Final Binder Report

Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform

Kyle Kinsey
Matthew Pantoja

Ramon Vazquez

Tarunjeet Singh

UTSA Mechanical Engineering Department

ME 4813 – Senior Design II
 A d v a n c e d In n o v a t io n s T e c h n o l o g ie s
One UTSA Boulevard • San Antonio, Texas
December 5, 2019

Senior Project Manager James E. Johnson

One UTSA Blvd

San Antonio, Texas, 78249

SUBJECT: Flight Platform Solution Final Report.

Professor Johnson:
As per your request, AIT is hereby summitting the final binder concerning the Paramotor Flight
Platform Solution. This document reports the tests performed and the results of each test matrix
and how it complies with our technical specifications. Any question and concerns regarding the
project can be directly addressed to the Engineering Project Manager or alternatively to any of the
AIT members.

We hope that you find this report satisfactory.

Sincerely,

Kyle Kinsey | 512-436-4925 Matthew Pantoja | 361-696-2721

Engineering Project Lead Design Engineer
[email protected] [email protected]

J. Ramon Vazquez C. | 210-788-9150 Tarunjeet Singh | 210-999-9862

Engineering Project Manager Systems & Controls Engineer
[email protected] [email protected]

Enclosed: Final Binder

Table of Contents

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 1
1.0 Introduction and Background ................................................................................................... 2
1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Background ........................................................................................................................... 2
2.0 Purpose...................................................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Problem Statement ................................................................................................................ 2
3.0 Objective ................................................................................................................................... 2
3.1 Objective ............................................................................................................................... 2
4.0 Specifications ............................................................................................................................ 3
4.1 Performance Requirements ................................................................................................... 3
4.2 Physical Specifications.......................................................................................................... 3
5.0 Concept Design ......................................................................................................................... 3
5.1 Alternative Solutions............................................................................................................. 3
5.2 Selection Criteria and Results ............................................................................................... 6
6.0 Prototype Design....................................................................................................................... 6
6.1 Analytical/experimental ........................................................................................................ 6
6.2 Product safety/failure ............................................................................................................ 7
6.3 Design refinements/optimization .......................................................................................... 8
6.4 Diagrams ............................................................................................................................... 8
6.5 Key drawings......................................................................................................................... 9
7.0 Prototype Fabrication .............................................................................................................. 11
7.1 Fabrication Method ............................................................................................................. 11
7.2 Drawings ............................................................................................................................. 13
7.3 Bill of Materials .................................................................................................................. 13
8.0 Prototype Testing .................................................................................................................... 14
8.1 Test Plan Summary ............................................................................................................. 14
8.2 Test Setup or Apparatus ...................................................................................................... 14
8.3 Test Results Summary......................................................................................................... 15
9.0 Project Management ............................................................................................................... 20
9.1 Personnel ............................................................................................................................. 20
 9.2 Overall Schedule ................................................................................................................. 21
9.2.1 Senior Design I Spring 2019 ............................................................................................ 22
9.2.2 Summer 2019 ................................................................................................................... 23
9.2.3 Senior Design II Fall 2019 ............................................................................................... 23
9.3 Financial Performance......................................................................................................... 24
10.0 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 25
8.0 Communications ..................................................................................................................... 26
Appendix A:.................................................................................................................................. 27

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Concept 1 4
Figure 2: Concept 2 4
Figure 3: Concept 3 5
Figure 4: Flight Envelope 6
Figure 5: Free Body Diagram 7
Figure 6: Electronics Schematic 8
Figure 7: Controls Schematic 9
Figure 8: Full Assembly Drawing 10
Figure 9: Exploded View of the Paramotor 10
Figure 10: Fuselage Subassembly 10
Figure 11: Wheel Subassembly 11
Figure 12: Weldment of the Fuselage 11
Figure 13: Axle for the Wheel 12
Figure 14: Wheel attached to Axle 12
Figure 15: Full Fuselage Assembly 12
Figure 16: Earned Value 24

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Bill of Materials 10
Table 2: Riser Slot and Ground Clearance 13
Table 3: Axle Alignment 13
Table 4: Weight and Strength Results 14
Table 5: Receiver Signal Results 14
Table 6: Servo Behavior Results 14
Table 7: Current, Power and Temperature Results 15
Table 8: Weld Strength Results 16
Table 9: Wing Material Corrosion Resistance Results 16
Table 10: Range Results 16
Table 11: Launch and Flight Behavior Results 17
Table 12: Spring Gantt Chart 19
Table 13: Summer Gantt Chart 20
Table 14: Fall Gantt Chart 20
List of Acronyms and Symbols with Units

DMM Digital Multimeter

ESC Electronic Speed Controller
d1 Riser Distance (Front)
d2 Riser Distance (Center)
d3 Riser Distance (Back)
d̅ Average Riser Distance
|d1−d̅|+|d2−d̅|+|d3−d̅|
Mean Deviation
3
Power Voltage*Current
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 1 of 27

Abstract

To satisfy the research needs of Dr. Pranav Bhounsule our team created a device
with the flight characteristics of similar paramotors while also increasing the capacity for
instrumentation and improving the maximum flight time, and efficiency. In order to
provide the extended flight time and increased instrument and control payload that were
required, a large parafoil wing would be needed. Designing a parafoil was outside the scope
of this project and as such a suitable sized wing with appropriate flight characteristics was
sourced. The craft was designed around the restrictions of weight and geometry set by the
chosen wing, an Opale Camo H2.6. In current configuration, the craft has an estimated
flight time of one hour at optimum conditions. The device is well under the maximum
weight for the wing, for extended flight time an extra battery can easily be added. It
contains additional room for several more instruments or micro-controllers depending on
the needs of Dr. Bhounsule as he develops control systems. The team has successfully
developed a craft that meets the needs specified by the client Dr. Bhounsule namely a mid -
sized remote controlled paramotor with a flight time of one hour. This device will be sent
to Chicago where it will be used to further develop the first automated flight control system
for a paramotor.
 Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 2 of 27

1.0 Introduction and Background

1.1 Introduction
The market is saturated with both quadcopter and fixed wing drones. These types
of devices have severe draw backs in power consumption or photo quality. Paramotors for
recreational use are common. They represent an untapped market for aerial photography
and other remote-controlled applications. The team’s project is to develop a paramotor
device that improves on existing devices by consuming much less power than a comparable
photography drone and achieving a slower airspeed and the ability to take pictures without
motion blur. This device will be used by Dr. Bhounsule to develop a control system that
can automate the craft and follow GPS waypoints. The objective of this project is to create
flight solution that is capable of low power consumption, increased flight time, easy to
operate and more affordable over a quadcopter. The project will comply with FAA
regulations Title 14 CFR Section 21.185, 21.191, 21.193, Fly sUAS, FAA Form 8130-7,
and Texas Government Code, Chapter 423. Finished product must be able to fly with 10
kg of total weight. Propeller must provide 8N of thrust and consume less than 1000W of
power while cruising. Parafoil must be able to withstand maximum of 25km/h wind gusts
from all directions.
1.2 Background
There are other types of similar craft available such as fixed wing airplanes and
multi-copter drones. The widespread use of these types of crafts is partially due to the
simplicity of controlling their flight behavior. Automated GPS guided systems can be
bought easily and are often built into premade drones, and as of yet there is no such system
available for a paramotor.

2.0 Purpose
2.1 Problem Statement
Dr. Bhounsule is interested in developing an automated flight system for a
paramotor, and though remote controlled paramotors are available none of them have the
features he needs to successfully implement the instruments and control systems he needs
to perform his research. The project we were given was to develop a remote controlled
paramotor with an extended flight time and a modular design that is able to easily integrate
multiple sensors or microcontrollers.

3.0 Objective
3.1 Objective
The objective of this project is to create a mid-sized remote controlled paramotor
that meets the research needs of Dr. Pranav Bhounsule, including
 Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 3 of 27

4.0 Specifications
4.1 Performance Requirements
Discuss key performance requirements (including flight time and instrumentation).
Together with our sponsor our team decided on several characteristics that would
be critical to the device being able to perform the research needed by Dr. Bhounsule. These
characteristics include a flight time of at least an hour, stable flight characteristics, an open
design to accommodate additional instruments, and the ability to takeoff unassisted.
Several instruments are necessary for our device and are included in the design.
The instruments included are utilized in the testing of the craft and consist of a battery
monitor, a GPS module, and a telemetry radio. There are many other instruments and
sensors that can be added if they are needed for automation such as an accelerometer, a
digital compass, and a tachometer. These can easily be added and utilized by the control
software that will be developed.
4.2 Physical Specifications
From the performance requirements a set of physical specifications was created that
were used to guide the design of alternative concepts. Of those specifications six are the
most critical. They are the takeoff weight, power consumption, flight speed, FAA
compliance, noise level, and within a budget.
The takeoff weight is determined by the wing and the desired cruising speed. The
chosen wing has a maximum loading of 10kg, and our design decisions needed to be based
around that maximum. Along with the weight the flight speed is determined by the wing
loading and sets a maximum of 20mph.
To achieve a nominal flight time of one hour we calculated a maximum power
consumption such that a single 6S battery could power the entire flight. A single battery
was chosen due to budget and weight constraints. The power consumption was determined
to need to be below 1000W.
According to OSHA standards the decibel limit for hearing damage is 100dB. We
used this value to ensure that the device would not damage hearing by flying to near to
someone. We also researched relevant FAA requirements for drones and other similar craft
and designed the paramotor to follow all relevant laws. And lastly our device was designed
to be built with a budget of $2000, which was given to us by our sponsor.

5.0 Concept Design

5.1 Alternative Solutions
Three concept designs were initially thought out for various ways of constructing
paramotors platform. It had to be aerodynamic and capable of automation in future by Dr.
Bhounsule. These three concepts were a three wheeled frame with no cover and a ducted
fan motor, a four wheeled frame with a cover and an open propeller, and a three wheeled
 Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 4 of 27

design with an open propeller. Each design has positive and negative features and
ultimately a three wheeled design with an open propeller was chosen.
5.1.1 Concept 1

Figure 1: Concept 1

The first concept is a standard paramotor design with no wheels, a simple frame, and a
GoPro camera. The frame will be constructed from wood as it allows for a cheaper cost of
manufacturing. The use of no wheels will allow for a lighter aircraft and cost reduction. A
disadvantage of no wheels is that the aircraft will have to be assisted on take-off by the operator.
The operator will also have to assist the aircraft in landing as no wheels will not allow the aircraft
to land in a safe manner. The use of a standard GoPro allows for a simple and economically
friendly camera system to be attached to the aircraft in various situations. The system can be
programmed for the operator to live stream footage to a transmitter. The wing in use for the system
will be a three-meter wing. The wing is constructed to handle the desired load of up to seven
kilograms. The overall design of Concept 1 is low in cost and weight. The design allows for the
simplest outcome. The breakdown of this concept can be found in Table 11 on the Appendix
section.

5.1.2 Concept 2

Figure 2: Concept 2
 Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 5 of 27

The second concept is a trike paramotor design with a four-meter wing. The aircraft will
use a ducted fan for safety purposes and to help provide a greater thrust. The wing will be four
meters in length to be able to lift the vehicle and maintain payload in flight. Aluminum tubes will
be used to construct the frame of the housing unit. Aluminum is chosen for the low weight and
higher strength than a 3D printed piece. The frame is economically friendly to the team but is not
the cheapest concept available. The team will add a shell of either carbon fiber or fiberglass to the
housing unit to improve aerodynamics. Three wheels will also be added to the bottom of the frame
to improve stability in takeoff and landing. A common drone camera will be placed in the aircraft
to capture footage. The overall design is a middle of the cost and somewhat competitive weight
concept. The team is intrigued by this design as the most viable solution. Table 12 in the appendix
section breaks down Concept 2.

5.1.3 Concept 3

Figure 3: Concept 3

Concept three is created to have the most high-end equipment. The design will be of a
quad-frame paramotor design with a five-meter wing. The aircraft will be propelled by a ducted
fan to improve safety as mentioned in concept 2. The housing frame will be constructed from steel
to improve durability and toughness of the aircraft. The material will also increase overall weight
which is why the five-meter wing will be used. The wing can carry up to twenty kilograms. A
carbon fiber or fiberglass shell will be placed over the housing unit to increase aerodynamics and
lessen drag. Four wheels will be placed on the frame to allow for stability on takeoff and landing
throughout the aircraft. A custom camera made by DJI will be placed in the housing unit. The
camera will have the ability to rotate in any direction and have moisture wicking capabilities in
more dynamic weather. The design is the highest in cost and weight, but it is the most durable out
of all the concepts. Table 13 in the Appendix section of the document shows this configuration.
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 6 of 27

5.2 Selection Criteria and Results

The three wheeled frames had more advantages over a four wheeled frame, most
importantly it is lighter in weight due to needing one less wheel and axle. However, there
would be less space to accommodate more instrumentation. Nonetheless, the design of the
three wheeled frame allows for the user to place levels inside of the fuselage, allowing to
mount other instruments like; sensors, cameras, or extra batteries.

6.0 Prototype Design

6.1 Analytical/experimental
The team used a few different techniques to determine the parameters for the
paramotor. The main thing the team needed to know was the flight envelope that would
correspond to the paramotor. The envelope can be seen below:

Figure 4: Flight Envelope

The flight envelope is important because it tells the team what the paramotor is able
to operate. Traditionally a flight envelope would have both a positive and negative load but
since the paramotor cannot operate upside down due to the wing deflating; it only has a
positive load. The paramotor has a stall speed of 6.2 meters per second and a max speed of
9.1 meters per second. The max speed is needed to determine how fast the paramotor needs
to be going on takeoff. The cruising speed is 7 meters per second which is what the
paramotor will be operating at when it is in flight.
Another important analysis that had to be made was how the forces distributed
across the fuselage. In order to do this the team created a free body diagram of the fuselage
that can be seen below:
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 7 of 27

Figure 5: Free Body Diagram

The fuselage has four main forces acting on the body. The first main force is the
gravitational force which acts straight down on the body. The propeller will provide a thrust
force which will move the body in the positive x direction. The parachute will provide a
sense of drag that will pull the paramotor in the negative x direction. The parachute also
provides a tension to the fuselage since it is connecting to the frame. This tension can be
determined by taking the cosine and sine of some angle multiplied by the amount of tension
provided on the body. All these forces make up the acting forces on the fuselage. The team
took this into consideration while designing.
6.2 Product safety/failure
During the designing phase the team had to consider various safety features and
risk mitigation that can be associated with the paramotor. The main risk that the team and
client were worried about was if the propeller had cutoff midflight and sent the paramotor
into freefall. The fact that the paramotor was attached to a parafoil helped provide drag on
freefall. Thus, slowing down the objects velocity and providing for a softer impact. The
axle on the wheels were also designed to take any impact that came with a drop. At worst
case scenario the axle would absorb the shock and brake at the weld. This led This led to
the main fuselage not being damaged.
In the event of longer flight with the chance of the battery dying out the paramotor
has the option to add another battery to act as a backup battery. This will also be beneficial
if the paramotor is not fully charged but needs to take flight.
The last main feature is the addition of a shroud to the fuselage to help minimize
debris from entering the electronics. The shroud is made of polycarbonate and covers all
sides of the fuselage except for the floor and back plate. The floor is not covered because
the electronics are attached to an aluminum plate that acts as the floor. The back plate is
left open for airflow to reach the propeller and allow for the motor wires to reach the inside
of the fuselage.
 Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 8 of 27

6.3 Design refinements/optimization

The team needed seven ECO’s after the completion of the fabrication package. All
seven were to change nut and bolt placements that were located on both the mounting plate
and the base plate. The team had made a mistake when calculating original hole placement
and ended up being off by an eighth of an inch. The team then recalculated the plates and
hole placement. The changes were approved and completed with no issues.
6.4 Diagrams
The electronics of the craft are designed such that they are controlled by a single
receiver while being powered by two separate batteries as seen in figure 3. This is done so a large
powerful battery can be used to power the propeller while a smaller battery powers the telemetry
and servos. This design enables the craft to continue flight in the event of the main battery failing
or running out of charge. If the main battery fails, the back-up will be able to control the craft and
it can be landed safely.

Figure 6: Electronics Schematic

Figure 4 shows the system flow chart. It shows the process that the user will go through to fly the
craft and details the transposition that is done by the servo mixer and how its controls differ from
standard aircraft. As seen on the right side the servo mixer reads a neutral control stick and
brings both servos to the upright position and only brings them down as the control is moved.
This is different to aircraft in that there is no upward deflection available as there is on a wing.
The pitch can only be controlled by means of changing the thrust.
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 9 of 27

Figure 7: Controls Schematic

6.5 Key drawings
Figures 5 and 6 show the assembly drawings of the entire craft. The first shows an
assembled version which gives a good idea of the shape of the final craft, while the
exploded view helps to demonstrate how all the individual pieces fit together. Figure 7
shows an exploded view of the frame, this drawing is of all the frame parts that were welded
together. The last drawing figure 8 is the wheel assembly which is designed to be easily
manufactured and replaced in case of damage.
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 10 of 27

Figure 8: Full Assembly Drawing

Figure 9: Exploded View of the Paramotor

Figure 10: Fuselage Subassembly

 Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 11 of 27

Figure 11: Wheel Subassembly

7.0 Prototype Fabrication

7.1 Fabrication Method
The fabrication consisted for the most part of cutting aluminum stock to the correct shape and
welding it into the fuselage of the craft. Figure 9 shows the bottom weldment of the frame it was
the first piece to be welded and served as a proof of concept for the team. The fabrication was
worrisome initially due to a lack of welding experience on the team.

Figure 12: Weldment of the Bottom of the Fuselage

Figure 10 and 11 show some of the wheel mount subassembly. This assembly attaches the
wheels to the frame and provides the ground clearance. The wheel assembly also serves as a
primary point of failure in the event of a crash, it is designed to be easily replaceable while also
absorbing the impact. The final version of the paramotor also included a wire mesh that is spread
across the propeller guard and keeps the riser lines from tangling in the propeller.
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 12 of 27

Figure 13: Axle for the Wheel

Figure 14: Wheel attached to the Axle.

Figure 15: Full Fuselage Assembly not including Parafoil

 Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 13 of 27

7.2 Drawings
The team followed the fabrication drawings to help complete the fabrication process. The
general assembly and subassemblies can be seen in section 6.4 of this report. The rest of the
drawings can be seen in the fabrication package tab at the conclusion of this report. The frame was
attached using an arc welder. The plates were attached using hex nuts. The electronics were
attached by Velcro. For full fabrication detail please refer to section 7.1.
7.3 Bill of Materials
In order to complete the project, the team had to make a bill of materials on parts that were
needed. All the materials were ordered online and shipped to the sponsor and then handed over to
the team. The team had a total of twenty-three different parts that were bought. The parts purpose
can be separated into two different uses which is frame or electronics. The aluminum, nuts, bolts,
and screws were all bought to makeup the frame. The motor, servos, propellers, ESCS, receivers,
and transmitter were bought to help makeup the electronic schematic that can be seen in the
electronic section of this report. The team had a cost budget of approximately $2000. The full list
can be seen in the table below:
Table 1: Bill of Materials
ITEM NO. PART NAME MANUFACTURER PART NO/ASIN QTY
1 Rubber wheel McMaster-Carr 2337T35 3
2 Brushless motor Esprit MARE10-510 1
3 Propeller 12x8 Esprit AER7227/37 1
Pusher
4 Propeller 13x9 Esprit AER7227/44 1
Pusher
5 Socket hex screw McMaster-Carr 91290a144 100
6 Socket hex screw McMaster-Carr 91251a527 25
7 Tig welding TIG Welding 102-WT016 1
electrodes Equipment
8 Servo Motor DSSERVO DS3218MG 4
9 2200 mAh Battery Gens Ace B50C-2200-2S1 1
TRX
10 Retaining Ring Hvazi CXZYDQ290P 1
11 Main Battery Hoovo B07MQT98D7 1
12 Paraglider wing Esprit OPL12131 1
13 GPS module Pixhawk B07NRMFTXL 1
14 Flange locknut McMaster-Carr 99904A101 100
15 Battery Charger Eyesky ECB6 1
16 Eyebolt McMaster-Carr 33045T77 2
17 ESC Esprit JETIELITEE80S 1
B
18 ESC programmer Esprit JETISPINBOX 1
 Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 14 of 27

19 Aluminum sheet McMaster-Carr 89015K18 1

1/8
20 Aluminum sheet McMaster-Carr 8975K142 1
1/4
21 Aluminum tube McMaster-Carr 6546K52 1
22 Flange locknut McMaster-Carr 94710A101 25
23 Bullet connector Hobbypower B00EZKW1T4 20

8.0 Prototype Testing

8.1 Test Plan Summary
The purpose of the test plan is to make sure the project meets client standards. The
client gave the team an initial amount set of specifications that the paramotor must be able
to operate at. The team then devised seven test that would test all the main functions of the
client specifications. The test that were conducted are as follows: critical dimension test,
electronics bench test, range and noise test, corrosion and UV test, drop test, weight and
strength test, and lastly a flight test. The details of each test are laid out in the section 8.2
in this report. The results of the test are in section 8.3 in this report.
8.2 Test Setup or Apparatus
The overall test plan consists of seven main tests. The first test is the critical
dimensions test. Using calipers measure the distance between the riser slots on the frame
at three points. The frontmost point before the radius begins, the rearmost and the center.
All measurements should be between 14 and 18 cm and within 5mm of each other. With
device on a flat surface measure the distance from the surface to the bottom of the frame.
Secure the back of the frame to a flat reference surface and measure the deviation along
the axles to verify alignment. They need not be aligned with the reference surface just
aligned together.
The second test is the weight and strength test which works by attaching a mass of
25 kg which is tied with bridling rope and attached to the hanging scale. If the rope doesn’t
collapse it pass the test otherwise it fails, the test. Weight of wing also be tested with scale
to assure it doesn’t weigh no more than 40 gr/m2. After fabrication the final product must
not exceed 8 kg.
The third test is the electronics bench test which works by setting up all electronics
on device in final configuration, do not attach propeller. Disconnect all connections from
receiver except for the power. Pair with transmitter and use DMM to check signal received
matches the one transmitted. Reconnect all cables. Check servo behavior matches
expectations with various transmitter conditions. Using transmitter set throttle to 50%. Use
DMM to measure current through motor power cables. Run at 50% throttle for 1 hour, to
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 15 of 27

simulate flight a fair will be directed across the device. Measure temperature of ESC at 15-
minute intervals. Disconnect batteries and check voltage.
The fourth test is the drop test which a Welded frame (unibody frame) will be
subjected to a drop test from 20-foot height and will be tested for weld cracks with dye
penetrants with provided instructions from the manufacturer.
The fifth test is covering the wing material which works by using the small patches
included with the wing. One of these samples will be placed in a 3.5% saltwater solution
for 1 hour and then removed. After a day the material will be inspected for holes and
manually manipulated to check for brittleness. Another sample will be placed in a sunny
location protected from the weather for a week and inspected the same way.
The sixth test is the range noise. In this test one of the team members will be
attached with a receiver and a GPS module. The other members will stand with the
transmitter. The receiver will be attached with an LED to show that it is still receiving
signal from the transmitter. The team member with the GPS module and receiver will begin
to run to at least two miles away from the transmitter and see if signal could still be reached.
The team will also see if the GPS module can still be traced by the telemetry system.
The last main test that is being conducted is the flight test. Here the finished
paramotor will be given 30 m to take off, and once it up in the air servos will be tested for
maneuverability. This test will cover how paramotor behaves turning left, right and during
braking.

8.3 Test Results Summary

The results for the seven tests are described in this section. For the dimensions test
the distances between the risers was measured at three points. The mean deviation of the
riser distances was calculated to give a value for the parallelism of the slots. Acceptable
criteria were determined to be a mean deviation of below 5 mm and the device was
significantly under the required value. As well ground clearance was specified to be a
minimum of 50mm and was measured to be 113mm which is well above the required value.
The parallelism of the wheels was measured by aligning the side of the frame to a common
reference and measuring the distance from that reference to the front and back of each
wheel. The alignment is the difference between those two measurements with a zero being
perfectly aligned. Each wheel was within 4mm of being aligned and the mean deviation of
these measurements was 3.3mm which is within the acceptable criteria of 5mm.
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 16 of 27

Table 2: Riser Slot and Ground Clearance Results

T-01 Critical Dimensions

Test Acceptance Criteria Measured Value Pass/Fail
Riser Distance 14cm<d 1 <18cm 17.3cm P
(Front)
Riser Distance 14cm<d 2 <18cm 17.4cm P
(Center)
Riser Distance 14cm<d 3 <18cm 17.5cm P
(Back)
Parallelism Mean Deviation < 0.67mm P
5mm
Ground Clearance >50mm 113mm P

Table 3: Axle Alignment Results

T-01 Critical Dimensions
Test Acceptance Criteria Measured Value Pass/Fail
Back Left Axle N/A 2mm N/A
Deviation
Back Right Axle N/A 2mm N/A
Deviation
Front Axle N/A 4mm N/A
Deviation
Parallelism Mean Deviation < 3.3mm P
5mm

The weight and strength test results were tricky but to ensure the safety of the device
bridle lines were tested to ensure a breaking strength above 25kg. This value was decided
upon because of the maximum weight of the craft as well as the maximum loading in the
flight envelope. The lines were tested by suspending 25kg from a single line. The lines
tested did not fail at that weight. The fabric weight was tested to match the weight listed in
the manual for the wing. This weight is listed as 32 gr/m2 and a value of 40 gr/m2 was
deemed as acceptable. The fabric tested to be accurate to the specification of 32 gr/m 2 . The
maximum weight possible for the wing is listed as 10kg and the listed specifications state
the craft should weigh no more than 8kg to ensure flight stability. The weight of the craft
in its current configuration was 5kg which is within acceptable weight for the wing and
will provide a more efficient flight.
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 17 of 27

Table 4: Weight and Strength Results

T-02 Weight and Strength Data

Test Acceptance Criteria Component Pass/Fail
condition
Bridling rope Hold 25 kg N/A P
without failure
Wing fabric Weight < 40gr/m2 32gr/m2 P
Overall product Weight < 8 Kg 5kg P

The electronics bench test is one of the most crucial components for the proper
function and behavior of the paramotor. It is why adequate testing procedures were set for
these components and why it is important to be able to monitor the behaviors in temperature
and power consumption of the functioning set. The transmitter signal responded to the
manipulation and activation of the transmitter. Also, the servo motors responded in a
positive way towards the corresponding desired behavior, yielding an optimal control for
the paramotor. Additionally, the behavior in terms of temperature and power consumption
of the electronics yielded temperatures well below our acceptance criteria dictated by our
specifications. Yielding in that regard a safer performance when operating the paramotor.

Table 5: Receiver Signal Results

T-03: Receiver Signal Matrix

Test Acceptance Criteria Pass/Fail
Receiver signal channel 1 Signal changes as transmitter P
is manipulated
Receiver signal channel 2 Signal changes as transmitter P
is manipulated
Receiver signal channel 3 Signal changes as transmitter P
is manipulated

Table 6: Servo Behavior Results

T-03: Servo Behavior Matrix
Test Acceptance Criteria Pass/Fail
Servo behavior (no input) Both servos are in upright P
position
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 18 of 27

Servo behavior (right turn) When control stick is moved P

to the right only the right
servo moves downward
Servo behavior (left turn) When control stick is moved P
to the left only the left servo
moves downward
Servo behavior (slowing) When control stick is moved P
downward both servos move
downward in unison

Table 7: Current, Power and Temperature Results

T-03: Current, Power and Temperature Matrix

Test Acceptance Criteria Measured Value Pass/Fail
Motor Current <50A 6A P
Motor power 1000W 133W P
consumption
ESC Temperature <60°C 21.2°C P
(Initial)
ESC Temperature <60°C 22.5°C P
(15 min)
ESC Temperature <60°C 23.1°C P
(30 min)
ESC Temperature <60°C 23.3°C P
(45 min)
ESC Temperature <60°C 24.1°C P
(60 min)

The test that had the most risk was the drop test as it could end in the total loss of
the paramotor. The paramotor was flown to a height of approximately twenty-five feet and
reached a stable position. Once stability was reached the throttle to the propeller was cut
off allowing no thrust to be provided. This action caused no lift to be provided to the
parafoil thus causing it to fall to the ground. The paramotor hit the ground and took a couple
of bounces before coming to rest. The team first visually inspected the welds for any main
cracks visible to the naked eye. None were visible so the team poured dye penetrant into
the frame to check for minor cracks. No penetrant was leaking, and all the welds held as
expected. The front axle was bent slightly but the team was able to bend it back in place
with no problems to the frame or electronics.
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 19 of 27

Table 8: Weld Strength Results

T-04 Weld Strength

Test Broken welds or large Pass/Fail
cracks (yes/no)
Dye penetrant None found P

The wing material was tested next to see how it withstood to weathering. The
parafoil came with a couple of spare patches just in case repair had to be made to the
parachute. One of the patches was taken and placed in saltwater solution for one hour. Once
the hour was complete, the patch was taken out and left to sit overnight. The team came
back the next day and evaluated the patch. No noticeable corrosion was observed. The team
also placed another patch outside for one week to check for weathering and UV resistance.
At the conclusion of the one week the team noticed no change in color or material strength.

Table 9: Wing Material Corrosion Resistance Results

T-05 Wing Material
Test Acceptance Criteria Pass/Fail
Corrosion No noticeable difference P
between new material and
tested sample.
UV No noticeable difference P
between new material and
tested sample.

The test that gave the team the most problems was the range and noise test. The
range goal for the transmitter and telemetry was to be at least 2 miles. The device did not
pass this test and signal was lost at a significantly shorter distance around 2000ft. If the
client is dissatisfied with the current range, then stronger transmission methods are
available and can be added to the device. These include larger antennas and more powerful
telemetry systems. The maximum noise level was determined to be the level that OSHA
lists as causing damage during extended exposure. Our tests were to be performed outdoors
to better simulate real world conditions but during testing indoors the value was measured
much closer than specified and was still much below the specified value. Therefore, it can
be assumed that at any range the device will not be loud enough to cause hearing damage.
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 20 of 27

Table 10: Range/Noise Results

T-06 Range and Noise Data

Test Acceptance Criteria Measured Value Pass/Fail
Transmitter/Receive > 2 miles N/A F
r
GPS Module > 2 miles N/A F

Noise level >100dB 76.7 P

The last test that was important to complete was the flight test. This was the
culmination of all the test and would determine if the overall project was a success. The
paramotor was taken to the Kitty Hawk Field in New Braunfels, Texas to test flight. The
airfield is equipped with various runways. The team used the end of the runways to test
takeoff. The paramotor was able to take off on its own with thirty feet. The vehicle quickly
ascended into the sky. Once in the sky, the team tested to see how the paramotor will
operate with turning. With the controller the paramotor was turned to the left and did a
couple of circles. The vehicle was then straightened back out and then turned to the right
for a couple of circles. The vehicle had no problem turning in either direction. The vehicle
was once again straightened back out and flown near the runway. The team then initiated
the brakes to test how the vehicle will land. The parafoil deflated the back of the parachute
as expected to allow the vehicle to return to the ground. The test flights were a success.

Table 11: Launch and Flight Behavior Results

T-07 Launch and Flight Matrix
Test Pass/Fail
Turning Right P
Turning Left P
Slowing P
Self-Launch P

9.0 Project Management

9.1 Personnel
The following is a brief summary of the key personnel. Additional details are
contained in the Communications section of the report.
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 21 of 27

Kyle Kinsey – Engineering Project Manager

Mr. Kyle Kinsey was the team leader for this project and as such delegated the
responsibilities among the other teammates. He was also the primary fabricator and with
Matthew Pantoja created the design and fabrication drawings for the device. He has
demonstrated the ability to implement the knowledge gained through his education to
successful develop a product from an initial idea into a functioning prototype.
Matthew Pantoja – Mechanical Design Engineer

Mr. Matthew Pantoja has contributed excellent problem-solving abilities and

process-thinking skills and embraces creativity and innovation. Through his studies, he has
gained extensive knowledge of thermodynamics and product design, among many other
components of mechanical engineering. He was a part of the Baja SAE team which taught
him project design early in his college career. He has demonstrated strong technical and
methodical aptitude with an innate ability to analyze problems and devise creative solutions
that enhance the quality of the project. Matthew has been an effective communicator who
builds positive, cohesive relationships with all personnel associated with the project.
Collaborated with the design analysis fabrication and testing throughout the project.
Tarunjeet Singh (TJ) – Systems and Control Engineer
Tarunjeet Singh has contributed to majority of hands on part of the The Paramotor.
It includes the sorting out all the electronic that were needed, fabrication and testing of the
project. Fabrication included milling the plates, making shafts on the lathe, and cutting and
drilling the materials according to design parameters. TJ has also used his collective
knowledge from all engineering courses to make this project meet its functional
requirement and design parameters. TJ also worked on testing all the electronic
connectivity, orientation and response timings of throttle and servos. TJ has been an
effective asset for completion of this project.
J. Ramon Vazquez C. - Engineering Finance Manager
Mr. Ramon Vazquez has contributed to multiphase programs throughout his career.
These include; being design and test lead of the NASA NCAS Mars competition, Secretary
and interim president for Aeronautics and Rocket Club at UTSA, Mechanical Engineering
Intern for various projects involving sustainability, mechatronics, and aerospace
engineering. He has acted as the team’s communications director, project management in
earned value analysis, scheduling and personnel, as well as being the scribe and record
holder of the project. Collaborated in producing the technical solution, fabrication, and
testing procedures.
9.2 Overall Schedule
A Gantt chart, or harmonogram, is a type of bar chart that illustrates a project
schedule. This chart lists the tasks to be performed on the vertical axis, and time intervals
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 22 of 27

on the horizontal axis. The width of the horizontal bars in the graph shows the duration of
each activity.
This tool was utilized to show the work performed in detail with the time it took
place keeping compliance throughout the deliverables and project development. This tool
was crucial to keep track of hours spent by team members and utilized to determine the
earned value in the financial performance.
The following sections show the summarized Developed Gantt chart for Senior
Design I in the Spring 2019 Semester, Summer of 2019, and Senior Design II in the Fall
2019 Semester in chronological order. The criteria for this arrangement of time was to
separate the whole project, into the scholastic semesters, and then into the deliverables for
each semester period. Since summer is not stipulated as a scholastic semester, the period
in between the two semesters was assigned to Summer 2019. Each section and deliverables
are explained in detail in the following sections

9.2.1 Senior Design I Spring 2019

In Senior Design 1, the project began as planed on January 28, 2019. The whole section
was set to encompass 70 days. The semester was broken up into 10 main tasks and
deliverables including specification sheet, tradeoff studies, fabrication report, drawing
package, and presentations. Each task consisting of numerous sub tasks needed to be
completed for the main task to be completed. The week of March 8 was left empty due to
spring break. The week was used as a vacation period for the team to relax and reenergize
for the remaining of the Senior Design 1 course. All items in this section were 100%
completed. The following table shows some of the main task needed to be completed in
Senior Design 1:
Table 12: Spring 2019 Summarized Gantt Chart
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 23 of 27

9.2.2 Summer 2019

One of the client’s prerogatives and objectives was that an early prototype of the final
product must be showcased before Senior Design II. Summer 2019 was the period utilized
by the team to Fabricate and test this early prototype. This whole section consisted of 54
days and 14 tasks including the plan, design, manufacturing, assembly, programming, and
preliminary testing. A vacation period of approximately one month was assigned to allow
the team to rest from the strenuous Spring Semester and generate creativity and energy for
the next tasks at hand. All items in this section allotted to a total of 100% completion. The
following table shows the rollout of the Gant Chart for Summer 2019.

Table 13:Summer 2019 Summarized Gantt Chart

9.2.3 Senior Design II Fall 2019

The final product development phase started in the Fall 2019 Semester. This section
was built in accordance with the Senior Design II Fall 2019 Syllabus. It was determined
that the Semester had 75 days in total for the team to accomplish all the milestones and
deliverables required. Referring on the rolled-up Gant Chart of this section, all items
excluding Task 19-Task 20 are at 100% complete. This yields a total of 90.90% completion
overall.
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 24 of 27

Table 14: Fall 2019 Summarized Gantt Chart

9.3 Financial Performance

The following sections discuss AIT’s EVA (Earned Value Analysis). Contrasting
planned financial resources vs actual values.
Earned Value Management (EVM) is a project management technique that Objectively
tracks physical accomplishment of work. This is used to track the progress and status of a
project & forecast the likely future performance of the project. The total Budgeted Cost of
Work Scheduled (BCWS) came out to be ≈$ $223,800.00. However, for the current week
(Week 28) this yields a total of $ $195,500.00 Budgeted Cost of Work Performed (BCWP)
also sometimes called Earned Value (EV) yields a result of $216,329.51. While Actual
Cost of Work Performed (ACWP) also sometimes called Actual Cost (AC) yields a value
of $210,100.00. When performing Schedule Variance, a value of $20,829.5which indicates
we finished ahead of schedule. While a result of $6229.51 for Cost Variance shows that
we finished under budget. Table 1 shows the Earned Analysis performed for these 28 weeks
of labor.
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 25 of 27

Earned Value for Paramotor

$250,000.00

$200,000.00

$150,000.00
Cost

$100,000.00

$50,000.00

$-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Weeks

BCWP BCWS ACWP

Figure 16: Earned Value chart

10.0 Conclusion
In accordance with the technical specifications in Appendix A, and the test plan
outlined in this document and submitted previously, Advanced Innovations Technologies
developed a functioning Paramotor Flight Development Platform. The device passed all
tests except the transmission range. All other aspects including power consumption and
flight behavior were successful and performed above specifications. The device has been
deemed acceptable as-is by the client without the need for modification to bring the
transmission range into compliance.
 Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 26 of 27

8.0 Communications
To ensure the fabrication as planned, Advanced Innovation Technologies will be meeting
with the Senior Project Manager, Professor James Johnson bi-weekly Thursday meetings at 8:40
AM. Additionally, the design team members meet at minimum of three times a week and keep
mentor/sponsor Dr. Pranav Bhounsule up to date by email when needed. Contact Information of
all team members:

Kyle Kinsey | 512-436-4925 Matthew Pantoja | 361-696-2721

Engineering Project Lead Design Engineer
[email protected] [email protected]

J. Ramon Vazquez C. | 210-788-9150 Tarunjeet Singh | 210-999-9862

Engineering Project Manager Systems & Controls Engineer
[email protected] [email protected]
Advanced Innovations Technologies December 5, 2019
Paramotor Flight Control Development Platform Page 27 of 27

Appendix A: