1. SAE Aerospace Regular Class High Lift Competition Educational Aircraft Design Objective: To develop a stable, controllable, high lift aircraft to serve as development platform for the RIT Aerospace Design Club. This aircraft must conform to the 2016 SAE Aerospace Regular Class Design Competition rules. Airfoil and Wing Planform: Selection of these features controls a substantial part of the remaining process. Initial design was to use the S1223 but designing a sufficient tail was not feasible within the design constraints. E423 chosen for this reason with a restriction on our cruising angle of attack to be 5 degrees. Aero Design Club: By the end of our project, we plan to provide the team with a flightworthy design, documentation, and calculation/simulation code that will permit future club members to make informed design decisions and estimate performance. Using this as a platform they seek to compete in next years AIAA or SAE Aerospace Competition Stability and Controllability: The primary technical challenge is stability and controllability. High lift wings generate powerful destabilizing effects and an uncontrollable aircraft is useless. Configuration: A conventional configuration was chosen in order to allow for relatively simple documentation. This will provide a more versatile development platform. Technical Specifications and Capabilities: Unloaded Weight: 13.55 lbs Predicted Cruise Speed: 35 mph Predicted Lifting Capacity: 33.3 lbs Wingspan: 86 in Root Chord Length: 17 in Tip Chord Length: 4 in Current Project Status: Presently the aircraft is under construction. Aluminum substructure is complete and landing gear is in progress. Wooden components are cut and assembly is in progress. Testing to confirm CFD data for propeller performance is under way. Simulation and Computation: Lacking in test data, we have needed to depend heavily on simulation. XFLR5 was the primary method of simulation due to computing limitations. An analysis of the tail in fluent was used to offer some verification pending test data. XFLR5 uses a 3D vortex lattice method and seems to underestimate drag compared to fluent and the Spalart- Allmaris method. Rochester Institute of Technology Multidisciplinary Senior Design Team Members: Dominic Myren, Marc Protacio, Matt Zielinski, Chris Jones, Ron Manning Acknowledgements: The team would like to thank Dr. Kolodziej for his guidance and the RIT Aero Club for their cooperation Structural Analysis: Structural analysis has been done on each aluminum structure using ANSYS. In each case we have targeted what we believe to be worse-than-reality loading conditions. The example below, our main tail structure, is experiencing the maximum expected bending moment applied twice- once around the y and once around the x-directions. While this is excessive for most purposes the over-development may prove essential for the unclear future of the aircraft. Acknowledgement: The team would like to thank Boeing for their generous contributions which have made this possible.