A Project Report on

“Design and Fabrication of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle”
By

PRASHANTH NATARAJAN USN: 1PI07ME065

PRATEEK JOLLY USN: 1PI07ME067

VIPUL PAUL USN: 1PI07ME119 Submitted to VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY BELGAUM-590 014

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING Project work carried out at P.E.S. INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BANGALORE-560 085 Under the guidance of Dr.T.S.PRAHLAD Chair Professor in Fluid Mechanics, Department of Mechanical Engineering, P.E.S.Institute of Technology, Bangalore-560085.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING P.E.S.INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BANGALORE-560 085

P.E.S. Institute of Technology
(AUTONOMOUS INSTITUTE UNDER VTU, BELGAUM) 100 ft Ring Road, Banashankari 3rd Stage, Bangalore-560085, Department of Mechanical engineering

CERTIFICATE

Certified that the project work entitled “Design and Fabrication of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle " carried out by Prashanth Natarajan (1PI07ME065), Prateek Jolly (1PI07ME067) and Vipul Paul (1PI07ME119) who are bonafide students of P.E.S.Institute of Technology, in partial fulfilment of Bachelor of Engineering in Mechanical Engineering of Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belgaum during the year 2011. The project has been approved as it satisfies the academic requirements in respect of project work prescribed for the said degree.

Signature of the Guide

Signature of the HOD

Signature of the Principal

External Viva: Signature of the Examiner with Date 1. 2.
Page 1

We, Prashanth Natrajan, Prateek Jolly and Vipul Paul, hereby declare that the Project Work entitled “Design and Fabrication of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle” has been independently carried out by us under the guidance of Dr. T. S. Prahlad, Chair Professor in Fluid Mechanics, Department of Mechanical Engineering, P.E.S.I.T, Bangalore in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree in Bachelor of Engineering in Mechanical Engineering Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belgaum. We further declare that, we have not submitted this work either in part of full to any other university for award of any degree.

Place: Bangalore. Date: 27th May, 2011.

Prashanth Natrajan USN: 1PI07ME065 B.E. (ME) P.E.S.I.T Bangalore

Prateek Jolly USN: 1PI07ME067 B.E. (ME) P.E.S.I.T Bangalore

Vipul Paul USN: 1PI07ME119 B.E. (ME) P.E.S.I.T Bangalore

Page 2

Contents
Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... 7 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. 9 1) Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 10 Applications ....................................................................................................... 10 Steps in the Design Process ................................................................................. 11 1.2.1) Literature survey: ................................................................................................................ 11 1.2.2) 1.2.3) 2) Theoretical Design: ....................................................................................................... 11 Prototype Fabrication and flight tests: .......................................................................... 11

Problem Statement ........................................................................................................................ 12 2.1) Design Considerations .................................................................................. 12 2.2) Mission ....................................................................................................... 12

3)

Design........................................................................................................................................... 13 3.1) Components ................................................................................................. 14 3.2) Weight of Components ................................................................................. 14 3.3) Wing Loading .............................................................................................. 15 3.4) Wing Geometry............................................................................................ 15 3.5) Lift and Drag ............................................................................................... 15 3.6) Airfoil selection .......................................................................................... 16 3.7) Fuselage drag calculations ............................................................................ 19 3.8) Velocity Correction ..................................................................................... 20 3.9) Mission ....................................................................................................... 23 3.10) Take-Off and Climb ................................................................................... 23 3.11) Energy requirements for mission ................................................................. 24 3.11.1) 3.11.2) 3.11.3) Take-off......................................................................................................................... 24 Loiter ............................................................................................................................. 24 Descent Glide ................................................................................................................ 24

3.12) Stability .................................................................................................... 26 3.13) Horizontal Tail Sizing ................................................................................ 27 3.14) Elevator Sizing .......................................................................................... 28 3.15) Vertical Tail Sizing .................................................................................... 28

3.16) Rudder Sizing ............................................................................................ 29 3.17) Aileron Sizing ........................................................................................... 29 3.18) Components Selected ................................................................................. 30 3.18.1) Global Positioning System (GPS) ............................................................. 30 3.18.2) Camera ................................................................................................... 31 3.18.3) Motor ..................................................................................................... 31 3.18.4) Servo Motors .......................................................................................... 31 3.18.5) Propeller ................................................................................................. 32 3.18.6) Receiver ................................................................................................. 32 3.18.7) Electronic Speed Control ......................................................................... 32 4) Fabrication ...................................................................................................... 33 4.1) Fuselage Fabrication .................................................................................... 34 4.1.1) Balsa Fuselage .......................................................................................... 34 4.1.2) Coroplast Fuselage: ................................................................................... 39 4.2) Wing Fabrication ......................................................................................... 40 4.2.1) Material .................................................................................................... 40 4.2.2) Hot Wire Cutter ........................................................................................ 40 4.2.3) Steps in Fabrication of Foam Wing: ........................................................... 43 5) Glider Tests ................................................................................................................................... 50 5.1) Glider test without a spar ............................................................................. 50 5.2) Glider Tests with Balsa Spar ........................................................................ 50 5.3) Glider tests with Carbon Fibre spar ............................................................... 51 6) Maiden Flight ................................................................................................................................ 53 6.1) Setup........................................................................................................... 53 6.2) Summary ..................................................................................................... 53 6.3) Flight Path .................................................................................................. 53 6.4) Objectives Achieved .................................................................................... 53 6.5) Duration of Flight 21 seconds ................................................ 53

6.6) Comments ................................................................................................... 54 6.7) Damage Reported ......................................................................................... 54 7) Flight Test Number 1: First Flight with Coroplast Fuselage ........................................................ 56 7.1) Setup........................................................................................................... 56 7.2) Summary ..................................................................................................... 56 7.3) Flight Path .................................................................................................. 56 7.4) Objectives Achieved .................................................................................... 56 Page 1

7.5) Duration of Flight

-

1 minute ................................................................ 57

7.6) Comments ................................................................................................... 57 7.7) Damage Reported ......................................................................................... 57 8) Flight Test Number 2: Acrobatics and Manoeuvrability Test ...................................................... 59 8.1) Setup........................................................................................................... 59 8.2) Summary ..................................................................................................... 59 8.3) Flight Path .................................................................................................. 59 8.4) Objectives Achieved .................................................................................... 59 8.5) Duration of Flight: 1.10 minute .................................................................... 60 8.6) Comments ................................................................................................... 60 8.7) Damage Reported ......................................................................................... 60 9) Flight Test Number 3: Heavy Cross Winds with Aborted Landing .............................................. 61 9.1) Setup........................................................................................................... 61 9.2) Summary ..................................................................................................... 61 9.3) Flight Path .................................................................................................. 61 9.4) Objectives Achieved .................................................................................... 61 9.5) Duration of Flight: 2.30 minutes ................................................................... 62 9.6) Comments ................................................................................................... 62 9.7) Damage Reported ......................................................................................... 62 10) Flight Test Number 4: Wing Failure and First Crash ............................................................... 63

10.1) Setup ......................................................................................................... 63 10.2) Summary ................................................................................................... 63 10.3) Flight Path ................................................................................................. 63 10.4) Objectives Achieved .................................................................................. 63 10.5) Duration of Flight: 0.50 minutes ................................................................. 63 10.6) Comments .................................................................................................. 64 10.7) Damage Reported ....................................................................................... 64 10.8) Analysis of the Crash ................................................................................. 66 10.9) Changes in Design ..................................................................................... 66 11) Flight Test Number 5: Gusty Weather Flight ........................................................................... 67

11.1) Setup ......................................................................................................... 67 11.2) Summary ................................................................................................... 67 11.3) Flight Path ................................................................................................. 67 11.4) Objectives Achieved .................................................................................. 67 11.5) Duration of Flight: 3 seconds ...................................................................... 67 Page 2

11.6) Comments .................................................................................................. 68 11.7) Crash Analysis ........................................................................................... 68 11.8) Damage Reported ....................................................................................... 68 11.9) Changes to Design: None ........................................................................... 68 12) Flight Test Number 6: First Long Endurance Flight ................................................................ 69

12.1) Setup ......................................................................................................... 69 12.2) Summary ................................................................................................... 69 12.3) Flight Path ................................................................................................. 69 12.4) Objectives Achieved .................................................................................. 69 12.5) Duration of Flight: 6 minutes ...................................................................... 70 12.6) Comments .................................................................................................. 70 12.7) Damage Reported ....................................................................................... 70 13) Flight Test Number 7: Flight Test for Manoeuvrability ........................................................... 71

13.1) Setup ......................................................................................................... 71 13.2) Summary ................................................................................................... 71 13.3) Flight Path ................................................................................................. 71 13.4) Objectives Achieved .................................................................................. 71 13.5) Duration of Flight: 2.30 minutes ................................................................. 71 13.6) Comments .................................................................................................. 72 13.7) Damage Reported ....................................................................................... 72 14) Flight Test Number 8: First Flight in PESIT with On-board Camera....................................... 73

14.1) Setup ......................................................................................................... 73 14.2) Summary ................................................................................................... 73 14.3) Flight Path ................................................................................................. 73 14.4) Objectives Achieved .................................................................................. 73 14.5) Duration of Flight: 2.30 minutes ................................................................. 73 14.6) Comments .................................................................................................. 74 14.7) Damage Reported ....................................................................................... 74 15) Flight test number 9: 20 Minute Flight ..................................................................................... 79

15.1) Setup ......................................................................................................... 79 15.2) Summary ................................................................................................... 79 15.3) Flight Path ................................................................................................. 79 15.4) Objectives Achieved .................................................................................. 79 15.5) Duration of Flight: 20 minutes and 36 seconds ............................................. 79 15.6) Comments .................................................................................................. 83 Page 3

15.7) Damage Reported: None ............................................................................. 83 16) 17) Comparison of Google Earth Snapshots with Snapshots Taken From the P❺........................ 84 What Makes the P❺ Different? .............................................................................................. 87

17.1) Cost Split Up: ............................................................................................ 87 18) Future Work .............................................................................................................................. 90

18.1) Autopilot ................................................................................................... 90 18.2) Live telemetry and Video feed .................................................................... 90 18.3) Extension of Flight time ............................................................................. 91 18.4) Portability ................................................................................................. 91 19) Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 92

Appendix A: Software Used................................................................................................................... 93 Appendix B: Original Design .................................................................................................................. 95 Appendix C: References: ..................................................................................................................... 125

Page 4

Table of Figures
Figure 1: Airfoil Sections ....................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 2: Combined Drag Polar ............................................................................................................. 17 Figure 3: Combined Cl-Alpha Graph ..................................................................................................... 17 Figure 4: PT - 40 Section........................................................................................................................ 18 Figure 5: Cl - Alpha and Drag Polar ....................................................................................................... 18 Figure 6: Graph to Obtain Optimum Cruise Velocity ............................................................................ 21 Figure 7: Mission Profile ....................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 8: Graph to Obtain Optimum Rate of Climb .............................................................................. 24 Figure 9: Variation of Static Margin with Wing Leading Edge Position ................................................ 27 Figure 10: Elevator Sizing ...................................................................................................................... 28 Figure 11: Tail Volume Ratios ............................................................................................................... 29 Figure 12: The Fuselage Sections Being Cut Out from the Balsa Piece ................................................. 35 Figure 13:The Plywood Pieces Being Positioned Along With the Balsa Side Panels in the Vice and Being Glued Using Fevicol ..................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 14: The curve of the aft section of the fuselage being done ..................................................... 36 Figure 15: The fuselage during fabrication placed in the vice (Top View) ............................................ 36 Figure 16: Leading edge of the empennage being sanded into shape ................................................. 37 Figure 17: Fuselage after completion ................................................................................................... 37 Figure 18: Fuselage with flap open ....................................................................................................... 38 Figure 19: Fuselage with flap open ....................................................................................................... 38 Figure 20: Hot Wire Cutter.................................................................................................................... 42 Figure 21: The plywood template being placed on the foam block ..................................................... 45 Figure 22: The foam cutter being run on the template. Cutting the leading edge of the wing ........... 45 Figure 23: The foam cutter being run on the template. Cutting the trailing edge ............................... 46 Figure 24: Breaking away the excess foam around the cut wing ......................................................... 46 Figure 25: the wing being removed from the block ............................................................................. 47 Figure 26: The cut wing removed and placed on a table ...................................................................... 47 Figure 27: Applying the Monokote layer using the hot iron ................................................................. 48 Figure 28: A number of attempts to get the correct linkage between the Aileron Servo and the Ailerons ................................................................................................................................................. 48 Figure 29: Placing the Plastic protective sheath around the wing to hot glue into place .................... 49 Figure 30: Completed Wing (Only MonoKote application left) ............................................................ 49 Figure 31: Broken wing without spar .................................................................................................... 50 Figure 32: Glider with full scale wing and empennage in flight ............................................................ 51 Figure 33: The NAL Grounds where the flight test was carried out ..................................................... 55 Figure 34: The aircraft taking off by hand launch ................................................................................. 55 Figure 35: The team setting up the model before flight....................................................................... 58 Figure 36: Aircraft being launched and pilot with remote ................................................................... 58 Figure 37: Aircraft in flight .................................................................................................................... 60 Figure 38: Aircraft facing a strong crosswind on landing approach ..................................................... 62

Page 5

Figure 39: the rubber band has eaten half way into the foam wing. The left rubber band has been put back into position.................................................................................................................................. 64 Figure 40: the wing could be actuated about the carbon fibre spar. This is why the flutter was seen from the ground .................................................................................................................................... 65 Figure 41: the missing Servo screw. ...................................................................................................... 65 Figure 42: PESIT Garden and Fountain ................................................................................................. 75 Figure 43: Professor M.R.Doreswamy Silver Jublee Block (A- Block) ................................................... 75 Figure 44: Department of Mechanical Engineering (C-Block)............................................................... 76 Figure 45: F Block (left) and Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (Right)................. 76 Figure 46: Tech Park (E-Block)............................................................................................................... 77 Figure 47: Boys Hostel blocks ............................................................................................................... 77 Figure 49: Stitched image showing the new football ground and a part of the cricket ground ........... 78 Figure 48: Stitched images showing A-block, the fountain, entry way and the Department of Mechanical Engineering, motorcycle parking in a single frame ........................................................... 78 Figure 50: Aircraft taking off ................................................................................................................. 80 Figure 51: Aircraft on final approach .................................................................................................... 81 Figure 52: Aircraft levelling off.............................................................................................................. 81 Figure 53: Aircraft attempting Flare ..................................................................................................... 82 Figure 54: Aircraft after landing ............................................................................................................ 82 Figure 55: Autopilot chipset .................................................................................................................. 90 Figure 56: Snapshot (12.97108, 77.67567) ........................................................................................... 84 Figure 57: Snapshot (12.560668, 77.327044) ....................................................................................... 85 Figure 58: Snapshot (12.55549, 77.324981) ......................................................................................... 86

Page 6

Abstract
In the present time, the need for small aircraft which can be remotely operated has taken at most priority in the needs of society. The multiple roles that an UAV can take clearly shows its versatility. This provided us the motivation required to design an UAV that could be fabricated using low cost materials but not compromising on the quality of the aircraft. We started out by defining a problem statement, “To design and fabricate an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle capable of carrying a light weight camera and a GPS unit, capable of a sustained flight time of 20 minutes”. Why did we choose to carry a camera and a GPS unit as payload? The reason is simple, we wanted our UAV to be used for aerial tracking purposes. We thought the best application for such an aircraft would be in search and reconnaissance operations after natural calamities and also for tracking radio collars of endangered animals. We started off with a long drawn design process following a conceptual design approach. We also kept looking at the UAVs present in the market and tried our best to incorporate the positive aspects of these UAVs. Once the design was complete we entered the world of fabrication which was completely new to us. It was the first time we were using a myriad of tools and each day was a learning experience right form choosing the materials to working on them. We had opportunities to visit the industry and see how Laser cutting is carried out. We carried out a complete survey to find out the best dealers to buy our components and raw materials from. We also built a number of tools to fit our needs of the fabrication process. These tools were built from materials that could be found at home and proved to be very efficient and effective in the fab process. We had to chance to make a number of innovations and also made a number of low cost and equally effective solutions to many problems that we faced during the course of the project. The toughest part of the project was carrying out the flight tests. We believed in the concept of build and fly where we build our own aircraft and fly it ourselves. A number of flights were put in and the results were both joyous where we would celebrate a very successful flight or sometimes would result in us heading back home to repair the aircraft. The long endurance flights where we kept breaking the time limits that we set were the most satisfying. The day we completed a 20 minute flight without any glitches was the most joyous moment for our team. During the project apart from having fun, we learnt a number of things. The first and most important thing that we learnt is how to work as a team, then we learnt how difficult it is to make something fly. We learnt to use a number of tools for the first time, we learnt the challenges in fabrication, we learnt how to improve upon our mistakes. At the end of the project we had an aircraft that could fly for the 20 minute duration specified by the project target and had the capability to take a video on board and also had the
Page 7

provision for a GPS unit to track the entire flight path, thus successfully completing our goals and our project. The beautiful thing about this project is that is doesn’t end here. There is always scope for improvement. There are new areas to venture into and new things to learn.

Page 8

Acknowledgements
This project would not have possible but for the opportunity that the Peoples Educational Society Institute of Technology, Bangalore gave us. It is a pleasure for us to thank all those people who supported and guided us to make this project a success both directly and indirectly. We extend our gratitude to our guide Dr. T. S. Prahlad, Chair Professor of Fluid Mechanics, P.E.S.I.T. for allowing us to further our knowledge and gain a profound understanding of the basic design principles involved in developing an unmanned aerial vehicle. We would like to sincerely thank him, for offering this project to us and constantly encouraging us along the duration of the project. Thank you sir for the patience and kindness you have given us, we truly value it a lot. We would also like to take this opportunity to thank Mr Satish Nair, Viable Central Asia for his passion to help and support students. Thank you sir for your contribution to our project. We would also like to thank Mr Prajwal of NAL, Bangalore for providing us with a number of suggestions and ideas many of which we have incorporated into our project. We would also like to thank him for the hardware support he provided us with and the tips he gave us on flying. Thank you Mr Prajwal for your time and for your patience and your constant encouragement. We also express our gratitude to Dr. K.N.B. Murthy, Principal, P.E.S.I.T. and Dr K. Narasimha Murthy, Head of Mechanical Department, P.E.S.I.T. for encouraging us and partially funding our project. Thank you Sir. This project would not have been a success if not for your generosity. We would like to thank our parents for supporting us in our times of success and failures. They have been our pillars of support, constantly been by our side and have helped us finish this project successfully. Lastly we would like to say that it was a great honour for us to be associated with all these people and we have enjoyed each moment of the past 3 months in which we have been learning and progressing under their guidance and support.

Page 9

1) Introduction
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are remotely piloted or self-piloted aircraft that can carry cameras, sensors, communications equipment or other payloads. They have been used in a reconnaissance and intelligence-gathering role since the 1950s, and more challenging roles are envisioned, including combat missions. To distinguish UAVs from missiles, a UAV is defined as “a powered, aerial vehicle that does not carry a human operator, uses aerodynamic forces to provide vehicle lift, can fly autonomously or be piloted remotely, can be expendable or recoverable, and can carry a lethal or nonlethal payload.” Currently, military UAVs perform reconnaissance as well as attack missions. While many successful drone attacks on militants have been reported, they are also prone to collateral damage and/or erroneous targeting, as with many other weapon types. UAVs are also used in a small but growing number of civil applications, such as fire fighting or non-military security work, such as surveillance of pipelines. UAVs are often preferred for missions that are too "dangerous" for manned aircraft.

Applications
1. Reconnaissance : Reconnaissance in a purely military sense involves the constant monitoring of enemy troop movement and formations. Reconnaissance missions require the aircraft to be behind enemy lines for an extended period of time thus, these missions are highly dangerous for manned aircraft. Such missions are the domain of UAVs. These aircraft are capable of surveying enemy positions and providing real time data back to the controllers and in case a UAV is shot down the mission commander doesn’t have to worry about pilot casualties. 2. Remote sensing : UAV remote sensing functions include electromagnetic spectrum sensors, biological sensors, and chemical sensors. A UAV's electromagnetic sensors typically include visual spectrum, infrared, or near infrared cameras as well as radar systems. Other electromagnetic wave detectors such as microwave and ultraviolet spectrum sensors may also be used, but are not very commonly used. Biological sensors are sensors capable of detecting the airborne presence of various microorganisms and other biological factors. Chemical sensors use laser spectroscopy to analyze the concentrations of each element in the air. 3. Search and rescue: UAVs will likely play an increased role in search and rescue in the world over the years. They can be used to find victims and also hostages holed up.

Page 10

4. Providing timely information on highway or other transportation modes on traffic flow and incidents, and the transmission of this information to the appropriate decision maker, are key requirements for improving traffic and incident management. The use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), equipped with video cameras and/or other sensors, is a technically viable method of providing timely information to support decisions regarding major traffic incidents and natural disasters, and also in providing an improved security and safety for the public.

Steps in the Design Process
1.2.1) Literature survey: In this step we understand what exactly a UAV is and understand its working. Here the emphasis was on understanding the intricacies involved in the design process as well as anticipating problems that can arise while applying the design to the actual model. A survey was undertaken to find the best materials and places to source the components and also the tools required to fabricate the prototype 1.2.2) Theoretical Design: This was the first step taken into engineering design. It includes:  Initial sizing and weight estimation  Layout Drawings  Fuselage design  Wing design  Control surface design  Thrust requirements and power plant selection 1.2.3) Prototype Fabrication and flight tests: A flight worthy prototype of the aircraft was fabricated and a number of flight tests were conducted to check the air-worthiness of the aircraft. Each step of the test demanded more from the aircraft in terms of performance and operation. Also we used the flight tests to practically reduce the wing span of the aircraft. The flight tests were also helped us gather a lot of information about parameters that could not be tested on simulations on the computer.

Page 11

2) Problem Statement
To design and fabricate an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle capable of sustained flight for 20 minutes, carrying a payload of a light weight camera and a GPS unit.

2.1) Design Considerations
1. Endurance – 20 Min 2. Payload: Camera and GPS unit

2.2) Mission
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Hand launched Take off Climb to desired altitude Cruise for 19 minutes Descent in 2 phases Belly Landing

Two designs have been considered to achieve the goals set by the problem statement. The first design is a delta wing model on which we had put an additional constraint of a wingspan of 500mm. Prototype gliders of this design were fabricated and flown, but a number of problems concerning the speeds and stability of the aircraft arose. These problems have been discussed as a part of appendix 2. Thereafter we removed the self imposed constraint of a 500mm wingspan and designed an aircraft with a conventional rectangular wing. The initial design phase of this planform showed us that we had overcome the problems that we faced with the delta wing. Therefore this is the planform that we chose and further developed. Our main aim was to try and build the aircraft using materials that are easily available in the market, cost effective and at the same time not compromise on the quality of the aircraft. We have tried to keep the costs low by using simple solutions to overcome a number of hurdles that we faced in the course of completing this project.

Page 12

Design
 Conventional Planform  20 Minute endurance  Payload of a Camera and GPS unit

Page 13

3.1) Components
The aircraft is expected to be a lightweight reconnaissance aircraft and the components were selected are listed below. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Global Positioning System (GPS) Camera Batteries Motor Servos Electronic Speed Control Transmitter and Receiver Propeller

3.2) Weight of Components
Component Servos G.P.S Camera Receiver Batteries Motor ESC TOTAL PAYLOAD
Table 1:Weight Estimate

Weight (Grams) 30 70 35 28 185 55 31 434

Page 14

3.3) Wing Loading
The weight of the aircraft being designed has been approximated to 500 grams. Form a group of R.C aircraft which are a powered glider design similar in weight and having a similar conventional platform as our design we have initially assumed the Aspect Ratio as 8 and also the wing loading to be 38.91 N/m2 Thus, A.R = 8 The wing loading is = 38.91N/m2 From the wing loading we can find the wing area; S = 4.68918/ 38.91= 0.1205 m2 The wing span (b) can be calculated from the Aspect Ratio and the Wing area Wing Span = b = √ =√ = 0.9819 m

3.4) Wing Geometry
A conventional rectangular wing is chosen. The wingspan, surface area and aspect ratio are known. With these parameters we can calculate the Root Chord (Cr) of the wing Root chord (Cr) =
( )

= 2* 0.1205/ (0.981889984* (1 + 1)) = 0.1227 m

3.5) Lift and Drag
Calculating Reynolds Number at the cruise speed of 14m/s; Re = = (1.225* 14* 0.1227)/ (2*10-5) = 105246.33 Clrequired = ( ) = (4.68918) / (0.5* 1.225* (14^2) * 0.1205) Page 15

= 0.3241

3.6) Airfoil selection
A number of low Reynolds number airfoils were analysed for their 2D chars in XFLR5. The characteristics that we were looking for were high lift at alpha = 0°, the cruise conditions fall within the drag bucket, and a thick airfoil for structural reasons. The Airfoils that were shortlisted were 1) Wortmann FX – 60

2) Selig 4083

3) PT 40

4) Gemini

5) Hobie

Page 16

Figure 1: Airfoil Sections

The thicker the airfoil, stronger the wing would be structurally. Therefore, structurally the Gemini, followed by the PT 40 would produce the strongest wing.

Figure 2: Combined Drag Polar

Figure 3: Combined Cl-Alpha Graph

The 2D CFD runs show that the Wortmann airfoil produces the greatest lift for a given angle of attack followed by the Selig 4083, Hobie, PT 40 and the Gemini. Page 17

The Hobie is eliminated because it stalls very early at an angle of 7 degrees. The Gemini is eliminated because of its sudden stall characteristics. The Selig 4083 was constructed out of foam, but turned out to be too flimsy, thus getting eliminated. The Wortmann airfoil, even though it is aerodynamically the best airfoil, producing most lift and least drag at the cruise Reynolds number, is even weaker than the selig airfoil, especially near the trailing edge. Therefore even it is eliminated. The airfoil thus chosen is the PT 40 We have chosen the PT40 airfoil because of its high lift and low drag value at our Cl required along with its very gentle stalling characteristics. This implies that the operator would have a large buffer zone in which he can recover the aircraft if it approaches stall. The airfoil is also thicker which helps make the wing stronger.

Figure 4: PT - 40 Section

Figure 5: Cl - Alpha and Drag Polar

For this value of Clrequired, from the graph the value of alpha initial is very close to 0 Degrees CdInduced = ( = 0.004179 Page 18 ( ) = (0.3241^2) / (3.14 * 8)

Cf = 0

(

(

))

/ (Log (105246.3327))2.58

= 0.007074 Cdw = 2 = 0.014149

3.7) Fuselage drag calculations
Fuselage length = 0.5m Fuselage height = 0.056m Fuselage width = 0.056m Fuselage Wetted area = 0.112 m2 Cdf =

= 0.007074 * 0.112 / 0.1205
= 0.006574847 Overall Drag coefficient: CdO = Cdw + Cdf = 0.014149 + 0.006574847 = 0.020724093 Accounting 10% more drag for interference we have; Cd = CdO + CdInduced = 0.026976329

Page 19

3.8) Velocity Correction
Our initial cruise velocity of 14m/s was assumed from an existing Powered Glider R.C model. In the second iteration we will find the optimum velocities for maximum endurance and range.

Velocity 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15

Cl 2.541061 2.100051 1.764626 1.503587 1.29646 1.129361 0.992602 0.87926 0.784278 0.703895 0.635265 0.576204 0.525013 0.480352 0.441156 0.40657 0.375897 0.348568 0.324115 0.302148 0.28234

D0 0.042068 0.050902 0.060578 0.071095 0.082453 0.094653 0.107694 0.121576 0.1363 0.151865 0.168271 0.185519 0.203608 0.222539 0.242311 0.262924 0.284378 0.306674 0.329812 0.35379 0.37861

Di 0.474343 0.392019 0.329405 0.280676 0.242012 0.210819 0.18529 0.164132 0.146402 0.131397 0.118586 0.107561 0.098005 0.089668 0.082351 0.075895 0.070169 0.065068 0.060503 0.056402 0.052705
Page 20

Drag 0.516411 0.442921 0.389982 0.351771 0.324465 0.305472 0.292984 0.285708 0.282702 0.283262 0.286857 0.29308 0.301613 0.312207 0.324662 0.338819 0.354548 0.371742 0.390315 0.410193 0.431315

Power 2.582054 2.436065 2.339895 2.286511 2.271252 2.291037 2.34387 2.428522 2.544317 2.690987 2.86857 3.077338 3.317743 3.590376 3.895942 4.235234 4.609118 5.018517 5.464405 5.947793 6.469727

Sink Rate 0.550641 0.519508 0.498999 0.487614 0.48436 0.48858 0.499847 0.517899 0.542593 0.573871 0.611742 0.656264 0.707532 0.765672 0.830837 0.903193 0.982926 1.070233 1.165322 1.268408 1.379714

15.5 16

0.264418 0.248151

0.404272 0.430774

0.049359 0.046323

0.453631 0.477097

7.031281 7.633552

1.499469 1.627908

Table 2: Cruise Speed Optimization

Figure 6: Graph to Obtain Optimum Cruise Velocity

From the Graph of Power Vs Velocity we see that the velocity for minimum power is approximately 8m/s. At this velocity, the Cl value when calculated is found to be 0.9926. This is a very high value nearing 1. The Cl value can be decreased by increasing the cruise velocity of the aircraft. We change the cruise velocity to 10m/s and recalculate the coefficients. New Reynolds Number is calculated to be Re =

= 1.225* 10 * 0.1227 / (2*10-5) = 75175.95193

Recalculating the Cl value for cruise velocity of 10m/s, Cl = 0.63520 Also recalculating the values of the Drag Coefficients: Cdi = 0.0160572 Cdf = 0.007095308 Cdo = 0.022364601 Accounting an additional 10% of Overall Drag to account for interference, we have Page 21

Cd = 0.040658283 From this value, drag is calculated to be = 0.300117 N

Thus the power required to overcome this drag is = Power = Drag * Velocity = 0.300117 * 10 = 3.00117 W

The stall speed for the aircraft is calculated as, VStall = √

=√

= 5.940751m/s

Page 22

3.9) Mission
The aircraft is hand launched from ground level by the operator. The aircraft ascends to four hundred feet. The aircraft then loiters in the same area for nineteen to twenty minutes taking photographs. It then descends back to the ground.

Figure 7: Mission Profile

3.10) Take-Off and Climb
Since the aircraft is hand launched, it needs to clear the ground as quickly as possible without stalling. The initial thrust supplied to the aircraft must be enough to sustain the velocity of the aircraft above its stall speed. The power required at take off to reach an assigned altitude of 400ft is calculated for varying rates of climb at the take off velocity. The equation to evaluate power consumed for varying rates of climb is ( W – Weight of the aircraft v – Velocity D – Drag L – Lift θ - Angle of ascent )

Page 23

Selection of Rate of Climb
35 30 25 Power (W) 20 15 10 5 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (s)

Figure 8: Graph to Obtain Optimum Rate of Climb

The graph also seems to almost level off at about 90 seconds. Therefore a time of 100 seconds is taken is taken to complete the ascent phase of the flight.

3.11) Energy requirements for mission
With an engine which consumes fuel such as aviation fuel or kerosene, the range or endurance of the aircraft can be estimated by applying the Breguet formula. Our aircraft does not use a consumable fuel, but rather a battery to power the electric motor, which is our primary thrust producing prime over. Thus, in this case we estimate the amount of energy (joules) required to complete the mission and then choose a suitable battery which can provide this amount of energy. Our mission is broken up into 3 phases. 1) Takeoff 2) Loiter 3) Descent Glide The energy required at each stage is estimated theoretically, and then added up to obtain the energy required for the whole mission. 3.11.1) Take-off The power required to reach four hundred feet has been estimated to be 8 watts. The aircraft is expected to achieve this in 100 seconds. The product of time and power gives the energy required. This is calculated to be 800 J. 3.11.2) Loiter The aircraft now levels off and circles the area that has to be scanned. The aircraft remains in this phase for up to nineteen minutes. The power required for sustained flight at 10m/s has been estimated at 3.6 watts. 3.11.3) Descent Glide

Page 24

After the aircraft has scanned a particular area, it begins an unpowered glide to the ground. The aircraft continues in this state till it reaches an altitude of 20 feet.

The power consumed by the servos and the receiver has also been estimated.   Servos - 70mA at 11.1V for 20 minutes = 932 J Reciever – 10mA at 11.1V for 20 minutes = 133 J

The energy required for the whole mission is estimated to be 6 kJ.  Efficiency of motor = 70%  Efficiency of propeller = 70%  Efficiency of Battery = 80% The Energy requirement after taking into account the component efficiencies is 15.5 kJ. Remote control aircraft pilots recommend that if an aircraft is designed to fly for certain endurance, then, because of weather conditions, the energy requirement is taken as 1.5 times to compensate for gusts, head winds, mid-course corrections etc. Therefore the energy requirement = 1.5 x 15.5kJ = 23.25 kJ. A 1000mA battery provides 36 kJ of energy. With an estimated battery efficiency of 80%, the energy available from the battery is 28 kJ. Therefore this battery is chosen.

Page 25

3.12) Stability
The aircrafts designed to be very stable longitudinally so that the on-board camera does not jerk or shudder, thereby compromising on the quality of images taken. The static margin is the defined as the distance between the C.G. of the aircraft and the Aerodynamic Center of the wing, and is usually measured as a percentage of the mean aerodynamic chord (MAC). Since our wing is rectangular, the MAC is the same as the chord. The static margin for gliders is between five and ten percent. Greater the margin, the greater the stability. If the margin exceeds 10%, the aircraft become ultra stable and is very difficult to manuver. The C.G. of the entire structure including the fuselage, tail, servos, motor and esc is found to lie 16 cm from the nose of the aircraft. The battery is the heaviest component in the aircraft at 185g and is placed in the roomiest part of the aircraft. The wing is then moved about till the required static margin is achieved. Position of Wing 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 Wing CG 7.305 7.805 8.305 8.805 9.305 9.805 10.305 10.805 11.305 11.805 12.305 12.805 13.305 13.805 14.305 14.805 15.305 15.805 Aerodynamic Center 6.075 6.575 7.075 7.575 8.075 8.575 9.075 9.575 10.075 10.575 11.075 11.575 12.075 12.575 13.075 13.575 14.075 14.575 CG of A/C 13.41645 13.44913 13.48181 13.51449 13.54717 13.57985 13.61253 13.64521 13.67789 13.71057 13.74325 13.77593 13.80861 13.84129 13.87397 13.90664 13.93932 13.972 Static margin 49.41324047 46.26783837 43.12243627 39.97703418 36.83163208 33.68622998 30.54082789 27.39542579 24.25002369 21.1046216 17.9592195 14.8138174 11.66841531 8.52301321 5.377611114 2.232209017 -0.91319308 -4.058595176

12 12.5
13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16

16.305 16.805
17.305 17.805 18.305 18.805 19.305 19.805 20.305

15.075 15.575
16.075 16.575 17.075 17.575 18.075 18.575 19.075

14.00468 14.03736
14.07004 14.10272 14.1354 14.16808 14.20076 14.23344 14.26612

-7.203997273 -10.34939937
-13.49480147 -16.64020356 -19.78560566 -22.93100776 -26.07640985 -29.22181195 -32.36721405

Table 3: Placement of Wing to get Appropriate Static Margin

Page 26

Longitudinal Stability
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 0 -20 -30 -40

Static Margin

y = -6.2908x + 68.286

5

10

15

20

Dist. From L.E. of Wing to Nose

Figure 9: Variation of Static Margin with Wing Leading Edge Position

Therefore for a static margin of 10%, the leading edge of the wing is found to lie at 12.4 cm from the nose of the aircraft.

3.13) Horizontal Tail Sizing
The tail-moment arm (TMA) is the distance between the mean aerodynamics chords of the wing and the tail. The TMA was taken to be 2.5 times the wing’s MAC. Therefore, TMA= 0.306841 m. The area of the horizontal tail (HTA), is given by the formula, HTA = Where, WA is the Wing Area. As the TMA was taken to be 2.5 times the MAC, HTA is 20% of the wing area. Hence, HTA = 0.2 * 0.120513 = 0.024103 m2. The aspect ratio of the tail was assumed to be 5. Therefore, the span of the horizontal tail, bht = √ The chord of the horizontal tail, Crht = = 0.06943 m.

= 0.347151 m.

Page 27

3.14) Elevator Sizing
The larger the elevator area, in proportion to the horizontal tail’s total area, the more effective the elevator, as shown by the graph below.

Figure 10: Elevator Sizing

From the graph above, we can see that a value of Se/St lying between 0.3 to 0.35 gives an elevator effectiveness of 70%. Assuming the value of Se/St as 0.35, we get; Se = 0.35 * 0.024103 = 0.008436 m2.

3.15) Vertical Tail Sizing
Since the vertical tail is placed on the horizontal tail, the root chord and the tail-moment arm of the vertical tail is same as that of the horizontal tail. Crvt= 0.06943 m TMA = 0.306841 m

Area of vertical tail is given by, Svt= Page 28

Where, Cvt is the tail volume coefficient, taken from the table below.

Figure 11: Tail Volume Ratios

Taking the value of Cvt for a sailplane, i.e. Cvt= 0.02. Thus, Svt = = 0.007713 m2

Taking a taper ratio (k) for the vertical tail as 0.6, we get the value of tip chord as, Ctvt = 0.6 * 0.06943 = 0.041658 m. The span of the vertical tail is given by, b = Thus, b is calculated to be 0.13886 m.
( ( ))

3.16) Rudder Sizing
A rudder area of 30% of the vertical tail area is found to optimum for a model this size. Therefore, Sr = 0.3 * Svt = 0.3 * 0.007713 = 0.0023139 m2.

3.17) Aileron Sizing
The Aileron was sized from a group of RC Powered Glider having similar characteristics as our aircraft; The Aileron Dimensions are 20cm X 5cm

Page 29

3.18) Components Selected
The aircraft is expected to be a lightweight reconnaissance aircraft and the components were selected are listed below. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Global Positioning System (GPS) Camera Batteries Motor Servos Electronic Speed Control Transmitter and Receiver Propeller

An exhaustive survey of components that meet the design requirements was carried over the internet.

3.18.1) Global Positioning System (GPS)
The GPS unit chosen is the 65CBTOOTH GPS Receiver. The specifications of the component are as shown in the table below. Specifications Dimensions Weight Battery Life Reacquisition Time Time log GPS data stored Recharge Time Data Recorded Cost 75 x 42 x 16 (mm) 70 g 18.5 hours (full charge) 0.1 seconds 300 hours 90,000 2.5 hours Latitude, Longitude and Speed Rs. 2395

The 65C BTOOTH unit was chosen as it is a lightweight unit, refreshes its location every 0.1 seconds and has sufficient memory for storing position data. The data recorded can be transferred to a computer via a USB cable and can be used with applications such as Google Maps to trace the flight path.

Page 30

3.18.2) Camera
Two types of cameras were considered the first was the Spy Hidden DVR Micro Camera DV and the second a 3.2MP Spy Pen Camera. Specifications Camera Resolution Photograph Resolution Battery Life Recording Time Data Storage Cost DVR Micro Camera 720 x 480 at 30 fps 1600 x 1200 pixels 60-80 minutes 1 hour 2-16gb Rs. 1200 Spy Pen Camera 640 x 480 at 30 fps 1024 x 768 pixels 120 minutes Memory Dependent 2gb External Card Rs. 1250

Although the two cameras are almost identical in specifications, a pen camera is preferred as it smaller in size, lighter and also has external storage thus making it user dependent.

3.18.3) Motor
A brushless DC motor was selected to act as the power plant of the aircraft. A brushless motor was selected as it is more efficient, produces less heat and is more reliable than a brushed DC motor. The motor selected was the Emax 1270/13. Specifications Recommended Model Weight Shaft Diameter Weight with cables Dimensions Continuous Current Maximum Thrust Cost 1000 grams 4 mm 55 grams 28.5 x 28.5 mm 25 Amps 800 grams Rs. 726

3.18.4) Servo Motors
Two servo motors are required to control the control surfaces namely one for the elevator and one servo for the aileron. The servo chosen was the Power HD Servo. This servo was chosen because of its light weight and small size. Specifications Weight Torque Speed Size Cost 2 plastic gear servos and 1 metal gear servo 9 grams 1.8 kg-cm 0.12 sec/60 22.5 x 11.5 x 24.6 mm Plastic Gear: Rs 275 Meatl Gear: Rs 480

Page 31

3.18.5) Propeller
The diameter of the propeller was calculated to be 9 inches. Since the aircraft requires a high torque during takeoff, a propeller of diameter 8 and a pitch of 4 taken, also this specification of propeller makes the motor most efficient i.e. a 8X4 propeller. APC 8X4 Propeller is chosen Features High Thrust Low Noise Gas filled nylon for strength and durability Rs. 225

3.18.6) Receiver
Futaba PCM FP-R138 DP Specifications Number of channels Dimensions Frequency Crystal Weight 8 64 x 35.3 x 20.8 mm 72 MHz 16 28 gms

3.18.7) Electronic Speed Control
E-Max ESC
Specifications Continuous Current Dimensions Surge Current Weight Cost Programmable ESC 25 Amps 50x28x12 mm 30 Amps 31 grams Rs 1000

Page 32

FABRICATION

Page 33

4.1) Fuselage Fabrication
The fuselage is the part of the aircraft that will hold the payload. We chose to go ahead with a box type fuselage in which all the components could be easily fit in. We chose to build two fuselages: 1. The first one is made of Balsa 2. The second one is our lower cost fuselage made of Coroplast

4.1.1) Balsa Fuselage
Steps in Fabrication 1. The side panels were drawn on the Balsa sheet and were cut out. 2. Three plywood pieces measuring 5cmX5cm and 3mm thickness were cut out. These pieces were used as the Motor Mount and as supports along the length of the fuselage. The two pieces that would be places along the length of the fuselage needed to have a provision for the wires to be threaded through. This was achieved by cutting out holes in the plywood pieces. 3. The squares were places at predetermined points and glued to the balsa cut outs with fevicol and placed in a vice to dry overnight. Additional supports were given to the motor mount using beading pieces. A third piece was glued in at the point where the fuselage starts to curve upwards. 4. Two additional pieces of plywood measuring 3cmX3cm and 1cmX1cm were cut out. These pieces were placed to help hold the gentle taper of the fuselage. The 1cmX1cm piece was placed at the end of the fuselage thus completing the sides of the fuselage. 5. The bottom of the rectangular section is a single piece of balsa glued onto the sides. The rear of the bottom portion is tapped with brown tape. This helps in saving weight and also helps in accessibility of components in this section. 6. The cover of the fuselage is a flap. The reason for choosing a flap is that it provides for accessibility to the components in the fuselage. The flap is a rectangular piece of Balsa that has been attached to the body with the help of ribbons. The ribbons make it possible for the flap to be opened and closed. For the rear we traced out the shape and cut out a piece of Balsa and glued it onto the fuselage. Building the empennage: 1. The empennage was fabricated using Balsa. The vertical tail and the horizontal tail were drawn on the balsa sheets and were cut out. 2. The pieces were then sanded such that the leading edges were rounded and the trailing edges were sharp. 3. The elevator was cut out from the horizontal tail piece and was attached back to the horizontal tail with the help of ribbons. The ribbons allow for the upward and downwards deflection of the elevator. 4. The vertical tail and the horizontal were attached using hot glue. This assembly in turn was placed on the fuselage with a bead of hot glue.

Page 34

Figure 12: The Fuselage Sections Being Cut Out from the Balsa Piece

Figure 13:The Plywood Pieces Being Positioned Along With the Balsa Side Panels in the Vice and Being Glued Using Fevicol

Page 35

Figure 14: The curve of the aft section of the fuselage being done

Figure 15: The fuselage during fabrication placed in the vice (Top View)

Page 36

Figure 16: Leading edge of the empennage being sanded into shape

Figure 17: Fuselage after completion

Page 37

Figure 18: Fuselage with flap open

Figure 19: Fuselage with flap open

Page 38

Placing of Elevator Servo:
The servo was placed along the centreline of the fuselage on the top surface. We had to make sure that there was enough movement of the servo arm to facilitate the corresponding movement of the elevator. The control line from the servo horn to the elevator horn was then bent and fitted making sure there was enough clearance for the horn to move freely and that the control line did not interfere with this movement.

4.1.2) Coroplast Fuselage:
Balsa as a raw material is quite expensive. As our main aim was to keep the costs for materials low we chose to build a second fuselage using coroplast. Coroplast (Corrugated Plastic) is basically two thin sheets of plastic with ridges in between. It is a very strong material and is quite economical to use. It is slightly heavier than Balsa but the difference is not much to cause a major difference in the flight performance.

Fabrication of the coroplast fuselage:
1. Three sections i.e the sides and the bottom of the fuselage were drawn onto the sheet of coroplast as a development. This was then cut out and the places where a fold would be done were cut such that only the top plastic layer was cut but the bottom layer remained. 2. Three plywood pieces measuring 5cmX5cm and 3mm thickness were cut out. These pieces were used as the Motor Mount and as supports along the length of the fuselage. The two pieces that would be places along the length of the fuselage needed to have a provision for the wires to be threaded through. This was achieved by cutting out holes in the plywood pieces. 3. The plywood pieces were placed in similar positions as the Balsa fuselage. The only difference was the use of hot glue to stick the plywood to the coroplast. Also we did not use the 3cmX3cm and 1cmX1cm pieces at the tapered region. 4. The tail region was built by hot gluing the 3 pieces such that the correct taper was achieved. 5. To cover the tail region, a coroplast sheet was cut into the correct shape and tapped to the bottom using duct tape. 6. The flap in this model is different from the Balsa model. We cut the single flap into 3 different flaps thus providing us access to the individual bays if required. Also we found that it was necessary to remove and replace the battery connections a number of times. With a single flap it was necessary to remove the wing every time that had to be done. We chose to have a single small flap at the front which would provide easy access to the battery leads without the need to remove the wing.

Page 39

Building the empennage: 1. The empennage was fabricated using Balsa. The vertical tail and the horizontal tail were drawn on the balsa sheets and were cut out. 2. The pieces were then sanded such that the leading edges were rounded and the trailing edges were sharp. 3. The elevator was cut out from the horizontal tail piece and was attached back to the horizontal tail with the help of ribbons. The ribbons allow for the upward and downwards deflection of the elevator. 4. The vertical tail and the horizontal were attached using hot glue. This assembly in turn was placed on the fuselage with a bead of hot glue.

Placing of Elevator Servo:
Our aim was to try and make the elevator servo sit a little more flush with the fuselage surface as compared to the Balsa fuselage. We achieved this by cutting out a piece of plywood and cutting out a slot on this in which the servo would fit into. This piece in turn was hot glued to the inside of the tail coroplast section. The servo sat much more flush to the surface and at the same time with enough clearance to prevent any interference from the elevator control line-servo horn assembly.

4.2) Wing Fabrication 4.2.1) Material
The material chosen to build the wing was High Density Foam. The reasons for choosing this material to build the wing are: 1. 2. 3. 4. Foam as a construction material is very light It is comparatively easier to work into the complex air foil shapes than balsa It is highly durable once given the necessary treatments which will be explained later It is an easily available material and is very economical

We had to find a way to cut the air foil shape from the foam blocks. On doing some research we found that the most effective method of cutting foam is using a Hot Wire Cutter.

4.2.2) Hot Wire Cutter
A Hot Wire Cutter basically uses an electric current to heat a wire under tension. When this wire is passed through the foam the wire cuts the foam.

Fabrication of Hot Wire Cutter
We chose to build the Hot Wire Cutter using cost effective and easily available materials. Materials Used:  Plywood (5mm thickness)  Compression Springs  Guitar String  Nails and Screws Page 40

Steps in Fabrication:       We first cut three pieces of plywood. o Two pieces measuring 30cm X 5cm o One Piece measuring 100cm X 5cm These were arranged in the shape of a U such that the longer piece forms the bridge and the two smaller pieces form the legs. They were fastened in such a way that the hinge provided for motion A string was drawn between the free ends of the smaller pieces. Provision was given for wire leads to be attached to the string. We then hammered nails near the hinge on which the compression spring would be attached. The spring keeps the string in tension and also provides strength to the entire assembly. We also gave a provision for changing the tension in the string by providing two different positions for the spring. This helped us change the tension if required. The leads from the string are connected to an adaptor which in turn are connected to a wall socket

Page 41

Figure 20: Hot Wire Cutter

Page 42

4.2.3) Steps in Fabrication of Foam Wing:
1. The airfoil coordinates were taken from the UIUC online database. These coordinates were in turn fed into Solid Works after multiplying the values with the predetermined chord length and a curve was drawn. The curve was then extruded to get a solid. On converting the Solid from 3D to 2D, one of the views gives the airfoil profile. A print out of the air foil was taken. 2. The airfoil print out was then stuck onto a sheet of 3mm plywood and the sheet was sanded down to give the shape as close to the airfoil outline as possible. Two of these were made. 3. A number of markings were made on the templates. These markings help provide a reference during the cutting process making sure that the two persons operating the hot wire are at the same point during the cutting process. 4. The two templates are placed on either side of the foam block and stuck to it using fevicol. The Hot Wire is then inserted and made to run along the templates from the leading edge to the trailing edge and is removed at quarter chord. 5. The excess foam is broken off and the wing is removed. The wing now has the two plywood templates stuck on either side. These are then removed using a blade. 6. A groove was to be cut into which the spar would sit. This is done again using the hot wire. We mark off the outline of the spar on either side of the cut foam wing. The hot wire is lowered and follows the outline drawn thus creating the groove for the spar to sit in. 7. The carbon fibre spar is then taken and fevicol is applied on three sides of the spar. This is then slid into the groove and a slight pressure is applied to keep it in place. The groove is then covered with a layer of paper to help give a neat finish to the top surface of the wing. 8. The section where the fuselage is to seat is marked off. This is to place the servo along the centre line of the wing. A groove of 4.5cmX3.5cm is shaved off the wing. Into this a plywood piece in which a cut out for the servo has been done is placed and fixed in place using fevicol. 9. Once the aileron position is chosen, a slot is cut in the wing for the aileron to sit. 10. Application of MonoKote: MonoKote is commercially available light weight plastic shrink wrap film available in various colour schemes with an adhesive on one side, used to cover and form the surfaces of a model aircraft. The MonoKote is cut into shape such that is forms a wrap around the wing and is then applied with the help of a hot iron. The adhesive on one side is heat activated. Once the layer sticks to the surface a different temperature is set on the iron, this is to shrink to layer onto the wing. 11. The aileron is made of balsa wood. The aileron is placed on the foam wing and taped to it in such a manner that it is free to move up and down.

Page 43

12. The last step in the fabrication of the wing is placing the servo and attaching the control rods from the servo to the ailerons. We chose a simple system in which a single servo is used to control both the ailerons. When one aileron is pushed down the other is pulled up. The control rods are simple cycle spokes that have been bent in such a manner to achieve the movement necessary. What we learnt using the Hot Wire Cutter? It was a first time experience for the team building and using the hot wire cutter and we learnt a number of things while using it. As the process was carried out we found a number of ways to make it faster and make the finish better. A number of challenges and how we overcame them have been listed below:  During the course of fabrication we first used balsa as the wood to make the templates. On carrying out the process we found out that the hot wire started to eat into the balsa thus getting stuck in the template itself. The wing that we got first had a very bad finish and was discarded. We then tried out the same using plywood and found that the wire glided smoothly on it and thus we choose to go with plywood to make the templates. In the first few wings we faced the problem of a bow along the trailing edge. After a number of wings were cut we found that the cause for the problem was that the middle portion of the wire tends to move slower than the extremes thus causing the bow. The problem was rectified by moving beyond the trailing edge of the template and staying in the foam for 5 seconds thus giving enough time for the wire to take up a straight shape. While cutting the wing we faced the problem of uneven heating along the length of the wire. The cause of the problem was found to be in the method we had connected the leads to the wire. We changed this and found that the wire heated evenly. While cutting the groove for the spar we found that at the centre portion of the wing the groove was very shallow but at the ends it was very deep. We tried raising the middle portion and cutting the groove. This proved to work but we required a number of passes and had the problem of the wire cutting all the way through the foam. We found out that the best solution was to move the hot wire very slowly. This once again helps the natural bow that is formed in the wire to come back to the straight line configuration. Once the first cut is made, the cutter is kept at the bottom of the groove for 5 seconds and then moved up slowly.

With every wing that we made we were able to get a much better finish and were able to get a finished wing much faster. Another major problem that we had to overcome was how to prevent the rubber bands which hold the wing in place on the fuselage from eating into the foam? The solution that we arrived at is a simple one. We used a slightly think plastic sheet and wrapped it around the central portion of the wing where the rubber bands would be placed. The sheet was hot glued into place. The hot glue provided additional strength to this sheet in turn preventing the rubber bands from eating into the foam wing. The first wing that we made took not less than three days but as we kept making wings we learnt a number of things and also were able to implement a number of methods to help increase our efficiency of production. At the end we were able to make a whole wing right from printing out the shape to attaching the servos in One day. Page 44

Figure 21: The plywood template being placed on the foam block

Figure 22: The foam cutter being run on the template. Cutting the leading edge of the wing

Page 45

Figure 23: The foam cutter being run on the template. Cutting the trailing edge

Figure 24: Breaking away the excess foam around the cut wing

Page 46

Figure 25: the wing being removed from the block

Figure 26: The cut wing removed and placed on a table

Page 47

Figure 27: Applying the Monokote layer using the hot iron

Figure 28: A number of attempts to get the correct linkage between the Aileron Servo and the Ailerons

Page 48

Figure 29: Placing the Plastic protective sheath around the wing to hot glue into place

Figure 30: Completed Wing (Only MonoKote application left)

Page 49

5) Glider Tests
We carried out a number of glider tests in order to determine and check a number of parameters:    Whether the tail size was adequate enough to provide stability to the aircraft To check if the wing could sustain the impact of a belly landing To check if the foam was a good material to absorb the impact of a belly landing

We built a 1:1 scaled wing using the foam and a 1:1 scaled empennage using coroplast. These were hot glued onto a stick which represented the fuselage.

5.1) Glider test without a spar
The first test was carried out without a spar in the wing. On impact the wing broke and this suggested that the placement of a spar in the wing was compulsory.

Figure 31: Broken wing without spar

5.2) Glider Tests with Balsa Spar
The second set of tests was carried out with a new wing having twin Balsa spars and wrapped with brown tape. We found that the wing with the twin spars absorbs the impact very well and the only damage that resulted from the landings was a small chipping of the foam on the trailing edge.

Page 50

5.3) Glider tests with Carbon Fibre spar
The third set of tests was carried out with a single carbon fibre spar placed at quarter chord. The spar gave immense strength to the wing and was clearly better than having a double balsa spar. Once again the only problem was the slight chipping of the foam on landing impact. This could be easily prevented by giving a layer of protective coating on the surface of the foam. The final set of tests was carried out with a wing which had a carbon fibre spar and a layer of MonoKote applied on its surface. This solved the problem of the trailing edge chipping on landing. We decided to go ahead with this form of the wing.

Figure 32: Glider with full scale wing and empennage in flight

Page 51

FLIGHT TESTS

Page 52

6) Maiden Flight
Date: 3rd May 2011 Time: 07:30 Location: NAL grounds Weather Conditions: Moderate Winds, Overcast conditions

6.1) Setup
1. 2. 3. 4. Wing Span= 95cm 1300 mah Battery Coroplast Fuselage Wing fixed by Rubber Bands being wrapped around the Fuselage

6.2) Summary
This was the first time we were flying our aircraft. Our main aim was to take-off and land. We wanted to check if the aircraft was air worthy and if the entire setup would work. It was also the first ever flight for our pilot

6.3) Flight Path
1. To Take-off at full throttle 2. Turn 3. Land without damaging the model

6.4) Objectives Achieved
1. The take-off was achieved successfully 2. Turn and glide were achieved successfully 3. Landing was perfect

6.5) Duration of Flight

-

21 seconds

Page 53

6.6) Comments
Form our first flight we were able to infer the following:    The aircraft took off at a very steep R/C. Thus the motor was switched off at the peak of ascent. The aircraft began an unpowered glide covering 2 circuits of the ground showing that the aircraft has very good glider characteristics. The aircraft landed smoothly without any damage. The landing was not entirely a smooth touch down but we managed to land it successfully. The foam layer that we had added for protection at the nose of the aircraft had done its job well. In fact on inspection we saw that the foam layer had taken the impact and that there was no damage on the balsa fuselage.

6.7) Damage Reported
There was no damage as such to the aircraft. Only the foam layer that had been added for protection had taken sum mud on its surface which was a clear indication that the aircraft landed on the layer.

Page 54

Figure 33: The NAL Grounds where the flight test was carried out

Figure 34: The aircraft taking off by hand launch

Page 55

7) Flight Test Number 1: First Flight with Coroplast Fuselage
Date: 5th May 2011 Time: 16:30 Location: Disused Test Track Weather Conditions: Moderate Winds

7.1) Setup
1. 2. 3. 4. Wing Span= 95cm 1300 mah Battery Coroplast Fuselage Wing fixed by Rubber Bands being wrapped around the Fuselage

7.2) Summary
This was the first flight of the coroplast Fuselage model. Our main aim was to check if there were any changes brought about due to change in the Fuselage material from traditional Balsa to coroplast. The coroplast fuselage is slightly heavier than the Balsa model. Also this was the first flight in moderate wind conditions in an open field.

7.3) Flight Path
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. To Take-off at a medium rate of climb Carry out a Left Aileron turn Trim the control surfaces in flight Carry out a complete circle Carry out a Straight in approach Try a smooth landing

7.4) Objectives Achieved
1. The take-off was achieved successfully 2. Left Aileron Turn 3. Trimming was carried out during the flight 4. The circle was successfully achieved 5. Lining up with the runway was done successfully

Page 56

7.5) Duration of Flight 7.6) Comments

-

1 minute

From this first flight we learnt the following:  During launch the aircraft must be held such that the orientation of the wings is parallel to the ground. As we near the launch velocity the aircraft starts to lift off and the person launching must simply let go of the aircraft and MUST NOT try and push it into the air  The control surfaces are adequate and provide a good amount of control for roll and pitch movements of the aircraft.  The control surfaces need to be trimmed in the first flight. This is because of the removable wing. Every time the wing is mounted and dismounted (for transportation), there is a need to remove the servo horn. This in turn causes a change in the Neutral Position of the control surfaces. A certain amount of setting can be done on the ground by visual reference but the actual feel for the controls can be got only in flight, thus the trimming has to be carried out in flight.  Once trimmed the aircraft is very stable. We were able to achieve a complete 360 degree aileron turn. The turn was a large radius turn. The aircraft had to be given additional throttle during the turn as it tends to loose altitude as it carries out the maneuver.  Lining up for landing proved to be the most challenging part of the flight as this was carried out for the first time. The aircraft is made to gain altitude and made to point towards the runway. The throttle is brought to Zero  As the aircraft comes closer to the ground the attitude control was given through inputs to the elevator causing the aircraft to flare. The landing was not entirely a smooth touch down but we managed to land it successfully.

7.7) Damage Reported
There was no damage as such to the aircraft; there were slight bruises that were purely superficial. The following was noted:  The wing had displaced slightly forward  No damage to the Empennage  No damage to the Fuselage  A complete check of all the servos and the motor was carried out and No damage was noted.

Page 57

Figure 35: The team setting up the model before flight

Figure 36: Aircraft being launched and pilot with remote

Page 58

8) Flight Test Number 2: Acrobatics and Manoeuvrability Test
Date: 5th May 2011 Time: 17:00 Location: Disused Test Track Weather Conditions: Moderate Winds

8.1) Setup
1. 2. 3. 4. Wing Span= 95cm 1300 mah Battery Coroplast Fuselage Wing fixed by Rubber Bands being wrapped around the Fuselage

8.2) Summary
This was the second flight of the coroplast Fuselage model. Our aim in this flight was to check the durability of the aircraft by putting it through high G turns and through few acrobatic manoeuvres. We also wanted to check how effective the rubber bands were in holding the wing in position by putting the wing through this highly demanding test.

8.3) Flight Path
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. To Take-off at a High rate of climb Carry out a sharp Left Aileron turn and level off Carry out a complete 360 degree turn Carry out a tighter 360 degree turn Level off Clock wise direction loop Sharp 180 degree turn Anti-clock wise loop Line up and perform a Straight in approach Landing

8.4) Objectives Achieved
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. The take-off was achieved successfully Sharp Left Aileron Turn 360 degree turn Tighter 360 degree turn CW loop 180 degree turn Anti-clock wise loop Page 59

8. Straight in approach landing partially successful

8.5) Duration of Flight: 1.10 minute 8.6) Comments
   The aircraft is very manoeuvrable and is able to take sharp turns quite easily. The loss in altitude during the sharp turns is kept under control by increasing the throttle. The aircraft was able to pull both directional loops with ease and it was easy to get it back in control. The rubber bands held the wing in position during the flight. There was no shifting of the wing during the flight.

8.7) Damage Reported
There was no damage as such to the aircraft; there were slight bruises that were purely superficial. The following was noted:  The wing had not displaced on this landing  Slight superficial damage to the Empennage  No damage to the Fuselage  A complete check of all the servos and the motor was carried out and No damage was noted.

Figure 37: Aircraft in flight

Page 60

9) Flight Test Number 3: Heavy Cross Winds with Aborted Landing
Date: 5th May 2011 Time: 17:15 Location: Disused Test Track Weather Conditions: High Cross winds

9.1) Setup
1. 2. 3. 4. Wing Span= 95cm 1300 mah Battery Coroplast Fuselage Wing fixed by Rubber Bands being wrapped around the Fuselage

9.2) Summary
This was the third flight of the coroplast Fuselage model. Our aim in this flight was to fly the sorties that we would be doing during an aerial tracking mission. The flight would test the ability of the aircraft to fly straight line paths at a level attitude and at the end of the run carry out a turn and repeat the flight in the opposite direction a slight distance offset from the first run.

9.3) Flight Path
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. To Take-off at a moderate rate of climb Carry out a Left aileron turn Fly a straight path Carry out a tight 180 degree turn Fly a straight path Carry out a tight 180 degree turn Fly a straight path Line up for a landing Attempt a flared, kiss landing

9.4) Objectives Achieved
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The take-off was achieved successfully Left Aileron turn Sortie of straight line fly-by’s followed by the turns Line up Successful touch down Page 61

9.5) Duration of Flight: 2.30 minutes 9.6) Comments
  The aircraft is very manoeuvrable and was able to achieve the sortie easily. On landing approach the aircraft faced a strong crosswind. The effect of the gust was to roll the aircraft CW direction. The pilot tried to put the nose into the incoming wind in order to perform a Crab Landing but the gust was too strong and blew the aircraft off course. He managed to line it back up but just 10 feet above the ground the aircraft faced yet another crosswind gust throwing the aircraft out of the line up once again. We were able to power up and gain altitude, finish a circuit and line up again and land successfully. This clearly proved that the motor produces enough lift to help the aircraft climb even at very low airspeeds.

9.7) Damage Reported
There was no damage as such to the aircraft  The wing had not displaced on this landing  No damage to the Empennage  No damage to the Fuselage  A complete check of all the servos and the motor was carried out and No damage was noted.

Figure 38: Aircraft facing a strong crosswind on landing approach

Page 62

10) Flight Test Number 4: Wing Failure and First Crash
Date: 5th May 2011 Time: 17:30 Location: Disused Test Track Weather Conditions: Heavy Wind Conditions

10.1) Setup
1. 2. 3. 4. Wing Span= 95cm 1300 mah Battery Coroplast Fuselage Wing fixed by Rubber Bands being wrapped around the Fuselage

10.2) Summary
This was the fourth flight of the coroplast fuselage model in one day. This was to subject the aircraft to rugged use by continuously taking off and landing in short duration flights.

10.3) Flight Path
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. To Take-off at a moderate rate of climb Carry out a Left aileron turn Carry out a number of circular sorties Line up with the runway Land

10.4) Objectives Achieved
1. The take-off was achieved successfully 2. Left Aileron turn

10.5) Duration of Flight: 0.50 minutes

Page 63

10.6) Comments
   The weather conditions got worse after take-off. There were strong guts that were blowing the aircraft making it extremely difficult to control. The pilot tried to bring the aircraft back in for a landing but wasn’t successful in doing so While flying into the wind the aircraft tended to pitch up and stall in spite of throttling up to 100%. The reason was the strong head winds that were hitting the aircraft. While attempting the final sortie, the aircraft stalled at a high AoA. From the ground a flutter was visible on the right wing. We immediately realized that the wing had failed. The aircraft crashed and the chase crew was sent out to recover the aircraft.

10.7) Damage Reported
The following was noted on recovery:  The rubber bands that hold the wing had slipped from its support and had eaten into the foam all the way till the carbon fibre spar. This had caused the wing to turn around the spar. This was the flutter that was visible from the ground.  The Aileron servo had lost one of the mounting screws.  Empennage had superficial damage.  No damage to the Fuselage

Figure 39: the rubber band has eaten half way into the foam wing. The left rubber band has been put back into position

Page 64

Figure 40: the wing could be actuated about the carbon fibre spar. This is why the flutter was seen from the ground

Figure 41: the missing Servo screw.

Page 65

10.8) Analysis of the Crash
We carried out a detailed examination of the crash in order to find the reason why it had occurred and find a solution to prevent it from occurring in subsequent flights From our study we found two main reasons as to how the crash had been caused: 1. The Aileron servo had lost one of its two mounting screws. This could have caused an unbalanced force on the ailerons which in turn would have caused excess forces on the wing and displaced it from its position. This in turn would have caused the rubber bands to slip and eat into the foam causing failure of the wing 2. The second reason was that the rubber band had slipped from its position and eaten into the foam wing. This in turn would have caused the flutter of the wing. The flutter in turn would have pulled on the control rods of the aileron servo and caused a pulling and pushing force on it. This in turn caused the servo to move and pulled out the servo mounting screw. Of the two reasons the second one seems more likely.

10.9) Changes in Design
After the crash we made a few changes in the design to prevent the same problems from occurring again: 1. The size plastic that we wrap around the central portion of the wing was increased from a span of 10cm to 20cm in order to make sure that there is no way the rubber bands can slip. 2. The Aileron servo mount material was changed from Indian Balsa to 3mm plywood. Also a layer of hot glue is applied on the surface of the plywood. The two layers ensure that the servo is held tight and secure.

Page 66

11)

Flight Test Number 5: Gusty Weather Flight

Date: 15th May 2011 Time: 15:45 Location: Disused Test Track Weather Conditions: Overcast Skies, High Velocity Gusty Winds

11.1) Setup
1. 2. 3. 4. Wing Span= 85cm, High Aspect Ratio 2300 mah Battery Coroplast Fuselage Wing fixed by Rubber Bands being wrapped around the Fuselage

11.2) Summary
The main aim of the test was to check if the aircraft structure can withstand the extremely gusty winds and also to evaluate the flight dynamics of the aircraft in these conditions

11.3) Flight Path
1. 2. 3. 4. To Take-off at a medium rate of climb Carry out a Left turn Take a circuit above the runway Land

11.4) Objectives Achieved
1. The take-off was achieved successfully

11.5) Duration of Flight: 3 seconds

Page 67

11.6) Comments
1. 2. The aircraft levelled off, elevator control was lost abruptly and the aircraft went into a shallow dive. Crash landed on the runway

11.7) Crash Analysis
1. As soon as the launcher released the aircraft, a side gust shifted the wing, making it skew with respect to the fuselage. 2. The trailing edge of the wing jammed the elevator servo, thus fixing the elevator in one place. 3. This caused the aircraft to go into a shallow dive

11.8) Damage Reported
1. The wing had displaced from its position, but was structurally alright 2. The coroplast fuselage absorbed the shock of impact well and did not show any sign of failure 3. The propeller shattered into 2 fragments

11.9) Changes to Design: None

Page 68

12) Flight Test Number 6: First Long Endurance Flight
Date: 13th May 2011 Time: 12:00 Location: Disused Test Track Weather Conditions: Clear Skies, Low Winds

12.1) Setup
1. 2. 3. 4. Wing Span= 85cm, High Aspect Ratio 2300 mah Battery Coroplast Fuselage Wing fixed by Rubber Bands being wrapped around the Fuselage

12.2) Summary
This was the first flight with the high aspect ratio 85 cm wing. The main aim of the flight was to fly for 5 minutes, the longest endurance flight till date. We wanted to check how much the battery would drain by during the flight, check by how much the components inside the aircraft heat up during a long flight and also check how the aircraft performs during long duration flights.

12.3) Flight Path
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. To Take-off at a medium rate of climb Carry out a Left Aileron turn Trim the control surfaces in flight Carry out circuits for the 5 minute duration Carry out a Straight in approach Smooth Landing

12.4) Objectives Achieved
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Flight duration of 5 minutes was achieved The take-off was achieved successfully Left Aileron Turn Trimming was carried out during the flight A number of circuits were carried out Lining up with the runway was done successfully Page 69

12.5) Duration of Flight: 6 minutes 12.6) Comments
From this first flight we learnt the following:  The aircraft performs well on long duration flights. The pilot was comfortable flying the aircraft for the long duration. He did not feel the need to continuously give input to the aircraft thus proving it to be stable which is an advantage for long duration flights as it helps prevent pilot fatigue from setting in.  For most of the flight we were able to fly at 75% throttle.  The battery and the other electronic components heated up normally. No overheated components were noted.  The lining up and the landing were carried out successfully. While landing the aircraft hit a low bush. The impact was on the right wing. When checked it was noted that no damage had been sustained. The foam wing had absorbed the impact very well.

12.7) Damage Reported
There was no damage as such to the aircraft in spite of the wing hitting the bush. The following was noted:  The wing had displaced slightly at an angle. This was a result of the impact into the bush. The wing was put back into its correct position immediately with no effort at all.  No damage to the leading edge which clearly shows that the foam wing is ideal for impact absorption  No damage to the Empennage  No damage to the Fuselage  A complete check of all the servos and the motor was carried out and no damage was noted.

Page 70

13) Flight Test Number 7: Flight Test for Manoeuvrability
Date: 13th May 2011 Time: 12:20 Location: Disused Test Track Weather Conditions: Clear Skies, Low Winds

13.1) Setup
1. 2. 3. 4. Wing Span= 85cm, High Aspect Ratio 2300 mah Battery Coroplast Fuselage Wing fixed by Rubber Bands being wrapped around the Fuselage

13.2) Summary
The main aim of the test was to check the aircrafts manoeuvrability by making it to carry out a “Figure of 8” turn followed by a number of circles each lesser in radius. These tests help us determine the shortest turn radius of the aircraft and help the pilot gain knowledge on how the aircraft performs and responds while carrying out the manoeuvres.

13.3) Flight Path
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. To Take-off at a medium rate of climb Carry out a Left Aileron turn Carry out a Figure of 8 Turn Try a Zero Radius Turn Carry out a number of circular circuits each with a smaller radius Smooth Landing

13.4) Objectives Achieved
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The take-off was achieved successfully Left Aileron Turn Two Figure of 8 turns were carried out Zero radius turn was attempted Short radius circuits were carried out

13.5) Duration of Flight: 2.30 minutes
Page 71

13.6) Comments
From this first flight we learnt the following:  The aircraft carried out the Figure if 8 turn with ease.  A zero radius turn was attempted. In order to carry out the turn, the pilot needs to cut back on the throttle, give a nose up moment through the up elevator and give a full directional aileron. The resulting forces cause the aircraft to pitch up and roll. The problem with this maneuver is that the aircraft loses altitude. The turn was attempted and the aircraft did respond to the inputs and the turn was partially carried out but the aircraft started to lose altitude so preventive action was taken, the turn was aborted and a circuit was carried out.  A number of turns were carried out and each of the turns had a smaller radius as compared to the previous turn. The aircraft handled and responded well.  The lining up and the landing were carried out successfully. The throttle was cut off after lining up and the aircraft flared about 15 feet above the ground and landed in a perfect landing.

13.7) Damage Reported
There was no damage to the aircraft.

Page 72

14) Flight Test Number 8: First Flight in PESIT with On-board Camera
Date: 16th May 2011 Time: 13:00 Location: PESIT Weather Conditions: Clear Skies, moderate Winds

14.1) Setup
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Wing Span= 85cm, High Aspect Ratio 2300 mah Battery Coroplast Fuselage Wing fixed by Rubber Bands being wrapped around the Fuselage On board camera

14.2) Summary
The main aim of the test was to fly our first flight over PESIT. The additional payload on this flight was the pen camera. We wanted to try and take a video from the aircraft of the college campus in order to retrieve few aerial pictures

14.3) Flight Path
1. To Take-off at a medium rate of climb 2. Carry out 2 circuits of college 3. Line up and carry out a Smooth Landing

14.4) Objectives Achieved
1. 2. 3. 4. The take-off was achieved successfully The circuits were successful A smooth landing was achieved On board camera successfully recorded a video and images were retrieved.

14.5) Duration of Flight: 2.30 minutes

Page 73

14.6) Comments
Through this flight we were able to conclude the following: 1. That the pen camera is good enough for the aerial photography that we wanted to achieve. The video quality was good. 2. The camera placement provided a clear view of the ground and there were no hindrances during the flight. We noted that the camera tends to shake when the aircraft is throttled up.

14.7) Damage Reported
There was no damage to the aircraft or the camera.

Page 74

Pictures of the college obtained from the on-board camera after processing:

Figure 42: PESIT Garden and Fountain

Figure 43: Professor M.R.Doreswamy Silver Jublee Block (A- Block)

Page 75

Figure 44: Department of Mechanical Engineering (C-Block)

Figure 45: F Block (left) and Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (Right)

Page 76

Figure 46: Tech Park (E-Block)

Figure 47: Boys Hostel blocks

Page 77

Figure 48: Stitched images showing A-block, the fountain, entry way and the Department of Mechanical Engineering, motorcycle parking in a single frame Pic:

Figure 49: Stitched image showing the new football ground and a part of the cricket ground

Page 78

15)

Flight test number 9: 20 Minute Flight

Date: 17th May 2011 Time: 11:00 Location: Disused Test Track Weather Conditions: Clear Skies, No Winds

15.1) Setup
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Wing Span= 85cm, High Aspect Ratio 2300 mah Battery Coroplast Fuselage Wing fixed by Rubber Bands being wrapped around the Fuselage Camera on Board

15.2) Summary
The objective of this test flight was to see whether the aircraft with this configuration can match the project requirement of 20 minutes flight time. The aircraft was to be flown just like it would on a real mission in very large oval shaped patterns and with very gentle turns.

15.3) Flight Path
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. To Take-off at a medium rate of climb Carry out a Left Aileron turn Trim the control surfaces in flight Carry out circuits for the 20 minute duration Carry out a Straight in approach Smooth Landing

15.4) Objectives Achieved
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. The take-off was achieved successfully Left Aileron Turn Trimming was carried out during the flight A number of circuits were carried out Flight duration of 20 minutes was achieved Lining up with the runway was done successfully Very smooth soft belly landing

15.5) Duration of Flight: 20 minutes and 36 seconds
Page 79

Figure 50: Aircraft taking off

Page 80

Figure 51: Aircraft on final approach

Figure 52: Aircraft levelling off

Page 81

Figure 53: Aircraft attempting Flare

Figure 54: Aircraft after landing

Page 82

15.6) Comments
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The aircraft matched the project requirement of 20 minute flight time. The flight was carried out with a camera on board. The aircraft was successfully trimmed to fly stick free The aircraft can sustain itself at about 52-53% thrust There was no loss in power for the duration of the flight, i.e. the throttle setting did not need to be changed once the aircraft was trimmed. 6. The aircraft is very stable when flying in a straight line.

15.7) Damage Reported: None

The team with the aircraft after the successful 20 minute flight

Page 83

16) Comparison of Google Earth Snapshots with Snapshots Taken From the P❺
The photographs retrieved from the on board camera were compared to images from Google Earth. We carried out one trial flight with a GPS system on board. The photographs below show a part of the flight path and where a snapshot was taken by the UAV, on Google Earth.

Figure 55: Snapshot (12.97108, 77.67567)

Page 84

Figure 56: Snapshot (12.560668, 77.327044)

Page 85

Figure 57: Snapshot (12.55549, 77.324981)

Page 86

17)

What Makes the P❺ Different?

The USP of our model is its base cost. Since the aircraft is either made of coroplast or balsa, and not an expensive, exotic material such as Kevlar or carbon fibre, the base cost of the model as a whole comes down drastically. A lot of the materials used to build the aircraft were not specialized aeromodellers’ materials, but things that we adapted such that they served the purpose. For example, the wing coating where the rubber bands sit is usually coated with a layer of fibre glass. This gives a very strong smooth finish, but is very expensive and also has a very large weight penalty. We used a stick file to do the same job, thus essentially reducing the cost of coating from about 400 rupees to 10 rupees, while having a lower weight penalty. Of course, the strength provided by the stick file is much lower than that of the glass fibre, but the strength provided was enough. We have used this same approach a number of times in numerous places, thus effectively lowering the cost of the aircraft. As part of our literature survey, we looked at the cost of similar sized UAVs in the market. One of the aircraft we found was a low cost mini UAV called Featherlite, manufactured by Aeroart. This low cost UAV has a wingspan of 1.9m and has an endurance of 1 hour. It costs 5,03,700 Indian rupees (7900 Euros). The cost break up of our aircraft with an autopilot (Future Work) integrated is as given below The following is the cost estimate for this aircraft if it is to be sold as a kit:  The aircraft is available in two specifications: o Balsa fuselage o Coroplast fuselage

Both the kits will come with the same equipment but would differ only in the fuselage material and hence their costs

17.1) Cost Split Up:
1. Electronics: Component Tipple 20C 2300 mah 3S EMAX ESC 25A EMAX Grand Turbo Motor GT2210/13 Futaba Tx/Rx 4Ch Servo Plastic Gear Servo Metal Gear 3.5 mm Gold Connectors TOTAL
Page 87

Quantity 1 1 1 1 2 1 2

Cost (Rupees) 1450 1000 725 6000 550 480 90 10,295

2. Raw material: o Balsa Fuselage: The Balsa fuselage requires two sheets of Balsa measuring 1m X 10cm. Each sheet costs Rs 350. In addition, half a sheet of Balsa is required to build the Empennage. Plywood reinforcement at 3 sections along with the motor mount = Rs 50. Thus material cost for fuselage = Rs 925 o Coroplast Fuselage: The coroplast fuselage requires sheet of coroplast measuring 60cm X 50cm. This sheet would approximately cost Rs 50. Plywood reinforcement at 3 sections along with the motor mount = Rs 50. The coroplast model also would require half a sheet of Blasa costing Rs 175, Thus the total cost for the Coroplast fuselage = Rs 275 Foam: Both the models require foam for building the wing. The approximate cost for foam to build a wing is around Rs 50 3. Additional Components: Components Carbon Fibre Rod Horns and Clevis MonoKote, 2 colours Propeller (2 nos) Cycle Spokes (4 nos) TOTAL 4. Miscellaneous Items: Item Glue Double Sided Tape Cutter Plywood Sheet (3mm) TOTAL Fuselage Type Cost (Rupees) Balsa 12070 Cost (Rupees) 200 25 200 180 10 615

Cost (Rupees) 100 10 25 50 185 Coroplast 11420

Page 88

The cost of the aircraft if it is to be sold as a Ready to Fly (RTF) kit is approximately 11000 rupees. This places our coroplast model very competitively in the trainer aircraft class of remote controlled aircraft. Another aircraft with specifications similar to ours can be found at the following address:
http://www.jackshobbies.in/products_big.aspx?imgid=1061

The cost breakup of the components if the P❺ was to be converted into a fully-fledged UAV is as given below Cost of Camera = Rs 1250 Cost of GPS = Rs 2900 Autopilot = Rs 18,900 (400 USD) UAV Specific PDA = Rs 50,000 Fuselage Type Cost (Rupees) Balsa 85,120 Coroplast 84,470

As mentioned above, The Featherlite manufactured by Aeroart costs 5,03,700 Indian rupees (7900 Euros). The above estimate shows that the cost of our UAV would be less than a fifth that of the Featherlite. Inspite of having a lower endurance, the fact that our UAV is more compact and cheaper would place it above the Featherlite when it comes to non-military operations such as disaster management, vehicular movement tracking updates and animal radio collar tracking.

Page 89

18)

Future Work

18.1) Autopilot
Every UAV is armed with an autopilot. The autopilot enables the operator to fly the aircraft by only inputting target coordinates on a computer. The autopilot also assists in stabilizing the aircraft and optimizing the various systems onboard the UAV. The cheapest quality UAV autopilot available today is an open source autopilot whose code is available online called ARDUPILOT from www.diydrones.com. This autopilot costs roughly 18000 rupees and provides both in flight stabilization and GPS navigation.

Figure 58: Autopilot chipset

18.2) Live telemetry and Video feed
Our aircraft records video and GPS tracking data onboard and this data is recovered when the aircraft lands. A UAV’s current position needs to be known to the operator while it is in flight, along with a live video feed of the area it is flying over. The telemetry (tracking) part is taken care of by the autopilot. The video feed is an optional upgrade with the ARDUPILOT, but costs approximately 5000 rupees more.

Page 90

18.3) Extension of Flight time
Improvements in the aerodynamics of the aircraft by making it more streamlined, adding appropriate wingtips, designing a specialized airfoil for our application. Use of exotic materials such as composites to lower the weight of the structure as well as strengthen it more. On board system managers that optimize the energy usage.

18.4) Portability
The whole aircraft along with its controller station needs to be made portable since the range of the aircraft is limited. Due to this short range the aircraft needs to be taken close to the area that needs to be scanned and then launched. This means that the operator would have to carry it to such a location. Thus the design, lightening and strengthening of all the controller and its subsystems needs to be done keeping this in mind.

Page 91

19)

Conclusion

The challenge of designing, fabricating and flying a mini unmanned aerial vehicle for at least 20 minutes has been achieved. Over the course of 2 months, 2 separate designs were created on paper and their gliders were evaluated. The aircraft chosen was then fabricated over the period of a month and the aircraft first flew on the 10th of May, 2011 for 18 seconds. Subsequently a number of flight tests were carried with various configurations to study their effects on flight dynamics while the aircraft was flying. Each flight pushed the known limit of the aircraft a little more, whether it was the flight time or the structural strength. The design objectives of the project were achieved on the 17th of May, 2011 when the aircraft flew non-stop for more than 20 minutes. During the project apart from having fun, we learnt a number of things.    The first and most important thing that we learnt is how to work as a team, then we learnt how difficult it is to make something fly. We learnt to use a number of tools for the first time, we learnt the challenges in fabrication We learnt how to improve upon our mistakes and we learnt the hard way the truth behind the adage, “learn from your mistakes”.

Each day was a new challenge and a learning curve and we overcame these challenges through hard work, team spirit and sheer determination. This is not the end of this project, but just the beginning. The aircraft is yet to be pushed to its utter limits, optimized to fly better, and with auto-pilot integration, our aircraft has the potential to be the finest and cheapest unmanned flight surveillance solution to a number of demanding situations.

Page 92

Appendix A: Software Used

SolidWorks 2010
SolidWorks is a 3D mechanical CAD program and developed by Dassault Systems. SolidWorks is currently used by over 1.3 million designers and engineers in 130,000 companies worldwide. SolidWorks was the CAD tool of choice for this project. All CAD models and drawings were done using SolidWorks. SolidWorks was preferred as it has an easy to understand interface that can easily be used by both amateurs and professionals to create CAD models of objects very easily and with a very high degree of realism and accuracy in a very short span of time. The SolidWorks curve wizard is unique to SolidWorks in terms of the ease with which files having coordinates of the curves can be imported. This curve wizard was especially helpful for us, as we had to make drawings and models of different airfoils that we were going to use. Many other CAD software such as SolidEdge were tried but the ease and the functionality of SolidWorks scored over all other software. The ability of the software to store the models and drawings in different formats was also of great benefit to us. SolidWorks is more than just a CAD tool. It can be used to carry out structural and flow anlaysis as well as computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations. Real life conditions and constraints can be applied to the model and simulated to understand the behaviour of the model.

XFLR5
XFLR5 is an analysis tool for airfoils, wing and planes operating at low Reynolds Numbers. It includes: XFoil’s Direct and Inverse analysis capabilities. Wing design and analysis capabilities based on the lifting line theory, on the vortex lattice method, and on a 3D plane method. XFLR5 is capable of plotting an airfoil in 2D by importing the coordinates from a notepad file. This feature of XFLR was not only made evaluation of airfoil parameters easy but also saved us valuable time. XFLR5 was used to evaluate airfoil parameters such as the lift vs angle of attack, the coefficient of lift vs coefficient of drag etc. The program evaluated these characteristics at different angles of attack, Reynolds Number and mach number. The results were represented in a graphical form, which made it easy for us to interpret and understand the airfoil performance. XFLR5 is available as freeware and is used by students and professionals around the globe to understand and study the performance parameters of airfoils.

Page 93

MotoCalc
MotoCalc is a program for predicting the performance of an electric model aircraft power system, based on the characteristics of the motor, battery, gearbox, propeller or ducted fan, and speed control. By specifying a range for the number of cells, gear ratio, propeller diameter, and propeller pitch, MotoCalc can produce a table of predictions for each combination. MotoCalc can predict weight, current, voltage at the motor terminals, input power, output power, power loss, motor efficiency, motor RPM, power-loading, electrical efficiency, motor RPM, propeller or fan RPM, static thrust, pitch speed, and run time. By producing a table of predictions, MotoCalc helps in determining the optimum propeller size and/or gear ratio for the aircraft. MotoCalc can also carry out in-flight analysis for a particular combination of components, predicting lift, drag, current, voltage, power, motor and electrical efficiency, RPM, thrust, pitch speed, propeller and overall efficiency, and run time at various flight speeds. It can also predict stall speed, hands-off level flight speed, throttle, and motor temperature, optimal level flight speed, throttle, maximum level flight speed, rate of climb, and power-off rate of sink. MotoCalc's graphing facility can plot any two parameters against any other (for example, lift and drag vs. airspeed), making it easier to interpret performance of the aircraft. For particular requirements, such as a minimum run time, maximum current, or maximum power loss (which is dissipated as heat), MotoCalc's filter facility can be used to filter out the unacceptable combinations. As we were beginners to electric flight, MotoCalc’s MotoWizard was able to guide us and give suggestions regarding the ideal power system for our requirements by asking a few questions about the model and our preferences. The results of the analysis were very detailed and explained in simple language how the aircraft and the power system would perform under different conditions.

Page 94

Appendix B: Original Design
 Delta Wing Plan form  500 mm Wing span  20 Minute Endurance

Page 95

Wing Loading:
The relationship between wing size, weight, and speed is embodied in the "Great Flight Diagram", which plots weight against cruising speed shown below.

Fig: The Great Flight Diagram Page 96

Weight Estimation by Component Breakup: Components
Servos GPS Camera Receiver Batteries Motor ESC Structure Fuselage Wing Tail Carbon fibre 2m TOTAL WEIGHT

Weight (grams)
30 70 35 28 100 145 25

72 73.575 20

10 608.575

This weight is a very rough approximation of the all up weight of the aircraft. Therefore the weight considered for design was assumed to be double this, due to factors such as reinforcement of the structure, glue, additional components, wiring etc. The weight of the aircraft being designed has been approximated to 1.25 Kg From the Great Flight Diagram, we see that the weight of our aircraft comes in the range of the Snowy Owl and the Osprey. Considering the Osprey’s characteristic values from the graph we have: Cruising speed ≈ 15 m/s Wing Loading = W/S ≈ 100 N/m2 = 10.1936 Kg/m2 From the wing loading we can calculate the Wing Area (S) = 1.250 / 10.1936 = 0.12262 m2 Wing Span (b) has been predefined in the design criteria as 500mm, Aspect ratio = A.R = = 0.52 / 0.12262 = 2.038736

Page 97

Wing Geometry:
Now the wingspan, surface area and aspect ratio are known. Taper ratio is the ratio of tip chord to root chord. We assume the entire wing to be swept with a taper ratio (k) of 0.45; This is because of structural reasons. If the taper ratio is one, the most amount of lift is produced but due to a uniformly distributed load the wing becomes weak structurally. If the taper ratio is zero the wing is structurally very strong but is aerodynamically inefficient since a lot of lift producing span is lost. A taper ratio of 0.45 is the optimum value taking structural safety and lift producing ability into account. Root chord (Cr) =

(

)

= 2* 0.12262 / (0.5 * (1 + 0.45)) = 0.338276 m Tip chord = k * (Cr) = 0.45 * (0.338276) = 0.152224 m

Mean Aerodynamic Chord = MAC =

(

)

= 0.667 * (0.45 + 1/(1 + 0.45)) * (0.338276)) = 0.2570 m

Lift and Drag:
Calculating Reynolds Number at the cruise speed of 15m/s ; Re = = (1.225* 15* 0.2570)/ (2*10-5) = 236129.7 Clrequired = ( ) = (1.250 * 9.81) / (0.5* 1.225* (15^2) * 0.12262)

= 0.725624 Page 98

Airfoil selection
For aircraft that operate in the region of low Reynolds number and have a requirement of high lift, there is a series of specialized airfoils created by Michael S. Selig. These airfoils are now standard on this size of aircraft. We have chosen the selig1210 because of its high lift and moderate drag along with its very gentle stalling characteristics. This implies that the operator would have a large buffer zone in which he can recover the aircraft if it approaches stall.

Fig: Cl vs Alpha

Fig Cl vs Cd

For this value of Clrequired, from the graph the value of alpha initial = -3.5 Degrees CdInduced = ( = 0.082249 Cf = 0 ( ( )) / (Log (2255325.43))2.58 ( ) = (0.725624^2) / (3.14* 2.038736)

= 0.006002 Cdw = 2 = 0.012003

Page 99

Fuselage drag calculations:
Fuselage length = 0.5m Fuselage height = 0.06m Fuselage width = 0.06m Fuselage wetted area (A) = 0.075m2 Cdf =

= 0.005943*0.075 / 0.122625
= 0.003671 Overall Drag coefficient: CdO = Cdw + Cdf = 0.011886 + 0.003671 = 0.015674 Accounting 10% more drag for interference we have; Cd = CdO + CdInduced = 0.015674 + 0.082249 = 0.099491

Page 100

Velocity Correction:
Our initial cruise velocity of 15m/s was assumed from the great flight diagram. In the second iteration we will find the optimum velocities for maximum endurance and range. Velocity 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Cl 6.530612 4.535147 3.331945 2.55102 2.015621 1.632653 1.3493 1.133787 0.966067 0.832986 0.725624 0.637755 D0 0.028234 0.040658 0.055339 0.07228 0.091479 0.112938 0.136654 0.16263 0.190864 0.221358 0.25411 0.28912 DL 12.50957 8.687199 6.382432 4.88655 3.860978 3.127392 2.584621 2.1718 1.850528 1.595608 1.389952 1.221637 D 12.5378 8.727857 6.437772 4.95883 3.952457 3.240329 2.721276 2.33443 2.041392 1.816966 1.644061 1.510758 Cd 6.677229 3.227899 1.74926 1.031607 0.649676 0.431424 0.299435 0.215841 0.160825 0.123426 0.097286 0.078572 VSink -5.11225 -4.27051 -3.67498 -3.23512 -2.90089 -2.64247 -2.4411 -2.28446 -2.16417 -2.07442 -2.01108 -1.97122

17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

0.564932
0.503905 0.452258 0.408163 0.370216 0.337325 0.30863 0.283447 0.261224 0.241517 0.223958 0.208247 0.194132 0.181406 0.169891 0.159439 0.149922 0.141233 0.133278 0.125976 0.119259 0.113065 0.107341 0.102041 0.097124 0.092554 0.088299 0.084331

0.32639
0.365918 0.407705 0.45175 0.498055 0.546618 0.59744 0.65052 0.70586 0.763458 0.823315 0.885431 0.949805 1.016438 1.08533 1.156481 1.22989 1.305558 1.383485 1.463671 1.546115 1.630818 1.71778 1.807001 1.898481 1.992219 2.088216 2.186471

1.082142
0.965244 0.866314 0.781848 0.709159 0.646155 0.591189 0.54295 0.500383 0.462632 0.428998 0.398902 0.371866 0.347488 0.325431 0.305409 0.28718 0.270536 0.255297 0.241311 0.228444 0.216578 0.205614 0.195462 0.186044 0.17729 0.16914 0.161539 Page 101

1.408532
1.331162 1.274018 1.233598 1.207214 1.192773 1.188629 1.19347 1.206242 1.22609 1.252312 1.284333 1.321671 1.363926 1.410761 1.46189 1.51707 1.576094 1.638782 1.704982 1.774559 1.847397 1.923395 2.002463 2.084524 2.169508 2.257355 2.34801

0.064891
0.054702 0.046988 0.041061 0.036447 0.032812 0.029916 0.027587 0.025696 0.024149 0.022872 0.021811 0.020924 0.020177 0.019545 0.019008 0.018548 0.018153 0.017811 0.017516 0.017258 0.017034 0.016837 0.016663 0.01651 0.016375 0.016255 0.016148

-1.9527
-1.954 -1.97401 -2.01198 -2.0674 -2.13994 -2.22944 -2.33584 -2.45921 -2.59966 -2.75739 -2.93262 -3.12566 -3.33682 -3.56645 -3.81492 -4.08264 -4.37001 -4.67746 -5.00545 -5.35443 -5.72486 -6.11722 -6.53199 -6.96966 -7.43073 -7.9157 -8.42507

3.5 3 2.5 D 2 r a 1.5 g 1 0.5 0 0 10

Drag vs Velocity

D0 DL D

20 Velocity

30

40

50

The induced drag is minimum at high velocity and very high at low velocity. The parasite drag is minimum at low velocity and maximum at high velocity. The total drag caused due to these two components is minimum at the point of intersection of these two drags. The velocity at the minimum drag is used to get a rough estimation of the cruise velocity of the aircraft.

The velocity at which the sink rate is minimum is the velocity for maximum endurance, from the graph this is approximately 18.5 m/s. Page 102

The point of intersection of the curve and the tangent drawn from the origin to the curve gives the velocity for maximum range. This is approximately 22 m/s. Taking the velocity value for maximum range and recalculating the Reynolds Number, Re =

= 1.225* 22*0.2570 / (2*10-5) = 291226.6

Also recalculating the Cl value for maximum endurance velocity, Cl = ( ) = 12.2625 / (0.5*1.225*18.52*0.122625)

= 0.477035

Fig: Clvs Alpha

For the new value of Cl, it can be seen that the initial alpha value shifts to -4 degrees (Show by the orange line) New value of Drag = 1.3189 N Power required for cruising = = 24.4 W = 1.3189 * 18.5

Page 103

Mission
The aircraft is hand launched from ground level by the operator. The aircraft ascends to four hundred feet. The aircraft then loiters in the same area for nineteen to twenty minutes taking photographs. It then descends back to the ground.

Takeoff and climb
The takeoff velocity of the aircraft is approximately 12m/s, 2 cases have been considered for the climb analysis. In the first case, the aircraft immediately begins to climb at 12 m/s. In the second case, the aircraft accelerates to 18.5 m/s(cruise speed) and then begins to climb. The power required to climb to 400 feet is plotted against the time it takes the aircraft to attain this altitude and a suitable time is chosen such that the power consumption is not very high. The equation to evaluate power consumed for varying rates of climb is

(
W – Weight of the aircraft v – Velocity D – Drag L – Lift θ - Angle of ascent

)

Page 104

200 180 160 POWER (watts) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 20 40

Power v/s Time
18.5 m/s 12 m/s

60 TIME (s)

80

100

120

140

The graph clearly shows that the power required to climb at 18.5m/s is about 10 to 20 watts lower than if the aircraft begins to climb immediately at 12m/s. The graph also seems to almost level off at about 50 seconds. Therefore a time of 60 seconds is taken is taken to complete the ascent phase of the flight.

Energy requirements for mission
With an engine which consumes fuel such as aviation fuel or kerosene, the range or endurance of the aircraft can be estimated by applying the Breguet formula. Our aircraft does not use a consumable fuel, but rather a battery to power the electric motor, which is our primary thrust producing prime over. Thus, in this case we estimate the amount of energy (joules) required to complete the mission and then choose a suitable battery which can provide this amount of energy. Our mission is broken up into 4 phases. 1) Takeoff 2) Loiter 3) Descent Glide 4) Flare

Page 105

The energy required at each stage is estimated theoretically, and then added up to obtain the energy required for the whole mission. 1) Take-off The power required to reach four hundred feet has been estimated to be 49 watts. The aircraft is expected to achieve this in 60 seconds. The product of time and power gives the energy required. This is calculated to be 2925 J. 2) Loiter The aircraft now levels off and circles the area that has to be scanned. The aircraft remains in this phase for up to nineteen minutes. The power required for sustained flight at 18.5 m/s has been estimated at 24 watts. 3) Descent Glide After the aircraft has scanned a particular area, it begins an unpowered glide to the ground. The aircraft continues in this state till it reaches an altitude of 20 feet. 4) Flare The aircraft now slows down and increases its angle of attack to 5 degrees. This is a controlled stall phase where the aircraft nose points up, but the aircraft descends to the ground very slowly. It is also called feathering. This phase requires a power of 30 watts.

The energy required for the whole mission is estimated to be 31171.87 joules. The battery selection is done based on this requirement.

Battery Type

Rating (mah) 1500 970 1020 1300 1500

Battery Energy(J) 19980 12920.4 13586.4 51948 19980

GB/T118287 SAMSUNG BATTERY Sony Erricson BST 38 Nokia bl 5c Rcforall lipobattery Nokia BP 4L

Battery Propeller Motor Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency 90%(J) 85%(J) 85%(J) 17982 15284.7 12992 11628.36 9884.106 8401.49 12227.76 10393.6 8834.557 46753.2 39740.22 33779.19 17982 15284.7 12992

No. of Batteries 3 4 4 1 3

The efficiency of the battery, propeller and the motor are taken into account and 5 lithium polymer batteries are considered for our energy requirements. The Rcforall battery turns out to be the lightest and cheapest option. Therefore it is the battery we have chosen.

Page 106

Stability
The aircraft s designed to be very stable so that the onboard camera does not jerk or shudder, thereby not compromising on the quality of images taken. The stability along the lateral axis of the aircraft has been carried out, with a static margin of 10%, which is ideal for delta wing aircraft. The components have been placed as per space constraints, and then a dead weight is placed at the aft most position of the aircraft to shift the center of gravity appropriately. Component Motor Rudder servo+ESC Reciever + Camera Wing Battery GPS Elevon Servos Fuselage Length (cm) 1.75 4.625 9.35 38.72414 46.5 46.25 23.125 25 Weight (Grams) 145 20 63 73.575 93 75 18 72 Moment (gm-cm) 253.75 92.5 589.05 2849.128 4324.5 3468.75 416.25 1800

The above table places the C.G. of the aircraft without the dead weight at 24.65cm from the nose of the aircraft. From the position of the wing, the expected center of gravity with a 10% static margin is calculated to be at 28.15cm from the nose. Therefore a dead weight of lead is added to the aft most position of the aircraft to pull the C.G. aft so that the aircraft balances at 28.15cm from the nose. This dead weight has been calculated to be 94gms.

Page 107

Control Surface sizing:
Aileron Sizing: The aileron span is taken as 85% of the wetted span. Therefore Aileron span = ba = = 0.85*(50-6) = 37.4 cm

Taking the ratio of Aileron span to Wing span we get 0.748

Reference: Aircraft Design: A conceptual approach by Daniel.P.Raymer

From the graph for a value of 0.748 we get the ratio of Aileron chord to Wing chord as 0.13 Therefore Aileron chord = 0.13* 0.257012 = 3.341155 cm

Page 108

Tail Sizing:

Reference: Aircraft Design: A conceptual approach by Daniel.P.Raymer

From the table above we assume the Tail volume coefficient for a Military cargo/ bomber as 0.08 For delta wings the general practice is to consider the tail area as 25% of the wing area Therefore, St = 0.25 * 0.122625 = 0.03065625 m2 Calculating Lvt which is the distance between the Aerodynamic centers of the tail and wing.

Reference: Aircraft Design: A conceptual approach by Daniel.P.Raymer

Page 109

Lvt = = 0.16 m

(

) = 0.08 * 0.5* .122625 / 0.03065625

Assuming a taper ratio for the vertical tail as 0.8 and the span to be 15cm we get; Cr = 0.227083333m Ct = 0.181666667m Also, calculating the value for MAC; MAC = 0.205216049m Considering AC to be 25% of MAC, AC= 0.051304012m Leading edge of the root chord of the vertical tail is therefore calculated to be at 39.399cm from the nose.

Page 110

Glider Fabrication
The main aim of the glider was to ascertain whether the delta wing design was feasible and if the aircraft showed good gliding characteristics. The glider was a scaled down version of the original design having a wingspan of 300mm with the other dimensions geometrically scaled down accordingly.

Material Selection
Since the glider was a scale model, the material that is chosen should be the best trade-off between weight of the structure of the aircraft and cost required to make the glider. Based on this selection criterion, three materials were considered for the fabrication of the glider. They were: I. II. III. Glass Reinforced Plastic (GRP) (Density- 2000 Kg/m3) Balsa Wood (Density – 200 Kg/m3) Corrugated Plastic (CoroPlast) (Density – 1000 Kg/m2)

GRP was the densest and most expensive material, hence was rejected. Balsa Wood, though the least dense among the three was twice as expensive as a corrugated plastic sheet. Taking these factors into account, corrugated plastic was the preferred material for the glider.

Wing fabrication
1. The location of the ribs in the wing was taken into account and the chord of each rib was calculated. 2. A template of each rib was then made using SolidWorks. 3. Using this template, the ribs were laser cut on a 5mm thick sheet of corrugated plastic. The laser used was a carbon dioxide laser running at 15W. 4. The central spar, leading edge and trailing edge of the wing were made of balsa wood in order to reduce the structural weight of the wing. 5. To accommodate the central spar, the ribs were arranged up with their trailing edges positioned along a straight line; the position of the central spar on each rib was marked and a hole was punched. 6. For the leading edge, a square cross-section balsa rod was taken and sanded into shape. To accommodate the leading edge, an L shaped cut was made in the front portion of the ribs. 7. The ribs were positioned along the trailing edge and stuck to the balsa using hot glue. The central spar was then passed through the ribs and glued into place with hot glue. Similarly, the leading edge was glued onto the ribs, making sure that the leading edge was sitting snugly in the cuts made in the ribs. 8. Kite paper was used for the outer skin of the wing. Kite paper was used as it is cheap, easily available and gives a very smooth surface finish. 9. The kite paper was first cut according the size of the wing and stuck onto the ribs using fevicol. Kite paper once placed over the ribs was completely soaked in water. Kite paper has the ability to shrink as it dries giving a very smooth and taut outer skin. 10. To facilitate the shrinking, the wing was placed in the sun and left to dry.

Page 111

Fig: Wing with wet kite paper wrap being left to dry in the sun

Page 112

Fuselage Fabrication
1. The four side panels of the fuselage along with front and rear pieces to close the fuselage were drawn on a sheet of corrugated plastic as a development. Each piece was then cut out from the sheet. 2. The left side panel of the fuselage and the base piece were then placed at a 90-degree angle and hot glued in place. Similarly, the right panel of the fuselage was placed and hot glued. 3. To support the side panels of the fuselage and prevent them from caving in, small rightangled triangular pieces of balsa were placed at regular intervals along the edge where the panel was glued onto the base. 4. The top of the fuselage was then hot glued in place. To close the fuselage the front and the rear pieces were hot glued at the front and the rear. 5. To accommodate the wing, holes were made in the side panels at the locations where the leading edge, the central spar and the trailing edge met the fuselage. 6. Duct tape was used to close the openings formed because of cutting the corrugated plastic sheet.

Empennage Fabrication
1. The empennage was fabricated using corrugated plastic. The vertical and horizontal tails were drawn on a sheet of corrugated plastic as a development. These pieces were then cut out carefully from the sheet. 2. The midpoint of the horizontal tail was marked and the vertical tail was hot glued in place. 3. To support the vertical tail and provide a larger area to stick the vertical tail to the horizontal tail, two rectangular pieces of balsa wood were stuck using hot glue at the junction where the vertical tail joined with the horizontal tail. 4. This assembly was the placed on the fuselage and using a bead of hot glue was stuck firmly to the fuselage.

Page 113

Fig: Laser cutting of the ribs

Fig: Kite paper attached to the Rib and spar structure Page 114

Fig: Fuselage being drawn on the coroplast sheet

Fig: The panels hot glued with wood supports Page 115

Problems faced during glider fabrication
1. The biggest problem we faced was regarding the laser cutting of the ribs from corrugated plastic. Very few places in Bangalore have machines that are capable of laser cutting corrugated plastic. After a weeklong search, we were able to locate a company in Whitefield by the name of ViableAsia, which could help us out. 2. During the initial fabrication phase of the fuselage, the fuselage was cut such that the ridges were in a direction perpendicular to the ground. With such an arrangement, the ability of the corrugated plastic to absorb heavy impact was reduced considerably. To overcome this, the fuselage was cut keeping the ridges parallel to the ground. 3. When the wings were attached to the fuselage the trailing edge of the wing was not snug fit and had a tendency to slip out even after a bead of hot glue was applied. To prevent this, a rectangular piece of balsa was inserted in the hole creating a snug fit for the wing. 4. In order to get a smooth surface after shrinking, the kite paper must be stuck very carefully over the ribs to ensure that it is smooth and there are no ridges or contusions.

Page 116

Glider Tests
Glider tests were carried out to evaluate the following parameters:    To evaluate the aircraft’s roll and lateral stability. To evaluate the aircraft glide performance. To evaluate the ability of the material to absorb the impact of a belly landing.

The glider tests were carried out on a 1:0.6 scale model of the aircraft. The glider tests were carried out both indoors and outdoors.

Glider Test – I
This test was carried out outdoors. The aircraft’s centre of gravity was found to be lying closer to the aft of the aircraft making the aircraft tail heavy. To pull the centre of gravity forward, ballast in the form of coins were added to the nose of the aircraft. The glider was hand launched from a height of 6 feet.

Evaluation of glider performance
During the initial flight, the glider had a propensity to turn left soon after launch. This was overcome by trimming the ailerons and by altering the throwing action. After trimming, the glider was launched again and the glider displayed good gliding performance as well as good roll and lateral stability and glided a distance of over 12 feet. The glider belly landed on gravel and showed no signs of damage.

Fig 1: The Correct throwing action

Page 117

Fig 2: Glider after launch

Fig 3: Glider landing in gravel

Page 118

Glider Test – II
This test was carried out indoors. The aircraft’s centre of gravity was found to be lying closer to the aft of the aircraft making the aircraft tail heavy. To pull the centre of gravity forward, ballast in the form of coins were added to the nose of the aircraft. The glider was hand launched from a height of 10 feet.

Evaluation of glider performance
The glider initially showed good gliding performance but a few seconds into flight, the aircraft stalled resulting in a spin and a nosedive. The nosedive resulted in a nose first crash into the ground. The stall was caused because the angle at which the glider was launched was incorrect. No signs of damage were observed on the glider.

Fig 1: Incorrect angle of launch

Page 119

Fig 2: Glider stalls in mid flight

Fig 3: Nosedive because of stall

Page 120

Fig 4: Resulting Crash

The angle at which the glider was launched was corrected and the glider was launched again. This time the glider showed good gliding performance and glided a distance of 10 feet. The glider landed smoothly and no signs of damage were observed.

Fig 1: Corrected angle of launch

Page 121

Fig 2: Glider after launch

Fig 3: Smooth landing

The glider tests conclusively proved that the aircraft exhibits good gliding performance and lateral and roll stability. The tests also proved that corrugated plastic was capable of withstanding a belly landing under different ground conditions.

Page 122

Problems with the Delta Wing configuration:
1. Sweep
There were 2 basic problems with the swept planform  Construction of the internal frame of the swept wing was difficult and time consuming because if there was any inaccuracy, the pieces would not fit together.  Stall characteristics – Though the swept wing can go to higher angles of attack without stalling than a conventional planform, the aircraft finds it very difficult to recover once it has stalled and begins to spin.

Fig :Dh 108 Swallow – Delta Wing Notorious For Spin Instability

2. No weight tolerance
There was no tolerance added for any kind of extra weight in the form of glue, wires, packaging. Cfd runs on Solidworks showed us that we could expect a lift of 500gms at cruise condition, whereas our all up weight was 503gms.

3. No Construction tolerance
A small warp or structural defect causes instability in flight. The model does not have forgiving flight characteristics, in that a small mistake from the pilot puts the aircraft in an unrecoverable state. 4. Difficulty faced during hand launch: The high wing loading causes the aircraft to have a very high stall speed of 9 m/s (32.4 kmph), which in turn means that the take-off velocity of the aircraft is about 12 m/s (43 kmph). Since our aircraft is a hand launched aircraft, this take off velocity becomes impractical.

Page 123

In order to overcome the above mentioned difficulties: 1) We removed the 500 mm constraint so that the wing loading remains low enough. 2) We changed the planform from a delta to a conventional planform. The conventional planform includes a wing +horizontal stabilizer + vertical stabilizer. Also the wing would be a rectangular wing. 3) We started with a 1m wing span, and then practically shortened the span while increasing the chord length, keeping the wing loading a constant and seeing how short a wingspan we could achieve so that the aircraft’s flight characteristics suit our requirements.

Page 124

References
1. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach; Daniel P. Raymer American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc Publication 2. Model Aircraft Aerodynamics; Martin Simons A Special Interest Model Books Publications 3. Basics Of R/C Model Aircraft Design; Andy Lennon AirAge Media Publications 4. Aircraft Performance and Design: Dr J.D.Anderson Jr A WCB/McGraw-Hill Publication 5. Beginners Guide To Radio Control Airplanes, Nickademuss www.instructables.com

Bibliography
Apart from the above sources, these websites were helpful in understanding the practicalities of flying and fabricating remote controlled aircraft. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. www.rcgroups.com www.ebay.in www.rcindia.com www.rcthrustcalc.com www.rcdhamaka.com www.rcforall.com www.bananahobby.com www.instructables.com

Page 125

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful