 fluid ounces, or 177.4 mL of
fuel. Calculating the total time which can be spent in the air with average rate of fuel consumption, we have
a total of 24 minutes of flying time. This is more than sufficient for the goals of the competition, and would
certainly allow for more aggressively throttled flight for some duration as well.
A typical build-up of uncertainty for an experiment of this nature would start at the base level of
measurement, with the uncertainties of the instruments and tools used in the procedure. The resolution or
certainty of measurement achievable with said devices will lead to the magnitude of uncertainty in the data
and parameters desired, and this propagates to the results. Obviously, the results’ uncertainties must be
evaluated as desirable or not, and subsequent adjustments may need to be made.
However, the scenario for the experiment proposed here is somewhat different. While the measurement of
the pulling force exerted by the propeller depends on the measurement of the strain, and the strain
measurements can be arrived at using beam bending theory, the uncertainties of parameters such as the
Young’s Modulus and beam dimensions need not be directly reconciled. This is due to the fact that the
beam will be utilized to generate a calibration curve by applying known loads and measuring the response.
Creating this curve and using it as a basis for the results effectively takes into account the aforementioned
uncertainties. Instead, the uncertainty desired is the uncertainty of using the calibration curve, which results
from the uncertainty of the strain gauge response when subjected to load. When the experiment is done, the
reading taken by the data acquisition system will be the voltage across the resistance of the strain gauges.
The aluminum beam scale to be used as a transducer is to be calibrated so that the relationship between
output voltage and force applied will be known to sufficient precision. The relationship that is expected
between force and voltage ratio (output voltage divided by excitation voltage) is a linear one, assuming the
following conditions are satisfied:
- 73 -
That is, the curve formed from the data collected during calibration should take on the following form:
where:
VOUT is the output voltage (measured across the bottom strain gage)
VEX is the excitation voltage
P is the force applied to the beam and
a and b are constants.
Data is collected during the calibration process with a known load applied and several measurements of
voltage ratio taken. Scattering of data about an average value of voltage ratio is expected since the signal,
in general, will contain noise.
The constants, a and b come from the equation of the linear regression computed from the data. The
equation is then inverted so that the force is a function of voltage ratio like so:
The norm of residuals computed from the data is then taken to represent the uncertainty in the force, W p.
where:
The value of this uncertainty in force will not be known until data is collected. Very small uncertainties,
while attractive, are not necessary to achieve the goal of comparing different propeller performances unless
their performance curves are very close. Furthermore, if two propellers have very nearly the same thrust
performance over the throttle range, the choice of propeller would not make much of a difference anyway.
In conclusion, the precisions and resolutions of the devices used in the experiment (see Theory and
Apparatus section) will be more than adequate to yield results with uncertainties low enough for the
purpose of propeller selection and estimate of maximum static thrust capability. Due to the supposed
suitability of the current proposed devices, the procedure could remain unaltered.
The measurement of fuel consumption rate will consist of weighing the fuel tank before and after a run at a
fixed throttle level with the selected propeller mounted. The fuel weight consumed divided by the time
elapsed over the run will be the resulting average fuel consumption rate. Since only weights and times are
measured, the uncertainty in fuel consumption rate is only a function of precision of two devices:
the scale upon which fuel and tank weight are measured and
the stopwatch (along with its operator) used to measure start and stop times for the run
- 74 -
Equation 19
where:
It might seem strange at first that ti, the time at the start of the run, is not just taken to be exactly zero and
ignored in the uncertainty analysis. Keep in mind that there is error due to the stopwatch and the stopwatch
operator that prevents the start time of the stopwatch from being exactly equal to the start time of the
engine. Indeed, this will add to the total uncertainty in the average fuel consumption rate.
The average fuel consumption rate, as a function of four variables shown above, will have an uncertainty
dependent on the precision of the measurement devices as well as the sensitivities of the consumption rate
to each independent measured variable. This relationship, from a Klein-McClintock analysis, is shown
below.
Equation 20
where:
δW is the uncertainty in measurement of weight (0.1 oz)
δt is the uncertainty in measurement of time (0.5 s)
Which are the magnitudes of the data parameter uncertainties which have been selected.
The partial derivatives represent the sensitivity of average fuel consumption rate to each independent
variable. These partial derivatives may be found by differentiating Equation 19 symbolically and plugging
in nominal values for the independent variables to obtain a number for the sensitivities. This will be
demonstrated here for the sensitivity to Wf only, with an expected run time of 15 minutes and final and
initial weights of 5oz and 1oz, respectively.
After all uncertainties and sensitivities are computed, Equation 20 will yield the overall uncertainty in the
measurement of average fuel consumption rate.
Taking the estimate of average fuel consumption rate to be 4oz per 900 seconds, the relative uncertainty
can be computed.
- 75 -
This estimate of uncertainty of 3.5% is adequate as it is under the 5% upper limit imposed. Thus, one may
conclude that the scale accurate to the tenth-ounce and the time-keeping accurate to the half-second will
yield results of sufficiently low uncertainty for average rate of fuel consumption.
Given the above quality of the results uncertainty, the bounds on the data parameters selected above do not
need to be tightened and the procedure can remain as suggested previously.
- 76 -
16.4.8 Mech. Lab Appendix B: Beam Calibration
When the beam scale used in the experiment was calibrated in the manner described throughout the report
above, the following calibration curve was produced:
The equation representing this curve was used in the VI setup to compute values of thrust produced by the
engine in real time. Numerical tabulation of calibration data is avoided in the report as it is seen as
unnecessary to the accurate description of the group’s methods.
- 77 -
16.5 Appendix E - Flight Simulation Code
clear all
clc
format short g
%Aspect Ratio
AR=9;
mu=3.848*10^-7;
Rho=0.0023769; %Slugs/ft^3
gravity=32.1740;
CL=1.48;
CD=0.01541;
count=0;
Count=0;
for T=4.88:7.88
for weight=35:5:50
for I=9:18
count=count+1;
Chord=I/12;
Wingspan=.85*Chord*AR;
% Wingspan=Chord*AR;
%Surface area of airfoil (ft^2)
% Area = Chord*Wingspan;
Area=Wingspan^2/AR;
Mass=weight/gravity;
%Lift Calculations
LiftCo=.5*Rho*CL*Area;
sim('MotionEq2')
rows = length(Pos_x(:,1));
Lift=Lift2(rows,2);
if Lift>weight
Count=Count+1;
K(Count,1)=T;
K(Count,2)=weight;
- 78 -
K(Count,3)=Chord;
K(Count,4)=Wingspan;
K(Count,5)=Lift; %Lift at takeoff distance
K(Count,6)=V_x(rows,2);
end
end
end
end
K
end
- 79 -
16.6 Appendix F - Servo Performance MathCAD Worksheet
- 80 -
- 81 -
16.7 Appendix G - Engine Specs
- 82 -
- 83 -
- 84 -
16.8 Appendix H – Project Timeline
- 85 -
16.9 Appendix I – Team Photograph
[L to R: Travis Cushman, Ben Waller, Zach Veilleux, David Chandpen, Joe Travaglini, Matt Maberry]
- 86 -