Aerodynamics

Final Design Report

Aerodynamics – Considerations

 Weight
 Airfoil Shape
 Low Reynolds Number
 Problems
 Boundary layer is much less capable of handling adverse
pressure gradient without separation
 Laminar flow: laminar separation bubbles can lead to
excessive drag and low maximum lift
 Stability – Tail Design
 Fuselage Design
Aerodynamics – Problems & Concerns

 Laminar Flow (low Reynolds number)

 High speed  Greater Drag
 Small wing area  Low lift
 Low lift coefficient due to low Martian density
 Low Aspect Ratio  high induced drag
 Lower Speed of sound on Mars from low
Temperature
Aerodynamics – Objectives

 Minimize Drag
 Minimize Craft Size
 Maximize Lift
 Structural Integrity
 A Stable and Self Righting Craft
Aerodynamics – Wing Design Process

 Choose approximate Cl value based off excel

sheet.
 Find an airfoil with appropriate Cl and Cd
values using Matlab
 Use Excel to build an, optimized planform
with inputted constraints
 Use coordinates generated in Matlab and
excel to build wing in ProE….
Aerodynamics – Airfoil Selection

 Need a low Re airfoil for Martian Atmosphere

 Airfoil data obtained from Michael Selig of
University of Illinois
 Data Analyzed using Matlab and Excel.
 Matlab for plotting and number crunching
 Excel for generating planform
Aerodynamics – Planform Constraints
 Re must match data from Selig files
 Freestream mach number must be kept below
0.6 for propeller tip velocity to remain subsonic
 AR must be chosen to minimize drag
 Structural Stability must be kept in mind while
designing a planform
Aerodynamics – Assumptions

 Density, temperature and viscosity gradients

are as defined by empirical equations
 Selig airfoil data is correct and reliable
 Planform will be smooth
 Controller can be designed to stabilize craft
 Assume relatively tranquil flying conditions
 Valid due to predictable Martian seasons
Atmospheric Conditions

 Average Temperature = 223 K = -50C

 Pressure = 700 Pa
 Density = 1.57 e-2 kg/m3
 g = 1.29
 Speed of sound = 234.72 m/s
Aerodynamics – Excel Screenshot
Aerodynamics – Matlab Screenshots
Aerodynamics – CL Selection

 First we needed to specify a desired CL

 This is done based on Reynolds number
 As the velocity increases Reynolds number
increase and the lift obtained goes up
Required CL decreases
 The opposite is the same:
 As velocity decreases the CL needed increases
and the Reynolds number decreases
Aerodynamics – Re vs. Optimal CL
Optimal Cl v. Reynolds Number

70000

65000

60000

55000
Re

50000

45000

40000

35000
0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6
Cl
Aerodynamics – CL Choice

 After careful analysis we have chosen to fly

at a lower Reynolds number to minimize drag
 To do this we need greater CL
 So we selected a target CL of 0.55
Data For 6 optimized wings

wing drag weight b sweep Cr Ct Vel

gm15 2.4442 0.82 2.078 4.9 0.422 0.084 129.1

s6063 2.9398 1.86 3.100 7.1 0.966 0.193 83.4

s7012 2.5381 1.41 2.922 4.9 0.627 0.125 129.1

rg14 2.8761 2.22 3.645 7.1 1.131 0.226 71.69

rg14 2.8331 1.33 2.848 5.0 0.628 0.126 129.1

gm15sm 2.6638 2.55 4.000 6.2 1.087 0.217 74.97

gm15sm 2.4501 1.59 3.162 4.6 0.631 0.126 129.1

sd7003 2.5914 2.62 4.000 6.6 1.164 0.233 70.4

sd7003 2.5313 2.34 4.000 4.8 0.840 0.168 97.6

 Wing Geometry
 Wing Twist: prevent tip stall and to revise the
lift distribution to approximate an ellipse
 Taper Ratio: Ratio between the tip and the
root chord; affects the lift distribution of the
wing
 Aspect Ratio: b2/S –or– b/cbar
 High AR --> Lower Induced drag for same area
 Sweep Discussed later with stability
 Dihedral Angle
Aerodynamics – Selig Airfoil gm15
Aerodynamics -- Wing Position

 High
 Low Fuselage  used in military transport
 Increases frontal area and thus drag
 Low
 Landing Gear Storage
 Dihedral angle not set by aerodynamics will
increase the size of tail
 Mid
 Better Maneuverability
Aerodynamics – Wing Data

 b = 2.07 m  Re = 40600
 Croot = 0.432 m  Sweep = 5o
 Ctip = 0.1512 m  Dihedral Angle = 3.5o
 Taper = 0.35  Wing Twist = 3o
 AR = 7.2
 M.A.C = 0.307 m
 Design Cl = 0.58
 M = 0.56
 t/c = .087
Aerodynamics – Wing Tip Selection

 Pros:
 Prevents vortex around wing tip which decreases

lift at the tip

 Serves same purpose of winglet without
increasing the wetted area
Aerodynamics – Two Sample Wings
Aerodynamics – Fuselage Design

We based our Fuselage Design on that of a Sailplane

 WHY?
 No boundary Layer separation points on the fuselage
 Converged rear prevents vortex wake from forming
 Small wetted area
Aerodynamics Performance

 Stall Speed
2W
Vstall   83m / s
CL max S

 Velocity of Max Lift to Drag Ratio

2W
VL / Dmax   120m / s
S CDP  AR  e
Stability & Control - Longitudinal

 Make an assumption of where the center of gravity

is going to be
 Make an educated guess of the placement of the tail
and the wing
 Determine the moment about the C.G due to wing,
fuselage, tail, and payload
 If Cm (L=0) is positive and dcm/da is negative then
UAV is longitudally and statically stable
 Iterate the process if necessary
Stability & Control – Longitudinal

 Moment Coefficient Cm

M cg
CM  1
2 V Sc
2
Stability & Control – Longitudinal

1) (C ) = C
m,cg L=0 m,acwb + V a (i
H t t +e o) + C
m(payload)
 Cm,acwb is the moment contribution from the wing and the fuselage
 VHat(it+eo) is the moment contribution from the tail
 Cm(payload) is the moment contribution from the payload

We want (Cm,cg)L=0 to be positive

  de 
 a h  hacwb   Vh a t / a 1 
dCm

2) da   da 
 We want this term to be as more negative as possible. The
smaller the value, the more stable the UAV.
Stability & Control – Longitudinal
 Moment Contribution from the wing
 M cgw  M acw  LW cos a w hc  hacw   Dw sin a w hc  hacw   Lw sin a wzc  Dw cos a wzc
 (z ~ 0) (Dw << Lw)
 M cgw  M acw  LW cos a w hc  hacw 
 Macw = -1 Nm
 CMacw = -0.041
Stability & Control - Longitudinal

 Moment Contribution for the payload

0.25 0.65 0.85 1.60
0.75 1.75
0m 2m
cg
1.17kg 4.2kg 1.8kg
Lidar Battery 0.61kg Motor 0.43kg 0.6kg
Controls Camera drive Propeller
shaft

 Total Moment For Payload = -3.733 Nm

 Moment Coefficient = -0.153
Stability & Control - Longitudinal

 Moment Contribution from the Tail

 
Vha t it  e o  0.194 to balance previous moments;
eo  0

lt St
Vh 
cw S w
 lt ~ 1 m
 it ~ 3 o
Stability & Control - Longitudinal

 Is the UAV stable?

(Cm,cg)L=0 = Cm,acwb + VHat(it+eo) + Cm(payload)=0.05
  de 
 a h  hacwb   Vh a t / a 1 
dCm
  0.03
da   da 

 Both of the criteria are satisfied, therefore the UAV

is longitudinally stable
Stability & Control – Longitudinal

 Neutral Point
 It is a fixed point on the UAV behind the center of
dCm
gravity where is equal to zero
da
 At this position the UAV is considered to be
“trimmed”
 Solving for hn (the location of the neutral point)
yields 1.06m back from nose
 Static Margin: hn-hcg = 0.21m
 Larger the value the more stable the craft is
Stability & Control – Tail Shape Selection

 Traditional
 V-shape
 Inverted V
 Inverted Y
 Fork Shape
Stability & Control - Tail

 Determining the tail configuration

 Pick Lh (distance between tail and cg)
 Lh determines the tail surface area
 Tradeoff between stability and drag
 Airfoil Selection
 Decide on a AR
 Determine the chords
 Decide on a tail setting angle
 Iterate if necessary
Stability & Control - Tail

 Tail airfoil candidates

Airfoil at Cl/Cd @ it = 3o
Rg14 .1051 27
S7012 0.0982 23
S7003 .0993 38
S6063 .0933 20

We chose S7003 because it has a positive lift coefficient at zero

angle of attack. In addition, its lift to drag ratio at it=3 is greater
than the other three candidates.
Stability & Control - Tail

 The desired operating Reynolds number is

61100. However, it is ok to operate at a
lower Re, because the tail angle of attack is
relatively small; therefore there will be little
boundary layer separation
 Pick an AR ~ 4
 Too large – the chord will be excessively small,
which leads to super low Reynolds number
 Too small – there will be a substantial increase in
induced drag from the tail
Stability & Control - Tail

 St: 0.15 m2
 Aspect ratio: 4
 Taper ratio: 0.35
 Root Chord: 0.287 m
 Tip Chord: 0.10 m
 M.A.C: 0.209 m
 Reynolds number: 29,375
Stability & Control – Lateral & Directional

 Load factor
 n = L/W ~ 1.06
 Turning Performance
V2
 R  12km
g n 1
2

 Bank Angle (max)

 cos-1(1/n) ~ 20o
Stability & Control – Lateral & Directional

 Dihedral angle
 Generates Roll Stability
 3.5o
 Sweepback
 Generates Yaw Stability
 5o
Stability & Control – Control Surfaces

 Ailerons
 Approximately 50-90% of the wing span
 Approximately 20% of wing chord
 Rudders & Elevators
 Since we have an inverted V-Tail the Rudders and
Elevators in the tail are combined
 Final Design needed
Stability & Control

 Stick fixed vs. Stick free stability control

 Since the craft is a UAV it is stick fixed
 This means that all elevators and rudder control
as well as aileron control are going to be
controlled by computers with sensors