Final Design


Home
Members
Schedule
Concept Design
Final Design
Construction
Testing
Future Considerations
Archive

Final Design Summary

Single Wing Final Design Results, Eppler 423 Airfoil

Wing Length

96 in

Chord Length

9.80 in

Height of Wings from Ground

9.5 in

Empty Weight

3 lbs

½ Payload

13.86 lbs

Full Payload

27.72 lbs

Velocity Estimate (based on Propeller)

73.3 ft/s

Dynamic Pressure (based on Propeller)

5.98 psi

Lift (Cruising, based on assumptions)

62.71 lbs

Surface Area (needed to lift full payload)

3.33 ft2

Vstall (stalling velocity)

41.96 ft/s

VLO (lift off velocity)

50.35 ft/s

Cl, max @ 12 degrees

2.4

Cd @ 0 degrees

0.03

Thrust (Lift Off)

16.0 lbs

Power (Lift Off)

563.9 ft-lb/sec

Payload Fraction

0.902

Fuselage and Landing Gear Drag

0.06

 

 

Aerodynamic Analysis and Design

An initial aerodynamic analysis was done to determine the effects of drag on the vehicle and to choose the best airfoil.  The team chose initial parameters and assumptions in order to perform their Initial Analysis and JavaFoil to model the selected airfoil.  The airfoil chosen by the team was an Eppler 423 airfoil because of its ability to produce a high lift, have a low drag and for its increased surface area.  By increasing the surface area of the wing, more lift was able to be produced, thus, increasing the payload that the aircraft could carry.  Once the airfoil was determined, a Final Aerodynamic Analysis was done.

Initial Design Parameters

 

Initial Assumptions

Propeller

11" x 4"

 

Propeller Efficiency

80%

Engine Speed

11,000 rpm

 

Flap Area

40% of total wing area

Empty Weight

3 lb.

 

Flap Length

40% of chord

Full Weight

12 lbs.

 

Oswald Efficiency

0.80

Wing Length

48"

 

Wing Height from Ground

7"

Take-Off Distance

100 ft.

 

CL@2° (Cruising)

1.54

Landing Distance

200 ft.

 

CL@4° (Take Off, Flaps 15°)

2.818

Altitude

1200 ft.

 

 

 

JavaFoil Lift Coefficient Analysis:                                                         JavaFoil Eppler 423 Airfoil Pressure Distribution Analysis:

    

 

Structural Analysis and Design

Wing Design

The wing design of the aircraft highly resembled that of a flying wing.  The structure was made from carbon fiber arrows which were relatively inexpensive and extremely light weight.  The carbon fiber arrows acted as the backbone structure for the ribbing design of the wingspan.  The ribbing structure of the aircraft was made from 3/32" balsa wood (also used for its lightweight and inexpensiveness).  The ribs were placed at intervals of 4".

Wing Design:                                                                                      Rib Spacing:

 

Aluminum pins were used to connect the end wings and center wings together.  The team's design called for a 5º bend at the thirds of the wing.  This was done by bending the aluminum pins at 5º angles.  The bend in the design provided the aircraft with greater stability in both windy and non-windy conditions.  Also, the end wings were removable to meet the packaging constraints set forth in the requirements.

Tail Design

The team's tail design focused on increasing the stability of the entire aircraft.  Carbon fiber arrows were also chosen to be the main material for the tail structure.  The team chose a straight triangular truss as the tail design.  The design placed 3 longitudinal carbon arrow shafts at intervals of 1.5".  To reduce weight further, and to increase the stability, a V-tail design was adopted for the aircraft.  This allowed for 2 servos to be used since the pitch and yaw would be controlled by 2 surfaces.  The angle between the V-tail was chosen to be 110º, which resulted in a 2:1 ratio of horizontal surface area to vertical surface area, making is a good copy of the traditional rudder/elevator setup.  The V-tail and the triangular truss were connected by a tail brace.

Tail Design:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Superpatch Design

The superpatch was the part of the aircraft to which all other parts were attached.  A poly-carbonate plastic was chosen because of its light weight and its reasonable strength to weight ratio.  The ribs that attached to the superpatch were made out of 3/32" balsa wood and were put into place to make the entire structure aerodynamic.  The payload was attached to the superpatch, but had no affect on the structural integrity of the plane.  The payload bay was designed to be enclosed by an aerodynamic shell, designed to help reduce the drag.

Superpatch Design:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Landing Gear

The landing gear the team selected was pre-fabricated model airplane landing gear.  The model chosen was a 0.40-0.60 size carbon fiber gear design.  This model was capable of being adapted to fit the location specified by the aircraft design for attachment, because it had no pre-drilled holes.  This landing gear was specified to withstand between 50 and 60 pounds of force and deflected enough to act as a suspension.

Landing Gear:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Component Selection

Motor/Propeller

The motor selected by the team was the Brushless Atlas 2927/08.  This motor was chosen for its relatively light weight and its moderate cost.  Trade-offs were performed between thrust and cost and between thrust and weight.  Thrust was used as the most important performance factor because of its relationship with the amount of payload being carried by the aircraft.  Based on these trade-offs, the above motor was selected.  The propeller recommended had a 13" diameter.

Brushless Atlas 2927/08 Motor:

   

Battery

The battery recommended, and selected by the team, for use with the above motor was the a lithium polymer battery that provided for a higher voltage under load.  The model chosen by the team was part of the eXtreme V2 Series Thunder Power RC lithium polymer batteries.  This series of batteries offered high continuous and burst discharge rates.

Controller/Receiver/Servos

The controller selected by the team was the Spektrum DX6DSM 6CH Park Flyer System.  The controller came with 4 S75 sub micro servos.  The controller had a frequency of 2.4 GHz, which was the suggested frequency as stated in the requirements.  It had 6 channels and was ideal for mixing different types of control, such as that for the V-tail.

Spektrum DX6DSM Park Flyer System:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Home | Members | Schedule | Concept Design | Final Design | Construction | Testing | Future Considerations | Archive

 Copyright © 2008 Stevens Institute of Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering. All rights reserved.
Last updated: 05/05/08.