AAE 451 AERODYNAMICS PDR 2 TEAM 4 Jared Hutter, Andrew Faust, Matt Bagg, Tony Bradford, Arun Padmanabhan, Gerald Lo, Kelvin Seah November 18, 2003.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ashley Brawner Neelam Datta Xing Huang Jesse Jones
Advertisements

AAE 451 Aircraft Design Aerodynamic Preliminary Design Review #2 Team Members Oneeb Bhutta, Matthew Basiletti, Ryan Beech, Mike Van Meter.
October 28, 2011 Christopher Schumacher (Team Lead) Brian Douglas Christopher Erickson Brad Lester Nathan Love Patrick Mischke Traci Moe Vince Zander.
DR2 Aerodynamic PDR II Aerodynamic Preliminary Design Review II “The 20 Hour Marathon” October 19, 2000 Presented By: Loren Garrison Team DR2 Chris Curtis.
Project Presentation Boiler Xpress December 5, 2000 Team Members Oneeb Bhutta Matthew Basiletti Ryan Beech Micheal Van Meter AAE 451 Aircraft Design.
Dynamics & Control PDR 1 Purdue University AAE 451 Fall 2006 Team 4 Tung Tran Matt Drodofsky Haris Md Ishak Matt Lossmann Mark Kock Ravi Patel Ki-bom Kim.
AAE 451 Aircraft Design Aerodynamic Preliminary Design Review #1
AME 441: Conceptual Design Presentation
D & C PDR #1 AAE451 – Team 3 November 4, 2003
Team 5 Dynamics & Control PDR 2 Presented By: Trent Lobdell Eamonn Needler Charles Reyzer.
Click to edit Master title style Click to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level 1.
DR2 Stability and Control Preliminary Design Review and Performance PDR October 24, 2000 Presented By: Christopher Peters …and that’s cool Team DR2 Chris.
Propulsion QDR #2 AAE451 – Team 3 November 20, 2003 Brian Chesko Brian Hronchek Ted Light Doug Mousseau Brent Robbins Emil Tchilian.
Click to edit Master title style Click to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level 1.
Patrick Dempsey Bridget Fitzpatrick Heather Garber Keith Hout Jong Soo Mok AAE451 Aircraft Design Professor Dominick Andrisani First Flight November 21,
March 1, Aerodynamics 3 QDR Michael Caldwell Jeff Haddin Asif Hossain James Kobyra John McKinnis Kathleen Mondino Andrew Rodenbeck Jason Tang Joe.
March 10, Dynamics & Controls 2 PDR Michael Caldwell Jeff Haddin Asif Hossain James Kobyra John McKinnis Kathleen Mondino Andrew Rodenbeck Jason.
November 6, 2003QDR1 Team 5 Aerodynamics QDR #2 Scott Bird Mike Downes Kelby Haase Grant Hile Cyrus Sigari Sarah Umberger Jen Watson.
Lesson 13 Airfoils Part II
Aero Engineering 315 Lesson 12 Airfoils Part I. First things first…  Recent attendance  GR#1 review  Pick up handout.
Aerodynamics QDR AAE451 – Team 3 October 9, 2003 Brian Chesko Brian Hronchek Ted Light Doug Mousseau Brent Robbins Emil Tchilian.
Team 5 Aerodynamics PDR Presented By: Christian Naylor Eamonn Needler Charles Reyzer.
Modern Equipment General Aviation (MEGA) Aircraft Progress Report Flavio Poehlmann-Martins & Probal Mitra January 11, 2002 MAE 439 Prof. R. Stengel Prof.
Aerodynamic Forces Lift and Drag Aerospace Engineering
Team 5 Critical Design Review Trent Lobdell Ross May Maria Mullins Christian Naylor Eamonn Needler Charles Reyzer James Roesch Charles Stangle Nick White.
Real World Design Challenge
Recent and Future Research for Bird-like Flapping MAVs of NPU Prof. B.F.Song Aeronautics School of Northwestern Polytechnical University.
Team “Canard” September 19th, 2006
Propulsion PDR #2 AAE451 – Team 3 November 11, 2003 Brian Chesko Brian Hronchek Ted Light Doug Mousseau Brent Robbins Emil Tchilian.
2D Airfoil Aerodynamics
DESIGN OF THE 1903 WRIGHT FLYER REPLICA MADRAS INSTITUE OF TECHNOLOGY CHENNAI - 44.
AAE 451 Aircraft Design First Flight Boiler Xpress November 21, 2000
1 Real World Design Challenge Aircraft Overview 24 Sep Mrs. McDaniel Dr. Chris Shearer,
Bridget Fitzpatrick Patrick Dempsey Heather Garber Keith Hout Jong Soo Mok Aerodynamics Preliminary Design Review #2 October 23, 2000.
Team 5 Aerodynamics QDR 2 Presented By: Christian Naylor Charles Reyzer.
February 24, Dynamics & Controls 1 PDR Michael Caldwell Jeff Haddin Asif Hossain James Kobyra John McKinnis Kathleen Mondino Andrew Rodenbeck Jason.
Theory of Flight All are demonstrated by the flight of the bird!
DR2 Aerodynamic PDR Aerodynamic Preliminary Design Review October 3, 2000 German National Holiday Presented By: Loren Garrison Team DR2 Chris Curtis Chris.
Dynamics & Control PDR 2 Purdue University AAE 451 Fall 2006 Team 4 Eparr Tung (in my) Tran Matt Dwarfinthepantssky Nazim Haris Mohammad Ishak (no, it’s.
Purdue Aeroelasticity
Dynamics & Controls PDR 2
AAE 451 AERODYNAMICS QDR 2 TEAM 4 Jared Hutter, Andrew Faust, Matt Bagg, Tony Bradford, Arun Padmanabhan, Gerald Lo, Kelvin Seah November 6, 2003.
STRUCTURES & WEIGHTS PDR 1
VEHICLE SIZING PDR AAE 451 TEAM 4
AAE 451 Senior Design – Critical Design Review
DYNAMICS & CONTROL PDR 1 TEAM 4
Aerodynamics PDR AAE451 – Team 3 October 21, 2003
Dynamics & Controls PDR 1
Team 5 Final Design Review
PROPULSION PDR 2 AAE 451 TEAM 4
CRITICAL DESIGN REVIEW
STRUCTURES & WEIGHTS PDR 2
Aether Aerospace AAE 451 September 27, 2006
Team “Canard” September 19th, 2006
DYNAMICS & CONTROL QDR 1 TEAM 4
COST QDR TEAM 4 Jared Hutter, Andrew Faust, Matt Bagg, Tony Bradford,
Team 5 Aerodynamics PDR #2
DYNAMICS & CONTROL QDR 3 TEAM 4
Purdue Aeroelasticity
PROPULSION QDR 1 AAE 451 TEAM 4
PROPULSION PDR 1 AAE 451 TEAM 4
Team 5 - Propulsion PDR #2 Scott Bird Mike Downes Kelby Haase
Stability and Control Non-Dimensional Derivatives Part 1 Greg Marien
Aerodynamics PDR # 2 AAE451 – Team 3 November 18, 2003
Structures PDR #1 AAE451 – Team 3 October 28, 2003
PROPULSION QDR 2 AAE 451 TEAM 4
Dynamics N Controls 1 PDR
Dynamics & Controls PDR 2
STRUCTURES & WEIGHTS QDR 1
Team 5 Vehicle Sizing PDR
Presentation transcript:

AAE 451 AERODYNAMICS PDR 2 TEAM 4 Jared Hutter, Andrew Faust, Matt Bagg, Tony Bradford, Arun Padmanabhan, Gerald Lo, Kelvin Seah November 18, 2003

TEAM4 OVERVIEW Concept Review Aircraft CL and CM Updated Wing Size Aircraft Plots Follow-Up Actions

TEAM4 CONCEPT REVIEW High Wing S = 47.8 ft 2 b = 15.5 ft, c = 3.1 ft AR = 5 Twin Booms 3 ft apart; 7.3 ft from Wing MAC to HT MAC Twin Engine 1.8 HP each Avionics Pod 20 lb; can be positioned front or aft depending on requirements Empennage Horizontal and Vertical Tails sized using modified Class 1 Approach (per D & C QDR 1)

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT LIFT COEFFICIENT Lift Coefficient C L = C L  *  + C L  e *  elevator + C L0 Matlab script based on Roskam Vol VI Ch8: C L = 5.41(rad -1 )*  (rad -1 )*  elevator Predator Codes from AAE 565 C L = 5.473(rad -1 )*  (rad -1 )*  elevator

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT PITCHING MOMENT Moment Coefficient C M = C M  *  + C M  e *  elevator + C M0 Matlab Script based on Roskam C M = (rad -1 )*  + ( )(rad -1 )*  elevator Predator Codes C M = (rad -1 )*  + (-1.058)(rad -1 )*  elevator

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT CL AND CM AAE 565 Predator code similar to Roskam Roskam uses graphs in his book Predator has the graphs hard coded into the program Predator will be more accurate Update Constraint Diagram Need Maximum CL for Constraint Diagram Roskam Code solves for Maximum CL.06 difference between Roskam Code and Predator for CL

TEAM4 MAXIMUM LIFT COEFFICIENT Need section cl along wing span Increase Angle of Attack and find new section cls Repeat until the wing begins to Stall That is the stall angle Integrate section cl’s to find Maximum CL

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT CL AND CM Three Major Codes: Predator, CL max, and Constraint Diagram  Predator: Input: Aircraft Geometry Output: CL and CM equations  Maximum Lift Coefficient Input: Main Wing and Horizontal Tail Geometry Output: CL Max and Alpha at CL Max  Constraint Diagram Input: Flight Conditions, CL at 0 Alpha, CL max, Engine Info Output: Wing Area and Required Power

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT CL AND CM Iterative loop can be used Used old constraint diagram values for initial guess Used Wing Area as the Control variable Constraint Code Predator Code Max CL Code

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT CL AND CM Lift Coefficient C L = C L  *  + C L  e *  elevator + C L0 C L = 5.931(rad -1 )*  (rad -1 )*  elevator Moment Coefficient C M = C M  *  + C M  e *  elevator + C M0 C M = (rad -1 )*  + (-1.058)(rad -1 )*  elevator Reduce C M0 for clean flight

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT CL AND CM C M0 main contribution is from the Incidence angle of Horizontal Tail (-2.51 degrees) Using the Iterative Loop, ran over a range of Horizontal Tail Incident angles Found Incident Angle that reduced C M0 the most

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT CL AND CM Lift Coefficient C L = C L  *  + C L  e *  elevator + C L0 C L = (rad -1 )*  (rad -1 )*  elevator Moment Coefficient C M = C M  *  + C M  e *  elevator + C M0 C M = (rad -1 )*  + (-1.058)(rad -1 )*  elevator Incident Angle=.23 degrees Does not seem right, may be caused by Downwash from the Main Wing

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT PARAMETERS Wing Area= 34.5 ft^2 Wing Span= 13.1 ft Max CL= Degree Angle of Attack 0 Angle of Attack

TEAM4 TRIM DIAGRAM AT CRUISE CL=.4327

TEAM4 Drag Polar Based on Roskam Vol VI Ch 4

TEAM4 FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS Verify CD calculations Triple Check C M0 and Incident Angle of the Horizontal Tail React to changes from D+C, Propulsion, and Structures

AAE 451 Questions?

TEAM4 Appendix Lift Curve Slope CL  = f(CL  W, CL  HT,  HT,  w)   HT = Ratio of dynamic pressure. Mostly caused by propeller wash and velocity Downwash, w = Caused by main wing’s vortex flow on tail. Changes effective angle of attack for the tail. Positive Negative

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT PARAMETERS Lift Curve Slope for Elevator Deflection C L  e = f(elevator size, horizontal tail planform) Zero Angle of Attack Lift Coefficient C L0 = f(C L0W, C L0HT,  HT, incident angles)   HT = Ratio of dynamic pressure. Mostly caused by propeller wash and velocity Incident angles are for both main wing and horizontal tail

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT PARAMETERS Moment Coefficient C M = C M  *  + C M  e *  elevator + C M0 C M = (deg -1 )*  + ( )(deg -1 )*  elevator Moment Curve Slope C M  = f(dC M /dC L, C L )  dC M /dC L = f(CG, Aerodynamic Center of Aircraft)

TEAM4 AIRCRAFT PARAMETERS Zero Angle of Attack Moment Coefficient C M0 = f(C M0_W, C M0_HT [both about the CG]) LIFT WEIGHT Aerodynamic Center