1 / 70

John Meissner Leo Nakanishi Ryan McDonell Patty Martinez

Team Stinger-409 presents Aereon Corps.’:. WASP UAV. John Meissner Leo Nakanishi Ryan McDonell Patty Martinez. Project Sponsor: Bill Putman Project Advisor: Dr. Jim Lang, Ph.D. WASP UAV. Mission Profile. Internal Components. Internal Components. AE 3007 Thrust vs Mach.

tulia
Download Presentation

John Meissner Leo Nakanishi Ryan McDonell Patty Martinez

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Team Stinger-409 presentsAereon Corps.’: WASP UAV John Meissner Leo Nakanishi Ryan McDonell Patty Martinez Project Sponsor: Bill Putman Project Advisor: Dr. Jim Lang, Ph.D.

  2. WASP UAV

  3. Mission Profile

  4. Internal Components

  5. Internal Components

  6. AE 3007 Thrust vs Mach

  7. AE 3007 SFC vs Mach

  8. Aerodynamics • Introduction • Prediction is based on WASP configuration A with AR=2.9 • Sref=836ft2 • b=49.22ft

  9. Aerodynamics • Key Features • The increase of CLmax with flap deflection • CLmax of approximately 1.8 • Various optimal AoA’s • Takeoff/Landing • Cruise

  10. Aerodynamics cont’d • Aircraft at sea level • Key Features • Approximate Mach Critical Number of .8 according to Nicolai • Aircraft stays subsonic • Cdo approximately constant at this region • Drag polar of CD=.009+.016CL2 at M=.2

  11. Aerodynamics cont’d • Key Features • Approximate Critical Mach Number of .8 • K (drag due to lift) is also constant in this region • K=K’ + K’’ according to Nicolai, but for our aircraft K=K’

  12. Aerodynamics cont’d • Key Features • Significant increase in drag with flap deflections • Optimal AoA at: • Takeoff/Landing • Cruise

  13. Stability and Control • Outline • Aerodynamic Center and neutral point located 19.01ft. from aft • Cg. at 18.92 ft. from aft • Static Margin = -.004 • Cg travel diagram • Aerodynamic Force diagram • Pitching Moment Curve with Flap Deflections • Trade Studies of control with different wing tips

  14. Stability and Control

  15. Stability and Control

  16. Stability and Control cont’d • Key Features • SM≈0 • Nose down pitching moment as the flap gets deflected • Need for control surfaces to stabilize the aircraft • What can we do?

  17. Stability and Control Cont’d • The Range of Control from the wing tip 1 • Extreme points occur when the flaps get deflected 60 deg’s • The wing tips help to stabilize the aircraft • The vortex fences creates a nose up pitching moment to stabilize the aircraft

  18. Stability and Control – Trade Studies with Various Wing Tips

  19. Error • Error Analysis is Broken into 3 Main Categories • 5% • 5-10% • 10-15%

  20. 5% Error Thrust Data Provided By Aereon

  21. 5-10% Error • Aerodynamics • (Agrees with Aereon calculations and Dr. Lang estimations) • Ps calculations • (dependent somewhat upon Thrust data, which is from a reliable source) • Endurance • (also directly dependent on assumed correct data provided to us, as well as reasonably accurate aerodynamic data) • Shear

  22. 10-15% Error • Dynamic Lift Calculations • (Difficult to estimate due to unsteady flow conditions and somewhat unknown performance characteristics) • cg characteristics • (due to uncertainties in true, final and required placement of components) • Cost analysis • Inlet and Nozzle effects • (addressed very little due to an assumed 5% installed thrust loss)

  23. Specific Excess Power (n=1) *NOTE: q limit is NOT a factor until after M=0.9 *Altitude in ten thousands

  24. Specific Excess Power(n=2.5) *NOTE: q limit is NOT a factor until after M=0.9 *Altitude in ten thousands

  25. Turn Rate Performance

  26. Turn Rate Performance

  27. Turn Rate Performance Maximum Sustained Turn Rates Sea Level M = 0.2 TR = 31.78 Deg/sec M = 0.6 TR = 10.60 Deg/sec M = 0.18 TR = 35.33 Deg/sec[MAX] 22K ft. M = 0.2 TR = 24.2 Deg/sec M = 0.6 TR = 11.4 Deg/sec M = 0.31 TR = 21.95 Deg/sec[MAX]

  28. Turn Rate Performance Maximum Instantaneous Turn Rates Sea Level M = 0.18 TR = 35.33 Deg/sec (same as for sustained) 22K ft. M = .23 TR = 29.7 deg/sec

  29. Dynamic Lift • Addition of Vorticity and Circulation at a Rate such that Inviscid Effects dominate Viscous Diffusion and Dissipation • Effectively Increases the Stall Angle of Attack, thereby Increasing CLmax and Maximizing Lift.

  30. WASP Analytical CL Charts

  31. Dynamic Lift

  32. Dynamic Lift TAKE-OFF IMPLEMENTATION • A/C Accelerates Down the Runway with a Clean Configuration • Quickly reaches Take-Off Velocity Due to Lowered Drag • Just Before Take-Off Velocity is Reached, Flaps are lowered to Max Setting, Vortex Fences are Deployed, and AofA is Quickly Increased

  33. Dynamic Lift

  34. Dynamic Lift LANDING IMPLEMENTATION • Bird-Like Manuever • A/C Approaches Runway/Deck at High Thrust and Negative AofA • One Second Before Ground Contact, Flaps Down, Vortex Fences Up, and AofA Increased to Large Positive Setting • A/C ‘Flares’, Thereby Increasing Drag to Reduce Velocity, and Increasing Lift to Avoid Ground Collision

  35. WASP Analytical Model Settings • Flaps • Max Setting = 20 Degrees • Deployment Rate = 20 Deg/Sec • Vortex Fences • Max Setting = 85 Degrees • Deployment Rate = 85 Deg/Sec • Angle of Attack • Max Setting = 35 Degrees • Deployement Rate = 35 Deg/Sec • Head Wind • 0 ft/sec and 10ft/sec

  36. WASP Analytical Model Results • Head Wind = 0 ft/sec • Time to Take-Off Velocity: 3.5 Secs • Distance to L>W: 170 feet • Head Wind = 10 ft/sec • Time to Take-Off Velocity: 2.9 Secs • Distance to L>W: 140 feet • Head Wind = 0 ft/sec • Time to Take-Off Velocity: 5.5 Secs • Distance to L>W: 250 feet • Head Wind = 10 ft/sec • Time to Take-Off Velocity: 5.9 Secs • Distance to L>W: 280 feet Take-Off w/Dynamic Lift Take-Off w/out Dynamic Lift

  37. WASP Analytical Model Results TAKE-OFF Head Wind = 0 ft/sec

  38. WASP Analytical Model Results Landing • Head Wind = 0 ft/sec • Velocity at Touch-Down: 40 ft/sec • Distance to Stop: 135 feet

  39. Endurance Mission • Loiter Phase Requires High Endurance at Best Endurance Mach • This occurs at L/D)max • L/D)max = 13.1Occurs at M = 0.27 • Endurance = 10.0 Hrs.

  40. Wing Tip Shear and Moments • Cantilever Beam Approximation Used For Order of Magnitude Calculation • Low g-Limit Craft, Not Much Stress • Resultant Shear at Wing Tip Root • Results in Stress = O(10-100) • Carbon Composite Yield Strength • Stress = O(10000-100000) • Order of Loads/Stresses << Yield Limits

  41. Weights Summary (pounds) • Carbon Composite Construction, some Al • Weights Summary (pounds) • Main Gear 579 • NoseGear 158 • Engine 1580 • Payload 3000 • Electrical 449 • Avionics 1082 • Fuel Tank 2000 • Fuel Tank 2000 • Fuel Tank 963 • Total Weight 11811 • Empty Weight 6848

  42. C.G. Travel

  43. x-Axis Moments

  44. y-axis Moments

  45. Cost Analysis

  46. Cost Analysis 1989 Dollars

  47. Model Construction Contents Goals for Model Construction Solid Works Modeling Material Selection Mastercamm and CNC Machining Main Body Construction Sleeve Mounting Winglet Construction Flap Construction Other Construction Details Summary

  48. Goals for Model Construction • Accurate Shape • CNC machining used to achieve this • Sturdy Construction • Strong material needed • Force Transfer • Completely fix sting within body to ensure complete aero load transfer to sensors

More Related