Design, fabrication & performance analysis of an unmanned aerial vehicle

, , , , ,
M. I. Khan , M. A. Salam , M. R. Afsar , M. N. Huda , and T. Mahmud

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1754, 060007 (2016); doi: 10.1063/1.4958448

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4958448
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1754/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics
 Design, Fabrication & Performance Analysis of an
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
M. I. Khan 1, a), M. A. Salam 1, b), M. R. Afsar 1, c), M. N. Huda 1, d) and
T. Mahmud 1, e)

1
Department of Aeronautical Engineering, Military Institute of Science and Technology (MIST), Mirpur
Cantonment, Dhaka-1216, Bangladesh
a)
Corresponding author: inzamimkhan@gmail.com ,
b)
head@ae.mist.ac.bd,
c)
rayhan@ae.mist.ac.bd,
d)
toyon153@gmail.com,
e)
sonon619@gmail.com

Abstract. An Unmanned Aerial Vehicle was designed, analyzed and fabricated to meet design requirements and
perform the entire mission for an international aircraft design competition. The goal was to have a balanced design
possessing, good demonstrated flight handling qualities, practical and affordable manufacturing requirements while
providing a high vehicle performance. The UAV had to complete total three missions named ferry flight (1 st
mission), maximum load mission (2nd mission) and emergency medical mission (3rd mission). The requirement of
ferry flight mission was to fly as many as laps as possible within 4 minutes. The maximum load mission consists of
flying 3 laps while carrying two wooden blocks which simulate cargo. The requirement of emergency medical
mission was complete 3 laps as soon as possible while carrying two attendances and two patients. A careful analysis
revealed lowest rated aircraft cost (RAC) as the primary design objective. So, the challenge was to build an aircraft
with minimum RAC that can fly fast, fly with maximum payload, and fly fast with all the possible configurations.
The aircraft design was reached by first generating numerous design concepts capable of completing the mission
requirements. In conceptual design phase, Figure of Merit (FOM) analysis was carried out to select initial aircraft
configuration, propulsion, empennage and landing gear. After completion of the conceptual design, preliminary
design was carried out. The preliminary design iterations had a low wing loading, high lift coefficient, and a high
thrust to weight ratio. To make the aircraft capable of Rough Field Taxi; springs were added in the landing gears for
absorbing shock. An airfoil shaped fuselage was designed to allowed sufficient space for payload and generate less
drag to make the aircraft fly fast. The final design was a high wing monoplane with conventional tail, single tractor
propulsion system and a tail dragger landing gear. Payload was stored in undercarriage box for maximum load
mission and emergency medical mission. The aircraft structure, weights 5.6 lb., constructed by balsa wood, depron
and covering film was the only feasible match for the given requirements set by the competition organizers. The
defined final aircraft was capable of: Completing 3 laps within 4 minutes at the first mission; flying 3 laps with 4
internal payloads at the second mission; flying 3 laps with all possible payload configurations at the third mission.

INTRODUCTION
The UAV is an acronym for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. According to Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) [1], UAV is defined as a device used or intended to be used for flight in the air that has no on-board pilot.
This device excludes missiles, weapons, or exploding warheads, but includes all classes of airplanes,
helicopters, airships, and power-lift aircraft without an on-board pilot. UAVs are currently used for a number of
missions, including reconnaissance and attack search and rescue operations, inspecting power lines and
pipelines, delivering medical supplies. This UAV is designed to be deployed when medical emergency service is
needed. Unconstrained by local traffic and roads, it, in theory, could arrive at the scene faster than an
ambulance. It can deliver medical supplies to local remote or otherwise inaccessible regions because it’s
designed to land on rough fields where runway is absent. It can also be used for disaster relief by delivering aid,
including water and medical supplies in the time of local natural disaster to affected areas.

International Conference on Mechanical Engineering

AIP Conf. Proc. 1754, 060007-1–060007-7; doi: 10.1063/1.4958448
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1412-9/$30.00

060007-1
 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

To begin determining aircraft configuration, a variety of aircraft concepts were generated. A Figure of
Merit (FOM) analysis was used to select competitive configurations to satisfy the given aircraft and given
mission requirements [2]. To represent importance of various factors different configurations were given Weight
of Factor. Then different configurations were scored for a specific factor. Total score was calculated by eqn.
(1).and a configuration with highest total score was selected [3].

Total Score = ∑Weight of Factor * Score of Factor (1)

The final configuration selected was an aerofoil shaped fuselage with a high wing, conventional tail and
tri-cycle landing gear. For the purpose of propulsion single tractor DC motor was chosen.

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

After completing a conceptual sketch, now it was time to define, iterate critical design variable for each
discipline and optimize them to maximize total flight score. Aerodynamics, propulsion, stability and control and
structure were evaluated for each evaluated for each of the individual design Iterations.Every Iteration and final
Optimization was driven to maximize overall score.

Design and analysis methodology

The Preliminary design was done iteratively and was optimized for all the missions to assume highest
possible score .Individual design parameters were used as an input and the performance result in each iteration
was monitored to explore any further improvements in those parameters. If improvement were monitored at any
point the next iteration was started from that point.

FIGURE 1. A closed loop optimization process flow chart

060007-2
 Design and sizing trades
Raymer's [4] method was utilized to determine thrust to Weight ratio (T/W) as a function of wing
loading for critical design cases. In the analytic equations of the function the aspect ratio, Oswald efficiency,
parasite drag and co efficient of lift was taken as 5, 0.90, 0.02, 1.8 respectively. The equation was than graphed
by MATLAB® [5] and the design point was selected.

FIGURE 2. Thrust to Weight ratio (T/W) Vs. Wing loading curve

Wing and empennage airfoil selection

Some important factors like-maximum lift coefficient, drag polar, stall characteristics, pitching moment
coefficient, manufacturability were considered during wing aerofoil selection [6]. Four aerofoils were selected
[7] for detailed analysis and XFLR5 [8] was used to analyse those aerofoils.

TABLE 1. Wing aerofoil selection

Parameters Weight E423 MH80 NACA23012 SD7062
Clmax 5 5 3 4 4
(L/D) 5 5 3 3 4
Stall 3 4 3 2 2
Manufacturability 3 4 4 4 4
-(dCm/dα) 2 5 3 3 2
Total 84 57 59 62

Finally the table showed E423 was the best aerofoil for the wing which will be able to generate desired
amount of lift with good aerodynamic performance. To have reduced weight and avoid complexity flat plates
were used as empennage aerofoil.

060007-3
 STABILITY CHARACTERISTICS
To meet performance goals, the UAV was designed to have excellent static and dynamic stability
characteristics allowing it to remain stable even when payloads shift in flight. To ensure required stability, the
aircraft aerodynamics were analysed according to the following standard design principles suggested by Etkin
[9].

x Centre of gravity was placed ahead of the aerodynamic centre with a static margin of 10%.
x Payload compartment was near the centre of gravity to reduce centre of gravity travel.
x Propeller centreline was collinear with the centre of gravity preventing pitch moment.

Static margin was calculated using Etkin [9].For mission-1 it was 8% and for mission-2&3 10% of Mean
Aerodynamic Chord (MAC).

DETAIL DESIGN

The prime consideration during detail design was to design a simple, light but strong structure which can be
manufactured fast and within a reasonable cost. Dimensional parameters were calculated using Raymer’s [4]
method which had a fuselage of 23in.×10in.×10in. and other important parameters are presented by the
following table:

TABLE 2. Dimensional parameters of the aircraft

Parameters Wing Horizontal Vertical Aileron Rudder Elevator

Stabilizer Stabilizer
Span 4.70 ft. 18.68 in. 7.73 in. 23 in. 6.6 in. 18.68 in.
Chord / % of 0.94 ft. 5.3 in. 5.3 in. 20% 30% 30%
chord
Area 4.42 ft.2 99.715 in.2 39.88 in.2 - - -
Max. - - - ±250 ±250 ±250
Deflection
Aerofoil E423 Flat plates Flat plates - - -
Aspect Ratio 5 3.5 1.5 10.2 6.2 17.6

Structural characteristics
Structural arrangement of wing mainly focused on sustaining a 3.42g load during mission, which is
equivalent to 3.25g for mission 2 and 3.Spars were designed [10] to sustain the bending and twisting moment
during maximum load condition. V-n diagram for three different missions is provided.

060007-4
 FIGURE 3.V-n diagram for mission-1 FIGURE 4.V-n diagram for mission -2 & 3

Detail drawing
SolidWorks 2013 [11] was used as CAD tool. The detail drawings of the designed aircraft are presented
below.

FIGURE 5. CAD drawing of the designed aircraft

060007-5
 Centre of Gravity estimation
As per FAA regulation [12] datum was considered ten cm. ahead of the motor mount. Centre of Gravity
position for mission 1, 2 & 3 was estimated at 16.9598(in.), 17.3373(in.) & 16.9535(in.) from the datum using
the same.

FABRICATION PROCESS
Total two prototypes were built during this process. First one was built of solid foam and several tests were
done on it. But it was not strong enough to carry desired payload. To make the structure strong and light enough
laser cut balsa was used for the production of final prototype’s major components.

FLIGHT TEST & PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS

All three missions were completed by the final prototype. Flight test results were measured using
conventional way like- weight by digital weight machine, distance by measuring tape, time by stopwatch and
velocity by speed gun.

TABLE 3. Flight performance parameters

Mission Parameter Expectation Test Result

Max speed 36 ft./s 40 ft./s
Stall speed 18ft./s 19 ft./s
Turn time 4s 9s
1
No. of Laps 3 2
Lap time 216s 300s
RAC Weight 3 3.6
Take-off weight 5lb 5.6lb
Max speed 43ft./s 40ft/s
Stall speed 25ft/s 20ft/s
2
Loading time 4min 2min
Take-off distance 35ft 37ft
RAC weight 3lb 3.6lb
Take-off weight 5lb 5.6lb
3 Take-off distance 35ft 31ft
3 Laps time 195s 203s

FIGURE 6. Flight test

060007-6
 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
For the evaluation of flight performance all the missions were performed with final prototypes, simulating
all the requirements. And the performance of flight was satisfactory.

In case of further development and improvement in performance author’s recommendations are listed
below.

x System engineering was followed for the design of this particular UAV. A single design solution is
impractical for an aircraft. So some other approach like conceptual design can be followed to find out
a better design solution.
x Throughout the design process weight plays an important role which affects the design parameters
the most. So for effective and cost efficient design a light weight material for UAV like carbon fibre,
composite material can be used for the fabrication process.
x Different wind models like-cross wind, head wind, gust etc. affect the performance and stability of
UAV, so study on wing modelling must be taken into consideration for further development in design
process.
x More attention in designing tail of an aircraft can result in reduced weight and drag and increase
aerodynamic efficiency of the overall aircraft.

REFERENCES

1. Integration of Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the National Airspace System (NAS) Roadmap-
1st edition, (Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), 2013), page 47- 48.
2. Design/Build/Fly(DBF) Competition Rules,(AIAA, Wichita, 2013-14),
see http://www.aiaadbf.org/2014_files/2014_rules_31Oct.html.
3. Abu Horaira Banna, M.; Afsar, M.R.; Ali, Z.M.S.; Abdus Salam, M., "Design, analysis &
optimization of a small unmanned aircraft," in Aerospace Conference, IEEE (IEEE, Big Sky, MT,
2015), pp.1-18.
4. Raymer, D.P, Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach-4th edition, (AIAA, Washington, dc, 2006).
5. MATLAB ® Software, see http://www.mathworks.com/.
6. Michael S. Selig, James J. Guglielmo, Andy P.Broeren and Philippe Giguere, Summary of Low
Speed Airfoil Data,-Vol. 1, (SoarTech Publications, Virginia Beach, Virginia, 1995).
7. UIUC Airfoil Co-ordinate Database, see http://m-selig.ae.illinois.edu/ads/coord_database.html.
8. XFLR5 Airfoil Analysis Software, see http://www.xflr5.com/xflr5.htm.
9. Bernard Etkin, Lloyd Duff Reid, Dynamics of Flight: Stability and Control-3rd edition, (Wiley,
1995).
10. T.H.G. Megson, Aircraft Structures for Engineering Students -5th edition, (Elsevier, 2013).
11. SolidWorks 2013 Software, see http://www.solidworks.com/.
12. Aircraft Weight and Balance Handbook: FAA-H-8083-1A-Vol. 1, (Aviation Supplies & Academics,
2007).

060007-7