Final Design review December 5, 2000   ORION AEROSPACE Final Design review December 5, 2000 Patrick Dempsey Bridget Fitzpatrick Heather Garber Keith Hout Jong Soo Mok  

Presentation Overview ORION AEROSPACE -Mission & Performance -Reasons for Design -3-view & aircraft dimensions -Aerodynamics -Stability and Control -Structures -Propulsion -Cost Analysis -Construction -Conclusion

Mission -Design and Build a R/C Airplane that must ORION AEROSPACE -Design and Build a R/C Airplane that must -Carry a gyro for augmenting aircraft stability -Carry a 1lb slug simulating data logging equipment -Fly inside Mollenkopf Athletic Facility -Flight duration of at least 12 minutes

M&P Mission & Performance -Estimated Values -Takeoff distance: 35.5 ft ORION AEROSPACE Cruise & Turn Descent Climb Takeoff Land -Estimated Values -Takeoff distance: 35.5 ft -Climb angle: 12 -Cruise & Turn: 13 min -Cruise speed: 25 ft/s -Turn Radius: 20 ft -Constraint Values -MAX. Takeoff distance: 120 ft -MIN. Climb angle: 5.5 -MIN. Cruise & Turn: 12 min -MAX. Cruise speed: 30 ft/s -MIN. Turn Radius: 37.5 ft

Constraint Diagram ORION AEROSPACE Text

Biplane Configuration Pros: Cons: ORION AEROSPACE Concept Description   Biplane Configuration Square fuselage Rectangular wings Conventional swept tail Taildragger landing gear Pros: Cons: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shorter Wing Span Wing Interference Increase Turn Clearance Accessibility of Equipment Increase Roll Rate Maneuverability Transporting Less Need For High Lift Devices Decalage Provides Natural Stall Recovery   Less Need For High Lift Devices Induced Drag Decalage Provides Natural Stall Recovery Accessibility of Equipment

3 View of SID5 ORION AEROSPACE -DIMENSIONS IN FEET

Aircraft Dimensions Wing span (b) 6.6 ft Chord 1.5 ft Fuselage length ORION AEROSPACE Wing span (b) 6.6 ft Chord 1.5 ft Fuselage length 5.9 ft Span h-tail 3.2 ft Root chord h-tail 1.3 ft Tip chord h-tail 0.8 ft L.E. sweep h-tail 18.4 Horizontal tail area 3.3 ft2 ¼ chord sweep h-tail 14.0 Span v-tail 1.3 ft Root chord V-tail Tip chord V-tail 0.8 ft L.E. sweep V-tail 21.0 ¼ chord sweep v-tail 10.9 Vertical tail area 1.3 ft2 Total wetted area 61.2 ft2 Incidence wing 3 Incidence h-tail 0

Aerodynamics Selection of Airfoil for Wing ORION AEROSPACE Selection of Airfoil for Wing Selection of Horizontal and Vertical Tail Lift Curve Drag Polar -Lift to Drag Ratio vs Angle of Attack CMARC Analysis

Aerodynamics CL 3.93 rad-1 CLwing 4.10 rad-1 CLo .5242 Cm ORION AEROSPACE CL 3.93 rad-1 CLwing 4.10 rad-1 CLo .5242 Cm -.4235 rad-1 Cmo 0.50 CDo .0427 Velocity Re Stall 20 ft/s 186279 Cruise 25 ft/s 232849 Max 30 ft/s 279419

Aerodynamics Airfoil Selection: Selig-Donavan 7062 ORION AEROSPACE Airfoil Selection: Selig-Donavan 7062 Low Reynolds Number, Slow Speed Flight Experimental Data/ Xfoil Analysis CL vs Alpha Curve, Drag Polar Ease of Construction Horizontal and Vertical Tail: Flat Plate Assumption

Aerodynamics Method CL-max Warner 1.25 Roskam 1.48 Average 1.37 2-D ORION AEROSPACE Method CL-max Warner 1.25 Roskam 1.48 Average 1.37 2-D 1.53

Aerodynamics Phase Angle of Attack CL Climb 4.0 .75 Cruise 3.0 .70 ORION AEROSPACE Phase Angle of Attack CL Climb 4.0 .75 Cruise 3.0 .70 Turn 5.2 .84 Stall 9.0 1.3

CMARC Analysis ORION AEROSPACE

Stability and Control Feedback Loop Description ORION AEROSPACE Feedback Loop Description Gain Selection and Description Static Margin, CG, and Aerodynamic Center Control Surface and Tail Sizing Horizontal and Vertical Tail Size Verification Trim Diagram Pertinent Static Stability Derivatives and Comparison

Loop Closure Description ORION AEROSPACE Rate feedback in the pitch axis Vary the stability of the short period mode Block Diagram Pilot inputs elevator command TX RX Servo Aircraft Pitch Rate Gyro Pilot +/ - ? + Servo converts voltage to elevator deflection Sign of feedback gain is chosen to stabilize or destabilize the mode

Feedback Gain Implementation Gain Picked Required Gain Margin (dB) Required Phase Margin (deg) Gain Margin (dB) Phase Margin (deg) -0.33 (stabilizing) >/= 6 >/= 45 25.8 Infinite 0.33 (destabilizing) >/= 1 >/= 10 1.11 Completed flight in Mollenkopf w/ stabilizing gain Behaved as expected, pilot described response as sluggish Damped out oscillations when perturbed Stabilizing Case Destabilizing Case

Static Margin, CG, and Aerodynamic Center ORION AEROSPACE Static Margin Desired is 10%, puts CG at the 27% chord location Past 451 final reports agree that 10-15% is an agreeable range for model aircraft Pick toward lower end of range to help with trimming Pick desired Static Margin and place internal equipment to obtain the CG that gives this Static Margin XLE XCG XNP XACHT Distances in ft

Sizing of Control Surfaces And Tails ORION AEROSPACE Historical Methods (as described in Raymer’s Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach) Control Surfaces Guidelines Ailerons: 15-25% chord and 50–90% span Elevators: 25–50% chord and ~90% span Rudders: 25–50% chord and ~90% span Selected: Ailerons: 15% chord and 90% span Elevators: 40% chord and 95% span Rudder: 40% chord and full span Tails Sized using the Tail Volume coefficient method Horizontal Tail Volume Coefficient = 0.45 Vertical Tail Volume Coefficient = 0.04 Coefficients based on old 451 Air designs V-tail H-tail Span(ft) 1.3 3.2 AvgChord(ft) 1.0 1.1 Aspect Ratio 1.30 3.00 Taper Ratio 0.6 LE Sweep (deg) 21.0 18.4 Dihedral (deg) 0.0 Planform Area (ft2) 3.3

Analysis Of Tails Horizontal Tail Design Point (3.3 ft^2) 2.5 2.75 3 ORION AEROSPACE Horizontal Tail 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5 3.75 4 4.25 4.5 4.75 5 0.5 1 1.5 2 Longitudinal X-Plot L r e q Lmax p o s s Design Point (3.3 ft^2) X c g X n p Distance / Wing Chord Horizontal Tail Area [ft 2 ]

Analysis Of Tails Vertical Tail (Dr. Roskam’s Airplane Design Series) ORION AEROSPACE Vertical Tail “Weathercock” Stability Criterion (Dr. Roskam’s Airplane Design Series) Lateral X-Plot 0.25 0.2 Design Point (1.3 ft^2) 1] - 0.15 [rad a e t b Constraint Point Cn 0.1 0.05 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.25 2.5 Vertical Tail Area [ft 2 ]

Trim Diagram ORION AEROSPACE Text

Trim Diagram ORION AEROSPACE

Static Stability Derivative Comparison ORION AEROSPACE SID-5 Cessna 172 MPX5 -0.40 -0.89 -1.13 0.12 0.07 0.16 -0.81 -1.28 -1.15 -0.08 -0.07 -0.11 All units are rad-1 Note: The MPX5 is a model aircraft designed by Mark Peters for his thesis, “Development of a Light Unmanned Aircraft for the Determination of Flying Qualities Requirements”, May 1996.

Structures Overview -Basic layout of the wings Structures matlab code ORION AEROSPACE -Basic layout of the wings Structures matlab code Material properties Equipment layout Weight breakdown Landing gear analysis

Basic Layout of Wing Spar -located at the 1/4 chord Sparcaps -spruce ORION AEROSPACE Spar -located at the 1/4 chord Sparcaps -spruce -1/8” x 1/8” x 6.6’ Shearweb -balsa -1.5” x 1/16” x 6.6’ Ribs -spaced every 3 inches from tip -include lightening holes Added balsa at leading and trailing edge

Geometric Layout of rib & wing ORION AEROSPACE Typical rib section

ORION AEROSPACE Code Code run using preliminary size of aircraft, load factor, and a chosen spar size -Wing loading Schrenk’s approximation (Raymer) Shear force Moment Find centroids Moments of inertia Normal stress

WING LOADING Trapezoidal approximation Elliptical approximation ORION AEROSPACE WING LOADING Trapezoidal approximation Elliptical approximation

ORION AEROSPACE SHEAR FORCE

ORION AEROSPACE MOMENT

ORION AEROSPACE Normal STRESS

Table taken from Spring ’99 AAE 451 report (Team WTA) Material Properties ORION AEROSPACE -Normal Stress (at spar caps) = 2750psi Table taken from Spring ’99 AAE 451 report (Team WTA)

Internal equipment layout ORION AEROSPACE Equipment Volume(in3) Gear box 3 x 1.5 x 1 Motor 2.25 x 1.5 Speed Controller 1.5 x 1.25 x 1 Receiver 1.75 x 1.25 x 0.75 Gyro 1.5 x 1.25 x 1.25 Data Recorder 1.75 x 2.25 x 3.25 Battery(18) 2 x 1 x 1 Servo 1.5 x 1.25 x 0.75 Interface 1.25 x 3.5 x 5.75

Predicted Weight Breakdown ORION AEROSPACE Wing 42.0 (oz) Tail 9.5 (oz) Fuselage 11.0 (oz) Misc 9.8 (oz) Receiver 1.0(oz) Speed controller 3.0(oz) Gyro 3.5(oz) Tattletail8 15.0(oz) Motor 7.5(oz) Gearbox 1.5(oz) Propeller Servo(4) 2.0(oz) Cell weight(18) 2.8(oz) Total Weight SID5 = 163.2 (oz), 10.2(lbs)

Method for sizing and placement of landing gear Figure 11.4 Raymer ORION AEROSPACE Conventional taildragger landing gear -Lateral separation angle of 37.7 -Located 1.2’ from nose 0.6” in front of the leading edge Method for sizing and placement of landing gear Figure 11.4 Raymer

Propulsion Constraint Values for Propulsion Design Motor Selection ORION AEROSPACE Constraint Values for Propulsion Design Motor Selection Propeller Selection Speed Controller Selection Gearbox Selection Battery Sizing & Energy Balance Results from the Flight Tests

Propulsion • Constraint Values for Propulsion Design From Sizing Codes ORION AEROSPACE • Constraint Values for Propulsion Design From Sizing Codes Maximum Thrust Required = Climb Thrust = 3.35 lbf Maximum Power Required into Air =109 Watts Endurance Time = 13.3 minutes Maximum Available Energy = 1) 2592 Watts-Min. (18 Sanyo 2000mAh Ni-Cd, 1.2 Volts) 2) 3888 Watts-Min. (18 Panasonic 3000mAh Ni-MH, 1.2 Volts)

Propulsion • Motor Selection ORION AEROSPACE • Motor Selection -Tool : Modified Motor Code provided by Prof. Andrisani -Criteria : High Efficiency, High Power at Low Current

Propulsion ORION AEROSPACE

Propulsion • Propeller Selection ORION AEROSPACE • Propeller Selection Tool : Modified Gold Code provided by Prof. Andrisani Criteria : High Efficiency, Low Power Usage, High Thrust at 25 ft/sec.

Propulsion •Gearbox and Speed Controller Selection ORION AEROSPACE •Gearbox and Speed Controller Selection Tool : Modified Gold Code provided by Prof. Andrisani Criteria : Minimum Power dissipated by Controller, High Efficiency, Low RPM

Propulsion • Battery Sizing & Energy Balance ORION AEROSPACE • Battery Sizing & Energy Balance Tool : Modified Motor Code provided by Prof. Andrisani & Iteration procedure to match Battery Size Criteria : Minimum Number of Battery Cells, Minimum Energy Usage Ni-Cd Battery : Easy to Charge and Handle. Heavy Weight and Low Capacity, Proven Battery. Ni-MH Battery : Low Weight and High Capacity. Sensitive to Heat and Hard to Charge.

Propulsion • 3 Choices to Final Propulsion Design Consideration ORION AEROSPACE • 3 Choices to Final Propulsion Design Consideration Common Features : MaxCim N32-13Y Motor, Maxµ35B-21 S.C. Choice 1 : 14X8 Propeller, 3.53 Gear Ratio Choice 2 : 14X8 Propeller, 3.75 Gear Ratio Choice 3 : 14X10 Propeller, 4 Gear Ratio

Propulsion •Final Propulsion Design Selection ORION AEROSPACE •Final Propulsion Design Selection Choice 1 : MaxCim N32-13Y Motor, Maxµ35B-21 S.C, 14X8 Propeller, 3.53 Gear Ratio, 18 Battery Cells Overall Efficiency : 38.55%

Propulsion •Results from the Flight Tests ORION AEROSPACE •Results from the Flight Tests -Main Target to Achieve is to make 12 minute Endurance -Ability to take off in 40 yards or less

M&P Mission & Performance ORION AEROSPACE Phase Time Breakdown, Energy & Power Requirement

Cost Cost Analysis Wing Test Materials ~ $90 SID5 Materials ~ $259.95 ORION AEROSPACE Wing Test Materials ~ $90 SID5 Materials ~ $259.95 SID5 Electronics ~ $1125 Man Hours (estimate) ~ 2650 Labor ($75/hour) ~ $198,750 Total ~ $200,125

Cost Price Breakdown of SID5 ORION AEROSPACE

Construction -AutoCAD drawings: actual size ORION AEROSPACE -AutoCAD drawings: actual size -Component templates created -Wing construction -ribs: balsa -spar caps: spruce -shear web: balsa -leading edge: balsa -aileron construction: balsa (w/ribs) -monokote -struts

Construction -Vertical and Horizontal Tail Construction ORION AEROSPACE -Vertical and Horizontal Tail Construction -balsa truss structure -built off AutoCAD drawings -monokote -Fuselage -constructed sides first -built top by holding sides and gluing pieces -sheet bottom to support components -velcro to inside for electronic components -monokote added

Construction -Endplates -balsa truss structure -monokote ORION AEROSPACE -Endplates -balsa truss structure -monokote -plastic screws to attach to fuselage -Landing Gear -main landing gear -tail gear -Motor mount -Control Surface attachments -ailerons -rudder -elevator

Upper wing, struts, control rods 1.30 lb Lower wing, 2 servos, wires Construction ORION AEROSPACE Component Weight Payload 1 lb Endplates 0.27 lb Fuselage, motor, controller, tail, landing gear, propeller, 2 servos, receiver, gyro 3.78 lb Upper wing, struts, control rods 1.30 lb Lower wing, 2 servos, wires 1.53 lb 2000 mAh NiCd 3.38 lb 3000 mAh NiMH 2.17 lb Total Weight: w/ NiCd: 11.26 lb w/ NiMH: 10.05 lb

Act P Actual Performance -Estimated Values -Takeoff distance: 35.5 ft ORION AEROSPACE Cruise & Turn Descent Climb Takeoff Land -Estimated Values -Takeoff distance: 35.5 ft -Climb angle: 12 -Cruise & Turn: 13 min -Cruise speed: 25 ft/s -Turn Radius: 20 ft -Actual Values -Takeoff distance: 24 ft -Climb angle: ~20 -Cruise & Turn: ~12 min -Cruise speed: ~27 ft/s -Turn Radius: 12 ft

Flight Results: Saturday- Flight 1 ORION AEROSPACE Pilot: Dave Henady ATM. Press.: 30.22 mm Hg Temp: 30 F Location: Delphi Airport Mission: Attempted First Flight Comments: ~extremely windy  ~had problem keeping airplane from blowing away  ~sustained minor damage from being blown into parked car  ~need to add down trim to plane-Pilot  ~initially was too cold for motor to function, had to be brought in and warmed up  ~plane was predictable and handled well-Pilot Duration: 3 minutes Take off Distance: ~plane basically hopped into the air Landing: ~no major problems Battery Utilized: NiCd Damage Report: ~cracked rib Repair Time: ~minor

Flight Results: Sunday- Flight 2 ORION AEROSPACE Pilot: Dave Henady/ Pat Dempsey ATM. Press. 30.30 mm Hg Temp: 46 F Location: Mollenkopf Athletic Center Mission:A. Short hop (P.D.) B. Short hop+turn (P.D.) C. Endurance Test (D.H.) Comments:A. Fine take off and landing needed some power. B. Fine take off , very stable turn and hard landing due to not adding enough power. C. Very smooth take off,turned and flew very nicely. Very predictable flying and stable. Very Maneuverable. A lot of power.

Flight Results: Sunday- Flight 2 ORION AEROSPACE Duration: A: less than 15 sec. B: About 20 sec. C:Appr. 14 min. 30 sec. Flight Speed: A: 25 ft/s B: 25 ft/s C: 27~ 30 ft/s Take off Distance: A: 15 yards B: 15 yards C: 20 yards Landing: A: 10 yards B: 2 yards C: 40~50 yards Battery Utilized: NiMH

Flight Results: Sunday- Flight 2 ORION AEROSPACE Damage Report: A: No damage. B: Separated firewall of motor. C: No damage. Repair Time:  A: None B: 5 min. C: None

Flight Results: Sunday- Flight 3 ORION AEROSPACE Pilot: Dave Henady ATM. Press.: 30.30 mm Hg Temp: 46 F Location Mollenkopf Athletic Facility Mission: Flap Test during indoor flight Comments: ~Flight started out well ~Adding flaps on landing is not the best idea ~Plane was stopped by student to keep from hitting wall ~adding flaps pitched plane up, and had to add more down elevator ~Group heart attack occurred shortly after crash ~it was demonstrated that feedback gain can be used Duration: 5 minutes Take off Distance: 20 yards Landing: ~Plane was caught in ground effect. Would not land. ~Touched down late and then hit student Battery Utilized: NiCd

Flight Results: Sunday- Flight 3 ORION AEROSPACE Damage Report: ~crushed leading edge on left side of bottom wing ~crushed leading edge on majority of upper wing ~about 15 broken ribs ~broken elevator ~major damage to group morale Repair Time: ~substantial, about 90 man hours

Flight Results: Tuesday –Flight 4 ORION AEROSPACE Pilot: Dave Henady ATM. Press.: 30.33 mm Hg Temp: 46 F Location Mollenkopf Athletic Facility Mission: demonstrate a/c flight both w and w/o feedback gain Comments: ~Very predictable ~gyro dampened out oscillations ~made the controls more sluggish Duration: 5 minutes Take off Distance: 15 yards Landing: 30 yards. No problems Battery Utilized: NiCd Damage Report: Happily None to Report Repair Time: Nonexistent

Flight Results: Tuesday- Flight 5 ORION AEROSPACE Pilot: Sean Henady ATM. Press.: 30.33 mm Hg Temp: 46 F Location Mollenkopf Athletic Facility Mission: perform the a/c mission of 12 minutes Comments: ~did not make 12 minutes because performed a lot of maneuvers ~flew nicely ~did four circles hands off ~pilot enjoyed flying this plane Duration: 10:43 minutes Take off Distance: 20 yards Landing: 30 yards. No problems Battery Utilized: NiMH Damage Report: Happily None to Report Repair Time: Nonexistent

Flight Results: Tuesday- Flight 6 ORION AEROSPACE Pilot: Sean Henady ATM. Press.: 30.33 mmHg Temp: TEMP:46F Location Mollenkopf Athletic Facility Mission: High Performance Test Comments: Short take off with full throttle setting. Tight turn with 6 yard radius. Demonstrated nice roll rate. Successful stall turns. Tested the minimal stall speed with power on and off. With power off stall speed was less than approximately. 20 ft/s. With power on stall speed was less than approximately.15 ft/s. Achieved maximum speed in Mollenkopf was approximately.100 ft/s.

Flight Results: Tuesday- Flight 6 ORION AEROSPACE Duration: Approximately 8 min. Take off Distance: 8 yards Flight Speed: Between 10 and 58 mph. Landing: 10 yards Battery Utilized: NiCd. Damage Report: No Damage. Repair Time: Nonexistent

conclusion -aircraft completed mission ORION AEROSPACE -aircraft completed mission -aircraft was more maneuverable than designed -aircraft cost $60 more than predicted -aircraft weight was similar -aircraft was able to perform with and without gain -took 2700 hours to build -if future models were built using a machine to cut out parts would be explored. -materials other than balsa may be explored if indoor flight was continued. (not the most robust)

Questions? ORION AEROSPACE