Dane BatemaBenoit Blier Drew Capps Patricia Roman Kyle Ryan Audrey Serra John TapeeCarlos Vergara Team 1: Structures 1 PDR Team “Canard” October 12th,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
February 17, Aerodynamics 2 PDR Michael Caldwell Jeff Haddin Asif Hossain James Kobyra John McKinnis Kathleen Mondino Andrew Rodenbeck Jason Tang.
Advertisements

Ashley Brawner Neelam Datta Xing Huang Jesse Jones
Group 3 Heavy Lift Cargo Plane
SAE Aero Design ® East 2005 University of Cincinnati AeroCats Team #039 SAE Aero Design ® East 2005 University of Cincinnati AeroCats Team #039 Design.
Daniel Graves –Project Lead James Reepmeyer – Lead Engineer Brian Smaszcz– Airframe Design Alex Funiciello – Airfoil Design Michael Hardbarger – Control.
AAE 451 Aircraft Design Aerodynamic Preliminary Design Review #2 Team Members Oneeb Bhutta, Matthew Basiletti, Ryan Beech, Mike Van Meter.
October 28, 2011 Christopher Schumacher (Team Lead) Brian Douglas Christopher Erickson Brad Lester Nathan Love Patrick Mischke Traci Moe Vince Zander.
Propulsion PDR 1 Team 1 September 21, 2006.
The Black Pearl Design Team: Ryan Cobb Jacob Conger Christopher Cottingham Travis Douville Josh Johnson Adam Loverro Tony Maloney.
Chase Beatty (Team Leader) Brian Martinez (Organizer) Mohammed Ramadan (Financial Officer) Noe Caro (Historian) SAE AERO Chase Beatty.
1 Structures QDR1 Ashley Brawner Neelam Datta Xing Huang Jesse Jones Team 2: Balsa to the Wall Matt Negilski Mike Palumbo Chris Selby Tara Trafton.
Project Presentation Boiler Xpress December 5, 2000 Team Members Oneeb Bhutta Matthew Basiletti Ryan Beech Micheal Van Meter AAE 451 Aircraft Design.
AME 441: Conceptual Design Presentation
D & C PDR #1 AAE451 – Team 3 November 4, 2003
Dane BatemaBenoit Blier Drew Capps Patricia Roman Kyle Ryan Audrey Serra John TapeeCarlos Vergara Critical Design Review Team 1.
Team 5 Dynamics & Control PDR 2 Presented By: Trent Lobdell Eamonn Needler Charles Reyzer.
Critical Design Review AAE490 Project 1 March 2003 Nicholas Baker Brian Chernish Andrew Faust Doug Holden Mara Prentkowski Nicholas Setar.
Click to edit Master title style Click to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level 1.
Vehicle Sizing PDR Presented by: Mark Blanton Chris Curtis Loren Garrison September 21, 2000 Chris Peters Jeff Rodrian DR2.
March 3, Structures and Weights 2 PDR Michael Caldwell Jeff Haddin Asif Hossain James Kobyra John McKinnis Kathleen Mondino Andrew Rodenbeck Jason.
Patrick Dempsey Bridget Fitzpatrick Heather Garber Keith Hout Jong Soo Mok AAE451 Aircraft Design Professor Dominick Andrisani First Flight November 21,
Rear spar for control surface hinges Styrene foam wing core Balsa spars carry bending load 0.25 in x 0.25 in T.E. Reinforcement Materials Employed: Balsa:
Over view Landing Gear Landing Gear Weight Determination Weight Determination Geometric Layout of Wing Structure Geometric Layout of Wing Structure Analysis.
Team 5 Aerodynamics PDR Presented By: Christian Naylor Eamonn Needler Charles Reyzer.
Dane BatemaBenoit Blier Drew Capps Patricia Roman Kyle Ryan Audrey Serra John TapeeCarlos Vergara Team 1: Propulsion QDR 2 Team 1 October 3, 2006.
Team 5 Structures PDR Presented By: Ross May James Roesch Charles Stangle.
Beams Beams: Comparison with trusses, plates t
CLARKSON UNIVERSITY Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering Introduction to AIRCRAFT STRUCTURES Ratan Jha (CAMP 364, ,
SAE Aero Design ® East 2005 University of Cincinnati AeroCats Team #039 SAE Aero Design ® East 2005 University of Cincinnati AeroCats Team #039 Design.
Team 5 Critical Design Review Trent Lobdell Ross May Maria Mullins Christian Naylor Eamonn Needler Charles Reyzer James Roesch Charles Stangle Nick White.
Team “Canard” September 19th, 2006
Dane Batema John Tapee Audrey Serra Patricia Roman Kyle RyanCarlos Vergara Benoit BlierDrew Capps Team 1: Lessons Learned and Vehicle Summary Team “Canard”
The Lumberjacks Team /16/12 Brian Martinez.
Group 10 Dimitrios Arnaoutis Alessandro Cuomo Gustavo Krupa Jordan Taligoski David Williams 1.
HALE UAV Preliminary Design AERSP 402B Spring 2014 Team: NSFW Nisherag GandhiThomas Gempp Doug RohrbaughGregory Snyder Steve StanekVictor Thomas SAURON.
DESIGN OF THE 1903 WRIGHT FLYER REPLICA MADRAS INSTITUE OF TECHNOLOGY CHENNAI - 44.
March 24, Critical Design Review Michael Caldwell Jeff Haddin Asif Hossain James Kobyra John McKinnis Kathleen Mondino Andrew Rodenbeck Jason Tang.
1 Lecture 4: Aerodynamics Eric Loth For AE 440 A/C Lecture Sept 2009.
Ashley Brawner Neelam Datta Xing Huang Jesse Jones
AAE 451 Aircraft Design First Flight Boiler Xpress November 21, 2000
Subsystem Level Design Review.  Project Review  System Level Changes ◦ Tail Dragger ◦ Airfoil Change and Discussion  Subsystem Selection ◦ Fuselage.
December 1, 2003PDR1 Team 5 Structures and Weights PDR #2 Scott Bird Mike Downes Kelby Haase Grant Hile Cyrus Sigari Sarah Umberger Jen Watson.
Structures PDR 1 Team Boiler Xpress Oneeb Bhutta Matthew Basiletti Ryan Beech Micheal VanMeter October 12, 2000.
April 28, Summary Project Presentation Michael Caldwell Jeff Haddin Asif Hossain James Kobyra John McKinnis Kathleen Mondino Andrew Rodenbeck Jason.
Dane BatemaBenoit Blier Drew Capps Patricia Roman Kyle Ryan Audrey Serra John TapeeCarlos Vergara Team 1: Prototype Fabrication, Economic, & Test Plan.
Patrick Dempsey Bridget Fitzpatrick Heather Garber Keith Hout Jong Soo Mok Structures Preliminary Design Review #1 October 12, 2000.
Dane BatemaBenoit Blier Drew Capps Patricia Roman Kyle Ryan Audrey Serra John TapeeCarlos Vergara Team 1: Propulsion QDR 3 Team 1 October 17, 2006.
Dynamics & Controls PDR 2
Vehicle Sizing AAE 451: Team 2 Michael Caldwell Jeff Haddin
STRUCTURES & WEIGHTS PDR 1
Team 3 Structures and Weights PDR 2
2007 SAE Heavy Lift Cargo Plane
SAE Aero 2017 Midterm Presentation Joe Zongolowicz, Nick Montana, Frank Dixon, Kevin Scheventer, Kathy Hansen, Marquis Ward, Gerald Short, Zhangsiwen Xiao,
Team “Canard” September 28th, 2006
Aerospace System Prototyping and Validation- Lecture 2
Structures and Weights
SAE AERO 2017 Joseph Zongolowicz, Kathy Hansen, Nick Montana, Marquis Ward, Frank Dixon, Thomas Houck, Gerald Short, Zhangsiwen Xiao, Kevin Schesventer,
Team 5 Final Design Review
Structures and Weights 1 QDR
CRITICAL DESIGN REVIEW
Project Plan Review Team “Canard” September 14th, 2006 Team 1:
STRUCTURES & WEIGHTS PDR 2
Team 5 Final Design Review
Structures and Weights Preliminary Design Review
Structures Overview Material Properties Structures Construction
Vehicle Sizing PDR Team “Canard” September 14th, 2006 Team 1:
Team 5 Structures and Weights QDR #1
Structures and Weights 1 QDR
Structures PDR #1 AAE451 – Team 3 October 28, 2003
STRUCTURES & WEIGHTS QDR 1
Presentation transcript:

Dane BatemaBenoit Blier Drew Capps Patricia Roman Kyle Ryan Audrey Serra John TapeeCarlos Vergara Team 1: Structures 1 PDR Team “Canard” October 12th, 2006

AAE 451 Team 1 2 Wing Sizing Aerodynamics gives the geometry Load case: Resist to 10g (74ft radius at 100mph) Materials 0.4 ft ft 9.3 deg S wing = 4.16 ft 2 MH 43 Thickness:8.5% With a weight of 5 lb Wing should support 50 lb

AAE 451 Team 1 3 Proof of n value

AAE 451 Team 1 4 Sizing Method Discretization of the wing Determination of the loads Quarter chord MAC: application of the lift For each part, we can figure out: The bending moment due to the lift The torsion torque due to the aerodynamic moment

AAE 451 Team 1 5 Distribution of Lift The lift is assumed to be linear: Lift = W loading x Surface

AAE 451 Team 1 6 Bending Moment L1 L2 d1 d2 M=L1.d1 + L2.d2 + ….. MAC

AAE 451 Team 1 7 Minimal thickness Assumptions: –Only bending loading –Foam doesn’t carry the load The balsa should resist the load We assume the shape of the airfoil is an ellipse t is figured out from I G a b polar inertia

AAE 451 Team 1 8 Skin Thickness Easy to built, but 70% heavier than discretized thickness Optimal thickness distribution 1.53 in

AAE 451 Team 1 9 Twist and Deflection Twist –Assumption: Only the aerodynamic twist (twist due to the swept angle is neglected) Deflection Lift at MAC yy’ y’ with Thales theorem =100 mph

AAE 451 Team 1 10 Twist max. twist: 0.7°

AAE 451 Team 1 11 Deflection 0.21 in

AAE 451 Team 1 12 Carbon Spar Advantages The minimum skin thickness is too thick to bend around the airfoil shape (from experience) Method: Assume iso-rigidity for the carbon tube and the skin (EI) skin =(EI) spar 50% of the load in the spar 50% of the load in the skin Redo the calculations for the skin with 50% of load

AAE 451 Team 1 13 Skin Thickness With Spar From this point, the structure resist without spar Cut spar at 1.50ft

AAE 451 Team 1 14 Skin Thickness 4.8 in Balsa sheet thickness t = 0.06 in ($22 for 253”x36”x1/16”) ID ≈ 0.32 in OD ≈ 0.45 in Thickness ≈ 0.13 in Final size will depend on market availability

AAE 451 Team 1 15 CG Location: 33% of Mean Aerodynamic Chord Mean Aero. Chord (MAC) CG Estimation/Spar Location Spar Length = 3.0 ft (≈1/2 of wingspan)

AAE 451 Team 1 16 Geometry Structure layout: –Full sheet of balsa sanded –Foam + balsa skin Horizontal tail structure 0.38 ft 0.07 ft 1.84 ft NACA 0006, 6% thickness ratio

AAE 451 Team 1 17 Horizontal tail calculations Load case: High speed dash + 20° deflection L=0.5ρSV 2 C L From control team we have: V is the most influent parameter for the Lift force Wing downwash = Wing AOA = Incidence of the Htail =0 Control surface deflection 20° =

AAE 451 Team 1 18 Bending moment roottip MAC location Lift a b x y DATAS Sref (ft²)0.56 lift force (lbf)1.98 Ult. Comp. Stress (psi)725.2 Vmax (ft/s)150.0 young modulus (ksi)185.6 shear modulus (psi) balsa density (lb/ft3)6.2 wingspan (ft)1.84 root chord (ft)0.38 wingtip chord (ft)0.23 airfoil thickness (%)6 Results: Min. thickness: 2.18e-2 in Total deflection: 5.3e-1 in Very thin, impossible to find in the market

AAE 451 Team 1 19 Final tail structure layout Horizontal tail: Foam core in balsa sheet (similar to the wing) Vertical tail: The final geometry is not define yet We plan to make it in a full sheet of balsa sanded.

AAE 451 Team 1 20 Components easy to vary Components more difficult to vary Components that cannot be varied Component CG Table Green Components need to be moved until this value = 0

AAE 451 Team 1 21 Graphical Representation of Weight Distribution

AAE 451 Team 1 22 Working Model

AAE 451 Team 1 23 Components Layout Payload Battery S.C. Motor GearBox

AAE 451 Team 1 24 V-n Diagram V Cruise = 115 ft/s V Dive = 1.3*V Cruise -5 g’s (from Raymer Table) V Stall ≈ 35 ft/s C LMAX = 0.9 S = 4.15 ft 2 m = 5 lbs G max = 10 Trade Study on n-loading, turn radius, and speed will provide more technical justification

AAE 451 Team 1 25 Landing Gear Roskam method for landing gear sizing: 1. Landing gear system: Fixed 2. Landing gear configuration: taildragger 3. Locate c.g.: 1.23 ft from the nose 4. Decide preliminary landing gear Goldberg Landing Gear: Glass filled Length: 14-3/8” (from axle to axle) Mount area length: 3-7/16” Height: 4-1/2”

AAE 451 Team 1 26 Landing Gear 5. Longitudinal tip-over analysis 15 deg 12 deg 6. Lateral tip-over analysis Ψ≤ 55 deg Main gear Tail gear

AAE 451 Team 1 27 Landing Gear 7. Ground clearance criteria 8. Max. static load per strut > 5 deg W TO nSPmnSPm PtPt ltlt lmlm l m +l t W TO = Total weight = 5.0 lbs n S = Number of main gear struts = 2 P m = Main gear load P t = Tail gear load l m = distance from main gear to c.g. = 1.6” l t = distance from tail gear from c.g. = 2.55” P t = (W TO l m )/(l m +l t ) = 1.93 lbs P m = (W TO l t )/n S (l m +l t ) = 1.54 lbs

AAE 451 Team 1 28 Landing Gear 9. Number of wheels: 2 for main gear 1 for tail gear Glassfilled Nylon Lightweight Width:.177’’ Diameter: 2.25” OD Hayes Racing Wheels: Ohio Tail Wheel Tiny 4-8 lbs

AAE 451 Team 1 29 Wing-Fuselage Attachment Fuselage Rib Wing top view Carbon rod Nylon screwL max /4

AAE 451 Team 1 30 Wing-Fuselage Attachment Nylon screws from hobby lobby: D = in Length = in Cross-sectional area: A = π(D/2) 2 = in 2 F = n*W/4 = 12.5 lbs n= number of g σ = F/A= 12.5 lbs/ in 2 = psi Ultimate Tensile Strength for Nylon = psi Margin = 34 L max /4 Margin=σ max / σ-1

AAE 451 Team 1 31 Wing-Fuselage Attachment Carbon rod: D= in t = thickness of rib = in σ = F/(D*t) = 12.5 lbs/(( in)( in)) = psi Ultimate Compressive Strength of balsa = psi Margin = 2.2 L max /4 t Carbon rod Front view Top view

AAE 451 Team 1 32 Questions