1. 2007-2008 RIT MAV System Review (P08121)
Dr. Jeffrey Kozak – Faculty Guide
Michael Reeder – Team Leader
Kevin Hand – Lead Engineer
Todd Fernandez – ME
Susan Bieck – ME
Jeremy Teets – ME
Cody Rorick – ME
Adam Bosen – CE
Sponsored By:
Good morning everyone, my name is Michael Reeder and I am the team leader for the 2008 RIT MAV senior design effort. I would first like to start off by thanking you all for attending. This year’s effort really produced some amazing results and I am proud to stand here in front of you today with this great senior design team.
…where the sky is only the beginning…
…and the ground is likely the end…

2. Re-Introduction of Team Members
Sue Bieck
Kevin Hand
Mike Reeder
For those of you that don’t know us, I would like to go through a brief introduction (introduce team members and majors).
Jeremy Teets
Todd Fernandez
Cody Rorick
Adam Bosen

3. Overall Objectives for MAV
Primary Objective:
Create a Micro Aerial Vehicle, expandable in nature for future RIT research
Simple, robust and stable in design
Capable of reading back information regarding the vehicle’s speed, angle of attack, pitch, yaw and roll rates
Flight Dynamics competition (held internationally) establishes target specifications (engineering metrics)
Max linear dimension of 80 cm
Max payload of 1 kg
Required flight time of 4 minutes
Secondary Objective:
Compete in international Flight Dynamics competition
To re-cap what was decided upon last quarter, these are the primary and secondary objectives for this year’s project. The change in focus of the international Flight Dynamics competition to MAV’s capable of larger flight envelopes and longer flight times allowed us to create a MAV that did just that. The main focus of this year, however, was to create a platform expandable in nature for future RIT research and development.

4. Requirements for MSD II
Plane is built and fully controllable by an operator on the ground
Testing of components is complete and team has been able to successfully simulate how the components will acquire data
Integration of components into a single system for use on the MAV is designed
The system of components is integrated into the MAV
Flight tests are being conducted on the MAV to see how the integrated systems perform on the MAV
The base station established can retrieve the data from the MAV and tabulate the acquired data so that it may be reviewed and interpreted
The MAV is completely operational and the integrated system components read effectively back to the base station what the MAV is experiencing while in flight
Stemming off of these objectives, requirements for Senior Design II were established. These goals ranged from having the plane built and controllable to incorporating a microcontroller capable of obtaining useful flight information. It should be noted that we came into this quarter slightly behind schedule with the intent to get a plane built and flyable within the first couple of weeks of MSD II.

5. Test Procedure - Microcontroller
Test fixture created to verify output of microcontroller
Systems Modeling used to simulate system output and to verify correct results were obtained
m = mass.
r = radius of wheel.
s = drop distance.
t = drop time.
g = gravity.
We’ll start with the microcontroller. A test fixture was built to verify the output of the microcontroller. O-Navi assured us that their microcontroller would not need calibration, but to be safe, we designed and built this device used to measure three axis acceleration. It was first necessary to determine the inertia of the fixture so that the acceleration could then be determined.

6. Microcontroller - Accomplishments
Microcontroller was obtained the sixth week of Spring quarter
Provide easy-to-use interface between flight controller, operator and base station
Source code written for ground station and MAV
Never tested…
O-Navi should be supplying next year’s MSD team with a new, updated microcontroller
The microcontroller finally came in about halfway through the spring quarter. It essentially was supposed to provide an easy-to-use interface between the flight controller, the operator and a base station. Source code was written for the ground station and for the MAV itself.

7. Microcontroller - Issues
O-Navi currently working on new microcontroller product
PheonixAX flight controller used out of date microcontroller
Unable to successfully program microcontroller
Antiquated MCore microcontroller
Only one person available for tech support at Freescale
Codewarrior for MCore discontinued in 2005
However, along the way, we ran into some serious issues. O-Navi is currently working on a new microcontroller product, therefore supplying us with a microcontroller that we have found somewhat anitquated as it is very difficult to obtain the correct programming software not to mention technical help. After working with our only source of help, Freescale, and not making any progress due to the inability to procure the very expensive license, our case with the company was closed.

8. Test Procedure - MAV Critical flight factors Game plan for testing
Locating/moving center of gravity (CG)
Calculating center of lift (CL)
Testing dynamic stability
Game plan for testing
Locate CG by weighing plane
Move CG by placing weights appropriately to locate best stability condition (low drag trim)
Glide-test MAV
Manipulation of control surfaces
Powered flight of MAV
From there, our main focus became the MAV. After much deliberation, we decided upon a test plan that would inherently test everything that the MAV could do. We would start off with CG location and move to glide testing, eventually ending up at powered flight.

9. Step 1 - Glide Testing MAV
Multiple steps taken to properly test MAV prototype
Initial glide test performed without weight
Produced unreliable results (CG not in correct location)
Added weights to increase payload to ~600 grams; moved CG to approximate correct location
Produced recordable results
41 ft horizontal flight from 12 ft height
Moved to second flight of Field House
Give MAV time to achieve stable flight
Produced better results
56 ft horizontal flight
Conclusions: move to Step 2 of testing procedure
After successfully creating a foam MAV wrapped with fiberglass, glide testing began. We first started with no weight added and worked our way to full payload at approximately 600 grams. The glide tests produced optimistic results, allowing us to move along to step 2 of our testing procedure: manipulation of the control surfaces.

10. Video Footage of Glide Tests (no weight)
As you can see in this video, the CG is not in the correct location, ultimately resulting in a looped and awful-looking flight. Therefore, we added weight to the 600 gram payload mark, ending up on the first landing of the field house stairs.

11. Video Footage of Glide Tests (correct CG location, first flight of stairs)
Again, the payload is at 600 grams. This produced our first recordable result as seen previously. Hopeful, we moved up another flight of stairs.

12. Video Footage of Glide Tests (correct CG location, second flight of stairs)
After the flights we thought that the plane was gliding to the left a little bit. We therefore manipulated the ailerons to hopefully correct this problem but unfortunately overestimated as it rolled very far right, but produced a great glide and a successful belly landing.

13. Step 2 – Manipulation of Control Surfaces
Done to set up proper test procedure for complete testing of MAV
Produced mixed results
One trial completed
Plane nose-dived (intentional to gain momentum and lift)
Ailerons manipulated to control plane
Conclusions:
Fly plane with motor power to obtain successful and controllable flight through manipulation of control surfaces
Move to Step 3 of testing procedure to see if controllable flight is possible
To comply with proper testing procedures, we then moved to powered manipulation of control surfaces. Without the motor however, it was difficult for the plane to maintain stable flight ending our testing procedure on this portion rather quickly.

14. Video Footage of Control Surface Manipulation
It was determined that the motor was needed to obtain successful control surface manipulation as seen here by the near decapitation of the camera man. We therefore moved to step 3 of the testing procedure: full powered flight of the MAV and full manipulation of the control surfaces.

15. Step 3 – Powered Flight of MAV
Done in two steps:
First flight performed with original prototype
Control surfaces larger than necessary to aid in control
Foam wrapped in fiberglass for robustness
Simple design
Produced 4 minute required flight but slightly unstable and tail heavy
Wing moved back 1 inch to increase stability
Unable to test due to lack of resources (inability to replace bad servo)
Second flight performed with second iteration design
Control surfaces made smaller
Foam construction – not as durable, but easier to produce
Simple design – one servo for elevator, tail narrowed at end to reduce tail heaviness
Symmetrical airfoil used for ease of reproduction if necessary
Produced combined flight time of 16 minutes
Much more stable
Easy to fly and land
These are the results obtained from our powered flight. The MAV went through two design iterations this quarter, the first one somewhat tail heavy and unstable. Steps were taken to fix these issues, but due to a lack of resources, we were unable to test the repair of these issues. However, it should be noted that the first iteration design did meet all design constraints and produced a flight of 4 minutes.
The second iteration design proved to be even simpler to create and produced amazing results as well. The tail heaviness was alleviated by a tapered tail, and the control surfaces were made smaller as it was decided that they did not need to be very large. Construction was foam and foam alone, not as robust as the other plane but very easy to re-create.

16. …Almost to the good stuff…
Before showing you the videos of our flight, I just want to touch on what we actually did accomplish in this year’s effort.

17. So what was accomplished?
Successful creation of simple, stable and robust MAV
Simplicity leads to expandability and future optimization
Flight Dynamics competition requirements met
Maximum linear dimension < 80 cm (31.5 in)
Wing span of 29.5 in (2 in lower than max mark)
Maximum payload < 1kg
Weight of completed plane (1st design iteration) at 670 g
Required flight time of 4 min
Max recorded flight time of 16 minutes (combined)
Would be entered in Level 1 autonomy portion of competition
Capable of all basic flight maneuvers needed to compete
First and foremost, we met all of our design objectives producing a plane that could fly for 4 minutes and then some (our maximum at 16 minutes combined at quarter stick throttle). The resulting plane is more than capable of competing in the international Flight Dynamics competition as a Level I entry (manual control). Basic flight maneuvers were more than obtained as both planes were not only capable of rolls, etc. but of barrel rolls and loops. These MAVs would more than likely win an endurance contest in their class. Perhaps most importantly though, the MAVs created were simple, stable and robust, perfect for future research at RIT into the world of MAVs and their many applications.

18. What else was accomplished?
Plane built around components’ sizes and locations determined
Proper seating for microcontroller, batteries, motor, speed controller, receiver, etc. within MAV
Integrated system fits nicely in MAV
Plane is build and fully operational and controllable by operator on the ground
Flight tests completed from gliding to powered flight
No microcontroller testing due to technical issues, but source code has been written (future projects)
Although we were not able to utilize the microcontroller, it is available for future teams to use. Keep in mind that O-Navi will be supplying next year’s team with an updated, not out-of-date, microcontroller that will be able to do what we set out to do this year. Still, we designed and built our plane around each and every component on the plane, completed all necessary flight tests and proved that our product is full operational and controllable in the manual sense.

19. Batteries Motor Microcontroller Speed Controller
This is just to give you an idea how the MAV was laid out. As you can see everything has its place.
Microcontroller
Speed Controller

20. Video Footage of Powered Flight (1st Design Iteration)
Since we’ve kept you waiting long enough, this first clip is of the first iteration plane flying off the fourth floor of the design center.

21. Video Footage of Powered Flight (2nd Design Iteration)
This next clip is of the second iteration plane.

22. Questions?
If anyone has any questions, we would be more than willing to entertain them. I would like to personally thank you all for attending. I would also like to thank Impact and Mike Koelemay and Mike Roemer for their continued support and generous donation and Dr. Kozak for his guidance. Additionally, the team standing before you today deserves thanks as well. Each member contributed greatly to the success of this project and it would have not been possible without them. If there are no questions, please proceed outside where we will be conducting a live flight test for your entertainment and interest. Thank you.