1 / 33

AAE 451 Aircraft Design

AAE 451 Aircraft Design. First Flight Boiler Xpress November 21, 2000 Team Members Oneeb Bhutta, Matthew Basiletti , Ryan Beech, Mike Van Meter Professor Dominick Andrisani. 3-D Views. 11ft. 6ft. Aerodynamic Design Issues. Lift Low Reynolds Number Regime Slow Flight Requirements

finn-frazier
Download Presentation

AAE 451 Aircraft Design

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. AAE 451 Aircraft Design First Flight Boiler Xpress November 21, 2000 Team Members Oneeb Bhutta, Matthew Basiletti , Ryan Beech, Mike Van Meter Professor Dominick Andrisani

  2. 3-D Views 11ft 6ft

  3. Aerodynamic Design Issues • Lift • Low Reynolds Number Regime • Slow Flight Requirements • Drag • Power Requirements • Accurate Performance Predications • Stability and Control • Trimmability • Roll Rate Derivatives

  4. Low Reynolds Number Challenges Separation Bubble-to be avoided! • Laminar Flow -more Prone to Separation • Airfoil Sections designed for Full-sized Aircraft • don’t work well for below Rn=800,000 • Our Aircraft Rn=100,000-250,000

  5. Airfoil Selection Wing: Selig S1210 CLmax = 1.53 Incidence= 3 deg Tail sections: flat plate for Low Re Incidence = -5 deg

  6. Drag Prediction • Assume Parabolic Drag Polar Based on Empirical Fit of Existing Aircraft

  7. Parasite Drag Drag Build-up Method of Raymer (Ref. Raymer eq.12.27 & eq.12.30) Blasius’ Turbulent Flat Plate- Adjusted for Assumed Surface Roughness

  8. Aircraft Drag Polar 0.16 CD CDi 0.14 CDo 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 CL Drag Polar

  9. 32 30 28 26 24 Power Required [ft-lb/s] 22 20 18 16 15 20 25 30 35 40 Velocity [ft/s] Power Required • Predict: • Power required for • cruise • Battery energy for • cruise

  10. Aerodynamic Properties Wetted area = 44.5 sq.ft. Span Efficiency Factor = 0.75 CLa=5.3 / rad CL de =0.4749 /rad L/Dmax = 15.5 Vloiter = 24 ft/s CLmax = 1.53 CLcruise = 1.05 Xcg = 0.10-0.38 (% MAC) Static Margin = 0.12 at Xcg = 0.35

  11. 0.3 elev deflect=-8 deg -4 0 0.2 4 8 0.1 elev deflect=-8 deg -4 0 0 4 Cmcg 8 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3 -0.4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 CL Stability Diagram

  12. Flow Simulation

  13. Parasite Drag • CDo for Wing and Tail surfaces • For Fuselage, booms & pods (Ref. Raymer eq.12.31 & eq.12.33)

  14. Tail Geometry Horizontal Tail: Area = 2.2 Span = 3.0ft Chord = 0.73ft Vh = 0.50 Vertical Tail- 25% added Area = 1.75 sq.ft Span = 1.63 ft Chord = 0.60 ft Vv = 0. 044

  15. Control Surface Sizing: Elevator Area Ratio = 0.30 Chord = 2.7 in. Rudder Area Ratio = 0.40 Single rudder of chord = 7.5 in. Ailerons Area Ratio = 0.10 Aileron chord = 3 in.

  16. Rotation angle = 10deg Controls equipment Propulsion component 17.54 in. Airframe component Tip Back angle= 15deg Miscellaneous Weight Equipment Layout & CG.

  17. Equipment Layout (3-D)

  18. Vvert=2.2ft/s g = -5 deg Landing Loads Vland=1.3Vstall=25ft/s For d = 1 in., k = 15.2 lb/in For 1 inch strut travel, peak load = 15.2 lb sspar = 240 psi on landing

  19. Static Margin, Aerodynamic Center, and c.g. Xac = 0.46 Xcg = 0.35 SM = 0.11

  20. Horizontal and Vertical Tail Sizing Vh - Horizontal tail volume coefficient = 0.50 Vv - Vertical tail volume coefficient = 0.044

  21. Control Surface Sizing • Based on historical data from Roskam Part II Tables 8.1 and 8.2. Homebuilts Single Engine 0.095 0.08 0.42 0.36 0.44 0.42

  22. Control Surface Sizing (cont.) • Sa = 1.35ft2 • Sr = 0.80ft2 • Se = 1.00ft2 • Max. surface deflection is 15 deg.

  23. Climb Performance • Max. Climb Angle, G G = 7.3 deg.

  24. Turning Performance • Maximum turn rate r = 50ft Vmax = 28ft/s Y= 0.28rad/s

  25. Propulsion Design Issues • Power • Power required • Power available • Endurance • Can we complete the mission • Verification • Motor test to take place this week

  26. Power • Power required is determined by aircraft • Power available comes from the motor

  27. System Efficiencies • Propeller • 60-65% • Gearbox • 95% • Motor • 90% • Speed Controller • 95% Total System Efficiency 50.7%

  28. System Components • Propeller • Freudenthaler 16x15 and 14x8 folding • Gearbox • “MonsterBox” (6:1,7:1,9.6:1) • Motor • Turbo 10 GT (10 cells) • Speed Controller • MX-50

  29. Economics • Preliminary Design • 525 man-hours @ $75 = $39,375 • Testing • 50 man-hours @ $75 = $3,750 • $81.70 in materials

  30. Economics • Prototype Manufacturing • 300 man-hours @ $75 = $22,500 • $417.35 in materials • Flight Testing • $900 • Prototype manufacturing budget • $200 max

  31. The Budget

  32. Total Project Cost • The Bottom Line $67,024.05

  33. Questions?

More Related