Conceptual Design Report SU Design/build/fly 2015-2016 SU DBF 2015-2016

Agenda Mission Requirements Design Requirements Configuration Selection Sizing Program Score Predictions Regional Competition Management SU DBF 2015-2016

Mission Requirements – Scoring Score = Written Report Score * Total Mission Score / RAC Total Mission Score = MF1 * MF2 * PF + Bonus RAC = EW1 * Wt_Battery1 * N_Components + EW2 * Wt_Battery2 SU DBF 2015-2016

SU DBF 2015-2016

Mission 1 Manufacturing Support Aircraft Arrival Flight Scoring Fly 3 laps in 5 minutes No payload Scoring 2.0 points for completion 0.1 points for incompletion or failure SU DBF 2015-2016

Mission 2 Manufacturing Support Aircraft Payload Delivery Flight 10 minute time limit Carry sub-assemblies of production aircraft internally One lap with each sub-assembly group No limit to number of flights made Production aircraft battery does not need to be carried Scoring 4.0 points for completion 1.0 points for at least 1 successful delivery 0.1 points for unattempt or failure SU DBF 2015-2016

Mission 3 Production Aircraft Flight Scoring Carry a 32 oz Gatorade bottle internally Fly 3 laps in 5 minutes Scoring 2.0 points for completion 1.0 point for partial completion (did not complete all 3 laps) 0.1 points for no attempt or failure SU DBF 2015-2016

Bonus Mission Production Aircraft Assembly Scoring First three missions must be successful Assemble the production aircraft in 2 minutes along with installation of payload Wing tip test and control systems check Scoring 2.0 points for completion 0.0 points for failure/unattempt SU DBF 2015-2016

Design Constraints Takeoff Distance Propulsion Systems Payload Limited to 100 ft takeoff Propulsion Systems All components must be commercially available Propeller driven and electrically powered NiCad or NiMH batteries must be used Any cell count, voltage, capacity No limit to weight of systems Payload Must be carried internally for Missions 2 and 3 Must be securely fastened SU DBF 2015-2016

Key Design Features Empty weight Battery weight Number of production aircraft sub-assemblies Payload requirements SU DBF 2015-2016

Configuration Selection Aircraft Configuration Wing Configuration Wing Placement Motor Configuration Landing Gear Configuration Tail Configuration SU DBF 2015-2016

Aircraft Configuration Mono High aspect ratio, low induced drag, inherently stable, relatively easy to build Large wingspan, leads to structural weaknesses due to stress, higher profile drag due to more aerodynamic surfaces Bi More wing area means smaller wings, easier to break down, more lift-providing surface, more stable Requires more connections and support, adding weight and drag Tri High lift, high stability High weight and drag, low maneuverability, very complex Flying Great lift/drag ratio, less parts, less connections and weight, easy to make Low repairability, incapable of carrying mission payload unless it’s very large SU DBF 2015-2016

Wing Configuration Dihedral Anhedral Polyhedral Straight More stable plane, combats dihedral effect of slipstreams, higher ground clearance Slightly difficult to make, angles on each side must be identical Anhedral More maneuverable, allows for faster turns Could roll more easily, less stable in flight, possible ground clearance issues, angles on each side must be identical Polyhedral High stability and maneuverability Very complex, difficult to manufacture reliably and break down Straight Easy to manufacture Doesn’t excel in any particular area SU DBF 2015-2016

Wing Placement High Mid Low Creates pendulum effect with plane’s weight, very stable; clearance from ground allows for wing-mounted engines Less maneuverability Mid More “centered” center of gravity, more balanced plane overall, more maneuverability Requires a support through fuselage which complicates housing a payload Low Landing gear can fit on wings Weight above wings makes it less maneuverable, possibly susceptible to rolls SU DBF 2015-2016

Motor Configuration Single Tractor Single Pusher Wing Mounted Weighs less, requires less takeoff space, moves center of gravity forward Propwash creates induced drag, compromises stability Single Pusher Payload can be loaded from front Center of gravity moved back, potentially behind center of lift Wing Mounted More thrust available, easier to lift payload and accomplish missions faster, could balance out aircraft Dependent on wing structure, much heavier due to extra motor, electronics, and structural elements SU DBF 2015-2016

Landing Gear Configuration Tail Dragger Most stable, tilts plane backward, increasing angle of attack, allowing for shorter takeoff distance Potential danger for propeller to clear the ground during landing Tricycle Very stable, wheels directly below center of gravity and lift, reliable taxiing and landing In-flight drag from wheels and support structure, generally heavier than other configurations Bicycle Generally lightest option, least amount of in-flight drag Wings may hit ground upon landing, taxiing is difficult without ability to steer SU DBF 2015-2016

Tail Configuration Conventional T-Tail H-Tail V-Tail More durable, needs less reinforcement, easier to service and design 3 separate parts T-Tail Ground clearance Weaker because only one mounting attachment H-Tail More control surface area, easier to turn, increased resistance to yaw motion Higher drag, multiple parts V-Tail Fewer parts, less drag Complex to design and build, angle must be accurate SU DBF 2015-2016

Figures of Merit SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Manufacturing Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Manufacturing Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Manufacturing Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Manufacturing Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Manufacturing Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Manufacturing Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Manufacturing Aircraft Monoplane High wing anhedral Single tractor motor Tricycle landing gear Conventional tail SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Production Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Production Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Production Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Production Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Production Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Production Aircraft SU DBF 2015-2016

Selection Matrices – Production Aircraft Monoplane High wing (straight) Single tractor motor Tail dragger landing gear Conventional tail SU DBF 2015-2016

Sizing Program WORK IN PROGRESS SU DBF 2015-2016

Score Predictions WORK IN PROGRESS SU DBF 2015-2016

Regional Competition Tentative date: April 2 Tentative location: Rome, NY Reached out to about 30 schools 4 definite responses SU DBF 2015-2016

Management SU DBF 2015-2016