Aircraft conceptual design - Draft

Nomenclature

UAV Unmanned Air Vehicle

MTOW Maximum take off weight

AR Aspect Ratio

Introduction
The goal of this document is to document the conceptual design process of an UAV with
certain constraints. The methodology that will be followed stems from a 27-step approach
suggested by [1].

1. General characteristics of the desired aircraft

The aircraft in cosideration is aimed to perform terrestrial mapping tasks, also known as geo-
mapping.
Normally, these UAV’s are small and quickly deployable. They carry lightweight digital
cameras that can capture high resolution images. Afterwards, these images can be processed
into ortho-mosaics to construct spatially accurate digital maps, which complement other
mapping methods.

1.2 Flight mission overview

The flight mission is commonly described by sweeping patterns over the desired surface to map.
The overlapping of each stroke of the pattern depends on the camera equipment and the
horizontal velocity of the UAV, as well on the flight altitude, which normally remains constant
over the mapping process. This is why is more useful to show the flight mission from a “top”
view, rather than the typical flight profile.

Below, a preview of a mapping flight is shown. Several softwares, such as DroneDeploy [2] offer
automated flight plans for commercial UAV platforms
1.3. Performance constraints and review of current aircraft

The starting constraints for the design of the current aircraft are:

Wing type Fixed

Max airspeed 180 km/h

Ceiling 3 km

Range 50 km

MTOW 60 kg

From the available literature, 25 aircraft models with characteristics similar to the desired
ones were examined. Then, the selection of the 3 that showed the closest performances to
our needs were examined in detail. It should be noted, however, that the aircraft selected are
not necessarily used in geo-mapping tasks.

1.3.1 Lipan M3

This UAV was developed by the Argentinian Army for geo-mapping purposes. It has:

● 40 km range
● 5 hour battery autonomy
● 20 kg payload
● 170 km/h maximum airspeed
● 2 km ceiling
● Span: 4.6 m
● Length: 3.55 m
● Empty weight: 60 kg
It takes off and lands via remote control, however once airborne it can fly autonomously. It
embarks a varifocal camera as well as an infrared one. They can be both streamed to a
control tower.

1.3.2. IAI Panther.

Developed and manufactured by Israel Aerospace Industries, the Panther is a tactical

UAV with the following main characteristics:

● Electrical propulsion system

● 65 km range
● 6 hour battery autonomy
● 6 kg payload
● 75 km/h cruise airspeed
● 3 km ceiling
● Span: 8 m
● MTOW: 65 kg

Two of the three electrical motors have a tilt system, which allows this UAV to take off and
land in steep path angles or even vertically.
1.3.3. BXAP15

This model was designed by the Hungarian company BHE Bonn Hungary Electronics. The
datasheet [3] implies that the aircraft is suitable for the following applications:
● Security and maintenance control for companies
● Combat reconnaissance
● Natural disaster monitoring such as earthquakes, flood and forest fire
● Precision agriculture
● Wild life monitoring
● Border control
● Geodesy (or geo-mapping)

And it features the following technical specifications:

● Speed: 60-100 km/h
● Ceiling: min. 4000 m depending on configuration
● Wing span: 3.7 m
● Length: 1.7 m
● Take-off weight: 17 kg
● Endurance: up to 100 minutes
● Propulsion: electric brushless engine (1200W peak power)
● Payload weight: up to 3 kg
● Real time video & telemetry transmission range: 15 km

1.3.2. Comparison summary

Model Enduran Range Ceiling MTOW Max Airspeed Span Length

ce
Lipan 5 hours 40 km 2 km 80 kg 170 km/h 4.6 m 3.55
M3

IAI 6 hours 65 km 3 km 65 kg 75 km/h (cruise) 8m --

Panther

BPAX15 1h 40m 5 km 4 km 20 kg 100 km/h 3.7 m 1.7

2.Aircraft cost analysis

Quantity factor.
This value is going to tell us how the experience of the technician that builds
the airplane will reduce the time of construction. Even though, this won’t be
necessary for us because we’re just building one airplane and as the formula
is based on the number of airplanes that are going to be built, the value gives
1.
In order to obtain costs we’re going to use excel tables for calculating
everything.
Development cost of a General Avition Aircraft
Quantity discount factor

QDF 1

Experience factor Fexp 0.95

Number of aircraft N 1

Development cost

Number of engineering man Heng 3750.562512

hours

Weight of structural Wairfram 100

skeleton e

Maximum level airspeed VH 180

KTAS

Number of planned aircraft N 1

to be constructed in 5 years

Certification factor Fcer 0.67

Flap factor Fcf 1

Factor to account the use Fcom 1.3

of composites

Fraction of composite f 0.3

Pressurization factor Fpress 1.03

 Number of tooling man Htool 4496.409295
hours

Weight of structural Wairfram 100

skeleton e

Maximum level airspeed VH 180

KTAS

Number of planned aircraft N 1

to be constructed in 5 years

Wing conf factor Ftaper 0.95

Production rate per aircraft Qm 1

per month

Flap factor Fcf 1

Factor to account the use Fcom 1.3

of composites

Fraction of composite f 0.3

Pressurization factor Fpress 1.01

Number of manufacturing Hmfg 3748.364975

man hours

Weight of structural Wairfram 100

skeleton e

Maximum level airspeed VH 180

KTAS

Number of planned aircraft N 1

to be constructed in 5 years

Wing conf factor Ftaper 0.95

Production rate per aircraft Qm 1

per month

Certification factor Fcer 0.75

 Flap factor Fcf 1

Factor to account the use Fcom 1.075

of composites

Fraction of composite f 0.3

Total cost of engineering Ceng 6669.142243

Heng 3750.562512

Rate of engineering labor Reng 53

pero hour

Consumer price index CPI_201 1.6

9

Total cost of Development Cdev 624.005083

Support

Weight of structural Wairfram 100

skeleton e

Maximum level airspeed VH 180

KTAS

Number of planned aircraft N 1

to be constructed in 5 years

Certification factor Fcer 0.5

Flap factor Fcf 1

Factor to account the use Fcom 1.15

of composites

Fraction of composite f 0.3

Pressurization factor Fpress 1.03

 Total cost of flight tests Cft 4.001751006
operations

Weight of structural Wairfram 100

skeleton e

Maximum level airspeed VH 180

KTAS

Number of planned aircraft N 1

to be constructed in 5 years

Certification factor Fcer 10

Consumer price index CPI_201 1.6

9

Total cost of tooling Ctool 3199.662768

Htool 4496.409295

Rate of tooling labor Rtool 21.21

CPI_201 1.6
9

Total cost of manufacturing Cmfg 2766.701173

Hmfg 3748.364975

Rmfg 22

CPI_201 1.6
9

Total cost of quality control Cqc 348.1711525

Cmfg 2766.701173

Fcert 10

Fcomp 1.15
 Total cost of materials Cmat 215.8419866

Weight of structural Wairfram 100

skeleton e

Maximum level airspeed VH 180

KTAS

Number of planned aircraft N 1

to be constructed in 5 years

Certification factor Fcer 0.75

Flap factor Fcf 1

CPI_201 1.6
9

Pressurization factor Fpress 1.03

Total cost to certify Ccert 10496.81185

IF no retractable landing --
gear then

Avionics

LSA 4500

Cost of powerplants 500

Break even analysis Nbe As we are only going to build one

unit this analysis is not necessary
Total cost 15496.1
After this we’ll proceed with the estimation aircraft operation costs
We will consider it as a business aircraft because our design is more like one
business aircraft than a commercial one in the operation way.

Maintenant cost Cap 1500000

Hourly rate for a Rap 60

mechanic

Number of flight hours Qflgt 10000

per year

Ratio of maintenance FMF 2.5

man-hours to flight
hours

Storage cost monthly 1000

Annual 12000

Fuel consumption No fuel consumption beacuse

electrical engine

Insurance 732.44

Inspection 1000

Ovaerhaul Cover 150000

Number of engines Npp 2

Number of flight hours Qflgt 10000

 per year

Crew cost No crew cost

Total year cost $1664732.44

Chapter 4. Aircraft Conceptual Layout
In this chapter the aesthetics of the aircraft will be analyzed, since as we know, an
effective airplane with good looks, is sold more than one that is only effective for the
mission, so we will also compare between the different types of combinations that
can be made and be able to determine between a balance of effectiveness and style,
for our preliminary design. The main components of an aircraft are: wings (main
elements like flap, aileron, spoiler, wingtip), fuselage, nacelle, empennage, horizontal
and vertical tail, power plant; and landing gear, to name a few.

The design process begins by the execution of the statement: “Understand

requirements, mission definition, and the implications of the regulations to which the
airplane will be certified.” This means:
● Understand requirements: how far, how fast, how high, how heavy, how long
a takeoff and landing distance must the airplane be capable of.
● · Mission definition: what is the airplane supposed to do? What’s the main
purpose of its use?
● · Regulations: in what regulations the airplane will be designed to.

Of the above primary components, three need some further definition:

● A fuselage is a structural body not intended to generate lift (although it may) whose
purpose is to contain engine, fuel, occupants, baggage, and mission related
equipment, although not always simultaneously, is always mounted to lifting and
stabilizing surfaces, if not directly, then through structural members.(Figure a)

Figure a. Fuselage of aircraft.

● An empennage refers to the horizontal and vertical tail of a conventional aircraft

configuration. (Figure b)

Figure b. Types of empennage.

● A Nacelle is a fuselage that does not carry an empennage. Nacelles usually carry an
engine, but may or may not house occupants. Nacelles can be mounted to a lifting
surface, such as a wing, or to a non-lifting geometry like a fuselage.(Figure c)
 Figure c. Structure of nacelle

4.1 THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE CONFIGURATION

LAYOUT

This section presents important concepts to keep in mind when selecting a particular
configuration, as well as arguments for and against their selection. Typical Properties of
Aircraft are: Wingspan,Wing aspect ratio, Wing taper ratio HT HT VT VT, Empty weight,
Gross weight, that are properties that we define in this section.

4.1.1 Vertical Wing Location

With respect to the location of the vertical wing, for our aircraft the most convenient would be
the high wing, this comparing with the UAV that has that similar characteristic, for our
objective it would be very convenient this configuration. (Figure d)

Figure d. High-Wing

Field-of-view
The high-wing configuration offers a great field-of-view downward, whereas it may obstruct
the pilot’s view when banking (turning). This is an important issue for small airplanes (when
the pilot sits below the wing) as it arguably increases the risk of mid-air collision for such
aircraft. But how we don't use a pilot, it doesn't matter. And we think that it will be easier to
installate.

Impact on Airframe Design

The high-wing configuration, for a light aircraft, may depend on a gravity-fed fuel
system, while a low-wing configuration may require a fuel pump. But like our aircraft,
it will be a UAV fuel, we will take it as the batteries of the aircraft, but even so, it is
easier to maintain and install a high wing. Many high-wing airplanes use wing-struts,
which substantially reduce the shear and bending moments, rendering the wing
structure lighter than if built using cantilevered beam principles. Such struts are
subjected to tension forces in normal flight, whereas struts on low wing aircraft would
be in compression, exposing them to a buckling failure.

Impact on Flight and Operational Characteristics

The high wing configuration is less affected by the ground effect, they float less than
the low wing aircraft when they land. Giving a good precision in the accomplishment
of landings in a short track and not prepared. This configuration increases the rolling
stability, only that this would not apply to heavy transport aircraft. However, for the
purposes that we want, this influences in a positive way.

4.1.2 Wing Configuration

Airplanes are also categorized based on the number of wings they have. The monoplane is
by far the most common configuration as it is without a doubt the easiest to make
aerodynamically efficient. And following the configurations of the UAV that we have chosen,
they are all monoplanes, so we will continue using that configuration, in a high wing.

4.1.3 Wing Dihedral

The dihedral angle is the angle the wing plane makes with the horizontal. It allows the
aircraft designer to provide the airplane with roll stability and a way to affect the severity of
dynamic modes such as Dutch roll. The magnitude of the dihedral effect depends on the
vertical location of the wing and sweep angle.
Although an increase of dihedral will increase stability, it will also decrease the lift, increase
the drag, but for our UAV we need more stability for the mission that we require. We will use
a dihedral angle of 2 degrees and this doesn't affect too much

4.1.4 Wing Structural Configuration

Nowadays, the wing’s structural layout is based on either a cantilevered or a strut-braced
methodology. Both have their pros and cons, with strut-braced having a higher drag than the
cantilevered configuration. However, the maximum shear and bending loads of the strut-
braced wing are much less than those of the cantilevered wing, resulting in a lighter wing
structure and for our aircraft, we choose the strut-braced configuration .

4.1.5 Cabin Configurations

As our aircraft will not have any pilot or passenger aboard, it is not necessary any of the
configurations shown in the book, but nevertheless, this section will be taken to fill with
avionics equipment

4.1.6 Propeller Configuration

The pusher propeller configuration was chosen, since the UAV models we chose to share
that characteristic, besides it is a good advantage in the aspect of reconnaissance missions
of a single engine, besides that the tractor configuration provides disturbed air and increases
the resistance in the aircraft
4.1.7 Engine Placement
Configuration G is a pusher configuration, which has the thrustline sitting somewhat high,
although this is not as much of a problem as one might first think. The propeller will help
keep flow attached on the aft part of the fuselage. It is subjected to some drawbacks of the
pusher propeller configuration, although the particular configuration shown improves safety
by making it hard to accidentally walk into a rotating propeller.( Figure 4-14).

4.2.8 Landing Gear Configurations

Taildragger aircraft have a number of advantages, the primary advantage is the high AOA
that can be generated at a low airspeed. The configuration is better suited for operation off
unimproved landing strips because two wheels on the ground reduce the possibility of the
landing gear hitting ground obstructions. The taildragger is harder to land and maneuver on
the ground than a tricycle gear due to a high deck angle. This configuration is usually used
on small aircraft.

4.1.9 Tail Configurations

For the configuration of the tail, we decided to put the tail H since we see that it will be more
effective and will have a better development on the engine and could be more effective than
the others. The configuration also increases the efficiency of the horizontal tail through
endplate effects. This effect promotes a uniform lift distribution by eliminating lift drop-off at
the tip and allows the size of the HT to be somewhat reduced

4.1.10 Sketch 1
Figure. a)Front facing sketch of the UAV. b) Upper view of the UAV. c) Side view of the UAV

For the design of our wing, we took the reference on the three chosen models, with respect
to their wingspan and for the model of the airfoil, we select the NACA 0015 because it has a
good aerodynamic airfoil. As we can see (In the figure 1), the wing was designed in a similar
way to the others UAV, taking care of the drag of the geometry of the airfoil to won't affect
where the laminar boundary layer transitions into a turbulent one. We did a simulation with
the wing, at 20m / s, which is the approximate range of the UAV. With a wingspan of 4m and
an angle of attack of 1 degree, the results were expected in low drag, and as can be seen in
the graphs, it is evident that as the lift increases, so the drag too, but in a very slow way (In
the figure 2). The wing has a wingspan of 4m, with a dihedral angle of 2, the main chord line
is 0.3m and the airfoil is the NACA 0015 (In the figure 3)

Figure 1. Preliminar wing design

Figure 2. Graphics of CDvsAlpha , CLvsAlpha, CDvsCL and CL/CDvsAlpha.

Figure 3 NACA 0015

Chapter 6. AIRCRAFT WEIGHT ANALYSIS

In this chapter we’ll see one of the most important steps in the aircraft process, this is the
estimation of the weight of the vehicle. One of the challenges is that excessive under- or
overestimation of an airplane’s empty weight can bring dire consequences to a development
program.

1. Initial weight estimation

The first point we’re going to cover is the initial weight estimation, this calls for a simple
weight estimate to be performed based on historical data and assume the class of the
aircraft is know.

For example, we’ll take the IAI Panther as example for the estimation of possible final
weight. The IAI Panther has the following characteristics:

● Electrical propulsion system

● 65 km range
● 6 hour battery autonomy
● 6 kg payload
● 75 km/h cruise airspeed
● 3 km ceiling
● Span: 8 m
● MTOW: 65 kg

So, for the purpose of use we’re searching for, it is possible that the value of final weight of
our aircraft will be more or less 59 kg. Because,

MTOW = Operating empty weight + payload,

for instance

Operating empty weight = MTOW - payload = 65 kg - 6 kg = 59 kg

Then, we can proceed to calculate the detailed weight estimation where we’re going to
include the weight of engine/s, landing gear components, avionics, etc.

2. Detailed weight estimation.

To ensure the proper max. speed, the range and the ceiling, it is very important to choose
wisely which engine we’re going to use. For this case, the first step we’re going to do is to
calculate what is the power required for our needs. The thrust required depending on the
speed can be calculated using the following formula:

So, here there are many values that we already know, such as:

W (weight) = 59 kg
p (density) = 9.09122E-1 kg/m^3
V (velocity) = 180 km/h
S (superficie alar) = 1 m^2

For K, and considering Bcl as 0.8, we have…

Cl(a) = 1.486 - 0 / 15° = 0.099 1/deg

CL(a) = 0.099*0.8 = 0.07925 1/deg
AR = 7.227
e= 1.78 (1-0.045*AR^0.68)-0.64 = 0.8325
K = 1/pi*e*AR = 0.0529

So, Treq = 12.5 kW and consume of this we’ll be 12,500 W * 0.5 hours = 6250 Wh

Engine - RTD83 Reacher/OEM brushless motor

6.1.1 Engine used

With a net wight of 12.5 kg

Battery - Marine & RV Deep Cycle 12 Volt 27 650 Marine

6.1.2 Battery used

6.1.3 Battery Specs

Battery weight = 23.1 kg

So, we’ll have a runtime of 0.52 hours = 31.2 minutes

At the moment, we have a total weight of

Wt = 23.1 kg + 12.5 kg = 35.6 Kg (without fuselage & wireframe)

So, we have a range of usable weight for the structure of

W(fuselage+wings+avionics) = 23.4 kg.

Only for the wings we have a wingspan of 4 m and a root chord of 0.3 m. If we want to bring
the proper structure for the wing loading we should have at least 0.07 m of width ribs and
stringers.

6.1.4 Example of wing structure components

And, we’ll use balsa wood as the main material for the structure of our airplane.

If we consider its density 160 kg/m^3 we’ll find that the final weight of the wings we’ll be at
least..

W(wings) = 4 m * 0.3 m * 0.08 m * 160 kg/m^3 = 15.36 kg

And at the end we have just 8.04 kg to bring structure of the fuselage.

W(fuselage) = 8.04 kg

The advantage of take the avionics weight at the end is that this are the lighter components
of all the airplane. So, for the part we have an estimate of 0.5 kg assuming we’re going to
use cables, logical central and control processor and some servo’s for the development of
this project.

At last, we have an Operating empty weight value of 59.5 kg