Technical

Report
Team #11
ITU SKY UAV
Table of Contents

1.INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 5
1.1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. 5
1.1.1. Design Process ........................................................................................................................... 5
1.1.2. Mission Requirements and Constraints .................................................................................. 5
2. PROJECT MANAGEMENT .................................................................................................................... 6
2.1. Team Organisation........................................................................................................................ 6
2.2. Time Scheduling ............................................................................................................................ 6
2.3. Financial Budget............................................................................................................................ 7
3. AERODYNAMIC DESIGN ...................................................................................................................... 7
3.1. Wing Planform Configurations ..................................................................................................... 7
3.2. Wing Vertical Position Configurations .......................................................................................... 8
3.3. Tail Configurations ........................................................................................................................ 8
3.4. Landing Gear Configurations ........................................................................................................ 9
3.5. Aerodynamic Design and Sizing .................................................................................................... 9
3.5.1. Airfoil Selection ........................................................................................................................ 9
3.5.2 Wing Design ............................................................................................................................ 12
3.6. Stability ....................................................................................................................................... 12
3.6.1. Center of Gravity and Static Margin ...................................................................................... 13
3.6.2. Longitudinal Stability............................................................................................................. 14
3.6.3. Lateral- Directional Stability .................................................................................................. 16
3.7. Estimation of Drag and Thrust .................................................................................................... 17
3.7.1. Parasite Drag ......................................................................................................................... 18
3.7.1.1. Skin Friction Coefficient ................................................................................................... 18
3.7.1.2. Form Factors..................................................................................................................... 19
3.7.2. Induced Drag ......................................................................................................................... 19
3.7.3. Crud Drug .............................................................................................................................. 20
3.7.4. Thrust Calculation ................................................................................................................. 20
3.7.5. Drag and Thrust Calculation Results ..................................................................................... 20
3.7.6 Verification of Wing Produced Lift and Drag ......................................................................... 21
4. STRUCTURAL DESIGN ........................................................................................................................ 23
4.1. Wing Structural Design ............................................................................................................... 23
4.2. Tail Structural Design .................................................................................................................. 25
4.3. Fuselage and Mechanical Systems ............................................................................................. 26
4.3.1. Fuselage ................................................................................................................................. 26

2
 4.3.2. Mechanical Systems ............................................................................................................... 26
4.3.3. Wings and Tail ........................................................................................................................ 26
4.3.4. Landing Gear .......................................................................................................................... 27
4.4. Wing Structural Analysis ............................................................................................................. 27
5. AVIONICS ........................................................................................................................................... 30
5.1. Batteries ...................................................................................................................................... 30
5.2.ESC ............................................................................................................................................... 30
5.3. Connectors .................................................................................................................................. 30
5.4. Servos.......................................................................................................................................... 30
5.5. Radio Control .............................................................................................................................. 30
6. PAYLOAD PREDICTION ............................................................................................................ 31
7. OUTLOOK ............................................................................................................................... 32
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 33

List of Tables

Table 1: Financial Budget ........................................................................................................................ 7

Table 2: Center of Gravity Calculation .................................................................................................. 13
Table 3: Static margin calculations........................................................................................................ 14
Table 4: 𝐶𝑑0 calculations ...................................................................................................................... 19
Table 5: XFLR5 and ANSYS Fluent Comparison for Cl calculation ......................................................... 22
Table 6: Comparison for 𝐶𝑑0 calculations ............................................................................................ 22
Table 7: Fuselage Material Selection .................................................................................................... 26
Table 8: Wing-Tail Material Selection ................................................................................................... 27
Table 9: Landing Gear Material Selection ............................................................................................. 27

List of Figures

Figure 1: Team Organization Chart ........................................................................................................ 6

Figure 2: Time Schedule .......................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 3: Wing Planform Configuration Selection ................................................................................... 7
Figure 4: Wing Vertical Position Configuration Selection ....................................................................... 8
Figure 5: Tail Configuration Selection ..................................................................................................... 8
Figure 6: Landing Gear Configuration Selection...................................................................................... 9
Figure 7: DAE 31 Airfoil achieved from XFLR5....................................................................................... 10
Figure 8: E205 Airfoil achieved from XFLR5 .......................................................................................... 10
Figure 9: FX 63-137 Airfoil achieved from XFLR5 .................................................................................. 10
Figure 10: Cl - alpha comparison of airfoils achieved from XFLR5 ........................................................ 10
Figure 11: Cd - alpha comparison of airfoils achieved from XFLR5 ....................................................... 11
Figure 12: Cm - alpha comparison of airfoils achieved from XFLR5...................................................... 11
Figure 13: Cl/Cd - alpha comparison of airfoils achieved from XFLR5 .................................................. 11
Figure 14: Properties of final wing design............................................................................................. 12

3
Figure 15: Types of Stability [1] ............................................................................................................. 13
Figure 16: Weigth entered in the XFLR5 program and position of center of gravity ............................ 13
Figure 17: Ideal Region for Center of Gravity on Aircraft [2] ................................................................ 14
Figure 18: Cm / alpha graph .................................................................................................................. 15
Figure 19: Parameters of formula on sample aircraft model [2] .......................................................... 15
Figure 20: Tail parameters .................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 21: Cn-β and Cl-β graphics achieved from XFLR5....................................................................... 16
Figure 22: Vertical Tail Dimensions ....................................................................................................... 17
Figure 23: Drag versus Velocity Graph .................................................................................................. 20
Figure 24: Drag-Thrust Comparison ...................................................................................................... 21
Figure 25: Contribution to drag of aircraft components....................................................................... 21
Figure 26: CFD Results for Cl calculation from ANSYS Fluent ............................................................... 22
Figure 27: CFD Results for Cd calculation from ANSYS Fluent .............................................................. 22
Figure 28: Streamlines for tip vortices from ANSYS Fluent ................................................................... 23
Figure 29: Streamlines on wing surface from ANSYS Fluent ................................................................. 23
Figure 30: Wing Structure ..................................................................................................................... 24
Figure 31: Fuselage Connection (Root Section) .................................................................................... 24
Figure 32: Connections View From Above ............................................................................................ 25
Figure 33: Tail internal structure and control surfaces ......................................................................... 25
Figure 34: Shrenk Approximation results and calculated lift distribution over wing ........................... 28
Figure 35: Lift distribution over wing surface for Schrenk Approximation ........................................... 29
Figure 36: The Finite Element Model with Applied Forces in the MSC Patran ..................................... 29
Figure 37: The displacement results for static analysis obtained by MSC NASTRAN ........................... 29
Figure 38: Payload prediction graphic................................................................................................... 31
Figure 39: Side view of final aircraft...................................................................................................... 32
Figure 40: Isometric view of final aircraft ............................................................................................. 32

4
1.INTRODUCTION

1.1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report details the design process, analysis, manufacturing, and testing plans of the
ITU SKY UAV Team from Istanbul Technical University for the Air Cargo Challenge 2022.
The aim of the Air Cargo Challenge competition is to carry the blood bags, which are medical
emergency goods, as much as possible within the specified time and to travel as far as possible
with the blood bags. The team aimed to achieve the maximum payload weight. The team
designed the UAV by complying with the constraints specified in the regulation. According to
the results of the analyses and designs, the UAV will have a high wing and a conventional tail
type.

1.1.1. Design Process

At the beginning of the design process, the team estimated the UAV’s total weight and
determined the payload weight to be carried. During the preliminary design phase, the aim is
for the aircraft to be subjected to the least amount of drag and produce the maximum lift force
during flight. To achieve this goal, it was tried to select an aerodynamically efficient airfoil.
One of the criteria for the design is that the aircraft take off from a short distance as specified
in the regulation. In addition, it has been taken into account that the aircraft also has sufficient
maneuverability to turn sharp corners. The avionic elements that will be used in the aircraft are
the LiPo battery, receiver, ESC, and GPS.

1.1.2. Mission Requirements and Constraints

The total time determined for flights in the Air Cargo Challenge competition is 180
seconds. The first 60 seconds of this time will be spent for the aircraft to achieve altitude, and
after 60 seconds, the altitude will be recorded. Then, at the end of the remaining 120 seconds,
the total distance traveled by the aircraft will be recorded. The main task is to carry as much
weight as possible to the longest distance. In addition, fast mounting of the payload on the
aircraft and removal also earn points.

There are some challenging conditions in the competition. The first of these conditions is
that the takeoff distance should not exceed 60 meters. Secondly, according to airworthiness
rules, the maximum altitude that the aircraft can reach is 120 meters. In addition, the
disassembled version of the aircraft fits in a 110 x 25 x 40 cm box, and the assembled aircraft
must fit into a rhombus-shaped box with an edge length of 1.5 m each. 50 cm is the maximum
height for the assembled aircraft.

5
2. PROJECT MANAGEMENT

2.1. Team Organisation

The team consists of 20 undergraduate students. Team members took on tasks according
to their interests and abilities during the design and production phase of the aircraft. The work
was divided during the design phase into Aerodynamics, CAD and Structures, Avionics and
Manufacturing. During the design phase, the design was carried out more efficiently with the
active communication and cooperation of team members working on different fields.

Figure 1: Team Organization Chart

2.2. Time Scheduling

Figure 2: Time Schedule

6
 The time schedule prepared by the team can be seen in Figure 2. The team aims to work
hard by complying with the timeline to overcome challenges that may occur during the
production and testing phase.

2.3. Financial Budget

Table 1: Financial Budget

No Item Unit Price Quantity Total Price

1 Balsa TRY 60 25 TRY 1500
2 Plywood TRY 325 2 TRY 650
3 Carbon Pipe TRY 100 12 TRY 1200
4 Covering Film TRY 110 8 TRY 880
5 Epoxy TRY 375 2 TRY 750
6 Motor TRY 1900 1 TRY 1900
7 Propellers TRY 45 1 TRY 45
8 ESC TRY 325 1 TRY 325
9 Batteries TRY 1300 1 TRY 1300
10 Filament TRY 200 2 TRY 400
11 Tools TRY 150 8 TRY 1200
12 Landing Gear TRY 400 2 TRY 800
13 Fasteners TRY 10 10 TRY 100
Total TRY 11050

3. AERODYNAMIC DESIGN

3.1. Wing Planform Configurations

Figure 3: Wing Planform Configuration Selection

The tapered wing is preferred as the wing planform because of the fact that the tapered
wing is more aerodynamically efficient than the rectangular wing and easier to manufacture
than the elliptical wing. Also, the use of tapered wings enabled us to achieve the needed aspect
ratio that will ensure wing area to produce the demanded lift and enough maneuverability while
allowing the aircraft to fit into the rhombus-shaped box specified in the competition regulations.

7
3.2. Wing Vertical Position Configurations

Figure 4: Wing Vertical Position Configuration Selection

Due to competition regulations, the lift force required to carry as much payload as possible,
as well as the requirement to place a payload box inside the fuselage, were the primary criteria
considered. The wing configuration was chosen for several reasons: the high wing configuration
generates the most lift force, the location of the center of gravity being below the wing causes
the fuselage to act as a pendulum during roll moments, which increases lateral stability, and the
wing-to-fuselage fasteners being high on the fuselage’s vertical axis makes it easier to position
the payload inside.

3.3. Tail Configurations

Figure 5: Tail Configuration Selection

T-tail, V-tail, and conventional tail are the most commonly used among UAVs for
comparable purposes. In order to obtain the necessary trim and stability conditions, a
conventional tail was preferred. Ease of production compared to other tail configurations and
high controllability were the main reasons for the decision to use a conventional tail.

8
3.4. Landing Gear Configurations

Figure 6: Landing Gear Configuration Selection

In the determination process of landing gear type, the most important factor is considered
as the landing and take-off safety. Since tail-draggers are the safest due to the motor being
located high, it was decided to use a tail-dragger to minimize the damage that can be taken
during landing and take-off. Also, tail-dragger landing gear has reduced parasitic drag and
weight compared to other types which affected the determination process.

3.5. Aerodynamic Design and Sizing

Dimensions and design parameters of the main components of aircraft have been
determined and discussed in this section.

3.5.1. Airfoil Selection

To sustain an aircrafts flight, the lift force required to overcome its weight and wings
generate most of the lift aircraft need. Airfoil is one of the most important sides of this problem.
Lift force is generated from the pressure difference between the upper and lower side of the
airfoil. So, when selecting the airfoil lift force must be considered. But it is not enough just
considering lift force. Keeping drag force low is important since there is a limited amount of
thrust. Also keeping the moment coefficient low to maintain stable flight. There are other
parameters about the selection of airfoil which are airfoil designs according to Reynolds number
and camber size according to have enough space for internal parts of the wing such as spars and
ribs and with a high stall angle because of climbing with a high angle of attack and 𝐶𝑙𝑚𝑎𝑥 Since
thrust limitations we decided to fly around 12m/s so our aircrafts Reynolds number will be ≈
215.000. Since that low Reynolds airfoils must be selected. With these requirements we
analyzed too many airfoils using the XFLR5 program. After this analysis, 3 airfoils showed
high performance and we chose the best one among them.

9
 Figure 7: DAE 31 Airfoil achieved from XFLR5

Figure 8: E205 Airfoil achieved from XFLR5

Figure 9: FX 63-137 Airfoil achieved from XFLR5

The intent of this selection process is to select an airfoil for an aircraft that is a low
Reynolds number cargo UAV. Thrust is limited since the engine and propeller are set by
regulations. At 12 m/s, 6.12 N of thrust is available since the selected airfoil must have a low
𝐶𝑑 to maintain cruise flight. The selected airfoil must provide enough lift at cruise speed, so the
𝐶𝑙 − 𝛼 graph also must be evaluated for this concern. To find an airfoil which has optimal
performance according to getting drag and enough lift, the 𝐶𝑙 /𝐶𝑑 − 𝛼 plot must be evaluated.
Also, as stated above, in order to maintain stable flight, 𝐶𝑚 is an important coefficient. So 𝐶𝑚 −
𝛼 graph must be considered. To get these plots, we used the XFLR5 program.

Figure 10: Cl - alpha comparison of airfoils achieved from XFLR5

10
 Figure 11: Cd - alpha comparison of airfoils achieved from XFLR5

Figure 12: Cm - alpha comparison of airfoils achieved from XFLR5

Figure 13: Cl/Cd - alpha comparison of airfoils achieved from XFLR5

According to these plots DAE-31 and FX 63-137 airfoils have higher lift and lower drag.
Even FX 63-137 has better performance but it is a more cambered and thinner airfoil. Since the
difference between DAE-31 and FX 63-137 is not that big enough to convince us to confront
structural problems. Between DAE-31 and E 205, DAE-31 has more lift and low drag and also
has low 𝐶𝑚 . According to these evaluations we decided to continue with DAE-31.

11
3.5.2 Wing Design

The main aim of wing design is to acquire the lift that is needed to sustain cruise flight
with the lowest possible drag force. According to regulation, the aircraft must be fitted to a
rhombus shaped with 1.5 m edge length. Within these restrictions the wing must produce lift
force to carry 3.2 kg total weight of the aircraft. The formula of the lift force that the wing must
produce to carry this weight;

1 2
𝑊=𝐿= 𝜌𝑉 𝑆𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐶𝐿
2
Using this formula to get an initial point the wing chord, sweep, dihedral, incidence and
sweep distributions along the span parameters were studied using an iterative study using
XFLR5.

After the design process on XFLR5 we set the design of the wing as:

Figure 14: Properties of final wing design

To acquire lift to maintain level flight the wing is fitted on the plane with a 3.5° tilt angle
on top of the aircraft.

3.6. Stability

Stability is defined as the ability of an aircraft to return to its flight path in the face of
weather events such as turbulence or a sudden change in weather. Stability assists pilots in
maintaining the specified and desired flight condition and responding to disturbances that may
occur during that flight condition. There are 2 types of stability in airplanes: static and dynamic.
Dynamic stability refers to the response time when disturbed by a tilt or bank movement. Static
stability is the tendency of the aircraft to return to the steady-state flight condition as a result of
encountering any small atmospheric disturbance in the steady-state flight condition.

12
 Figure 15: Types of Stability [1]

3.6.1. Center of Gravity and Static Margin

The center of gravity of an aircraft is an important location for designing a stable aircraft.
To determine the location of the center of gravity we used the XFLR5 program by giving all
parts of the aircraft as an input with their center of gravity locations.

Figure 16: Weigth entered in the XFLR5 program and position of center of gravity

Table 2: Center of Gravity Calculation

13
 Figure 17: Ideal Region for Center of Gravity on Aircraft [2]

To examine how ideal the CG location of the aircraft is we get the aerodynamic center of
the wing from the XFLR5 program. To estimate its adequacy, we used Static Margin. To obtain
ℎ𝑎𝑐 −ℎ𝑐𝑔
a longitudinally stable design static margin ( ) must be between 0.1c - 0.3c is the mean
𝐶
aerodynamic chord of the wing and it is 26.68 cm.

Table 3: Static margin calculations

Parameters Distance to Leading Edge of Wing

ℎ𝑐𝑔 14.3 cm
ℎ𝑎𝑐 17 cm
ℎ𝑎𝑐 − ℎ𝑐𝑔
0.102
𝐶

According to intentions, the static margin of the aircraft fits the requirements.
3.6.2. Longitudinal Stability

Obtaining a longitudinally stable design is an important criterion when configuring the

aircraft. While making this design, the longitudinal aerodynamic center of the aircraft should
be ahead of the center of gravity (closer to the nose). This will cause the cm-alpha graph to be
a graph with a negative slope (Figure 19). Because any effect (deterioration or lift increase)
affecting the aircraft will increase the lift of the aircraft. This increase in force will occur at the
aerodynamic center. Considering this increase, when the moment balance with respect to the
CG is written, it will force the aircraft to 'pitch up'. In order to balance this movement, there
will be an increase in the lift in the horizontal tail, and when the moment is taken according to
the CG by using this increase in the force, the pitch moment balance of the aircraft must be
ensured by forcing the ''pitch down'' movement. The mentioned moment balance is expressed
with the following sets of equations, and the horizontal tail is designed by adhering to the
following set of equations after the design of the wing;

14
 Figure 18: Cm / alpha graph

∑ 𝑀𝑐𝑔 = 0 → 𝑀0𝑤𝑓 + 𝑀𝐿𝑤𝑓 + 𝑀𝐿ℎ + 𝑀0ℎ + 𝑀𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑔 + 𝑀𝐷𝑤 = 0

𝐶𝑚0_𝑤𝑓 + 𝐶𝐿 (ℎ − ℎ0 ) − 𝜂ℎ 𝑉ℎ 𝐶𝐿ℎ = 0

Figure 19: Parameters of formula on sample aircraft model [2]

By using the above set of equations, it is aimed to design a horizontal tail to provide
longitudinal stability. With these in mind naca 0012 airfoil has used to maintain symmetry. The
distance of the horizontal tail to the CG was calculated as 49.7 cm, and the remaining
parameters are as follows;

Figure 20: Tail parameters

15
3.6.3. Lateral- Directional Stability

While designing any aircraft, the aircraft must be symmetrical along the x-axis. Assuming
that no disturbances occur, the mentioned symmetry keeps the aircraft lateral and directionally
stable. However, when any lateral wind acts, a change will be observed in the side slip angle of
the aircraft. This angle change will affect the lateral and directional stability of the aircraft.
Since the aircraft is desired to remain in a stable position, the vertical tail and symmetrical wing-
fuselage structure designed against these disturbances will tend to return the aircraft to the flight
phase where it started again. For this reason, the yaw moment and roll moment behaviors of the
aircraft under different side slip angle conditions were examined in the image below using the
XFLR5 program. In order to provide Directional-Lateral stability, the slope of the Roll
Moment-Beta graph of the aircraft must be less than 0 and the Yaw Moment-Beta graph must
be greater than 0. As explained, an acting positive side slip angle will increase lift on the right
wing of the airplane (as viewed from the z-axis). This increase will cause a roll moment in the
-x direction. According to the graph obtained below, this event is sufficient to explain that the
plane will be stable laterally when the slope is negative. Likewise, a positive side slip angle will
change the lift at the vertical tail, causing a yaw moment in the +z axis. This is explained by the
positivity of the Cn-Beta graph, showing that the aircraft provides directional stability

Figure 21: Cn-β and Cl-β graphics achieved from XFLR5

Mathematically, the lateral-directional stability derivatives mentioned above are explained

as follows. NA and NT are aerodynamic yaw moment and thrust yaw moment, LA and LT are
aerodynamic roll moment and thrust roll moment respectively.

𝜕(𝑁𝐴 + 𝑁𝑇 )
>0
𝜕𝛽
𝑁𝐴 + 𝑁𝑇 = (𝐶𝑛 + 𝐶𝑇𝑛 )𝑞𝑆𝑏

𝐶𝑛𝛽 + 𝐶𝑛𝜏 > 0

𝛽

16
 The final representation of the stability derivative, ignoring the yaw moment at which the
thrust is seen, is as follows;

𝐶𝑛𝛽 > 0

The equation sets for side slip angle and Roll moment are as follows;

𝜕(𝐿𝐴 + 𝐿 𝑇 )
<0
𝜕𝛽
𝐿𝐴 + 𝐿 𝑇 = (𝐶𝑙 + 𝐶𝑙𝜏 )𝑞𝑆𝑏

𝐶𝑙𝛽 < 0

With these in mind naca 0012 airfoil has used to maintain symmetry and remaining
parameters of vertical tail are as follows:

Figure 22: Vertical Tail Dimensions

3.7. Estimation of Drag and Thrust

Drag is the aerodynamic force that resists an aircraft's motion through the air. Every
component (interacted with fluid) of the airplane generates drag. Furthermore, there must be a
velocity difference between fluid and solid bodies to produce drag. During the subsonic flight,
there are two forms of drag force. Those are parasite drag and induced drag. Parasite drag (a.k.a
zero-lift drag) is related to the shape of the solid and its skin friction. Parasite drag affects all
components, regardless of whether they can generate lift. On the other hand, induced drag
occurs due to lifting surfaces.

1
𝐷 = 𝜌𝑉∞2 𝑆𝐶𝐷
2

17
 In addition to parasite and induced drag, we will include the term 'crud drag' for external
factors such as production defects. Finally, we can calculate the drag coefficient by summing
the parasite, induced and crud drag coefficients.

𝐶𝐷 = 𝐶𝐷0 + 𝐶𝐷𝑖 + 𝐶𝐷𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑑

3.7.1. Parasite Drag

Parasite drag can be estimated by using a build-up method [3].

∑(𝐶𝑓 𝑐 . 𝐹𝐹𝑐 . 𝑄𝑐 . 𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡 )

(𝐶𝐷0 )𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑖𝑐 =
𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓

𝑪𝒇 = 𝑆𝑘𝑖𝑛 𝑓𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡

FF= 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 (𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑔 𝑑𝑢𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛)

Q = 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟

𝑺𝒘𝒆𝒕 = The wetted area (The total area of the component that is in contact with the fluid)

𝑺𝒓𝒆𝒇 = The wing reference area (The top view area of the wing)

3.7.1.1. Skin Friction Coefficient

First of all, we must decide whether the piece deals with the laminar or turbulent flow. To
make this decision, we should investigate the Reynolds number. As an assumption, we will take
laminar flow if Re < 2x105 else taken as turbulent flow.

If the flow is laminar, the skin friction coefficient is given as;

1.327
𝐶𝑓 =
√𝑅𝑒
If the flow is turbulent, the skin friction coefficient is given as;

0.455
𝐶𝑓 =
(𝑙𝑜𝑔 (𝑅𝑒))2.59
Where the Reynolds number,

𝜌𝑉𝑙
𝑅𝑒 =
µ

18
3.7.1.2. Form Factors

Wing and tail surfaces,

0.6 𝑡 𝑡 4
𝐹𝐹 = [1 + 𝑥 ( ) + 100 ) ] , [1.34𝑀0.18 . (𝑐𝑜𝑠∆𝑚 )0.28 ]
(
(𝑐 ) 𝑐 𝑐
𝑚

Fuselage,

60 𝑓
𝐹𝐹 = 1 + 3
+
𝑓 400
𝑙 𝑙
𝑓= =
𝑑
√( 4) . 𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝜋
t/c = Thickness to chord ratio
x/c = Maximum thickness location on the chord (normalized to x-axis)
∆m = Maximum sweep angle

Table 4: 𝐶𝑑0 calculations

Component Reynolds Number Flow Characteristic 𝐶𝐷0

< 2x105 Laminar 0.0062

Wing
> 2x105 Turbulent 0.0111
5
Fuselage > 2x10 Turbulent 0.0035
< 2x105 Laminar 0.0013
Horizontal Tail
> 2x105 Turbulent 0.0021
< 2x105 Laminar 0.0007
Vertical Tail
> 2x105 Turbulent 0.0012

3.7.2. Induced Drag

Induced drag is the drag that occurs in response to the Lift produced.

𝑘 ∗ 𝑊2
𝐶𝐷𝑖 =
𝑞∗𝑆
K = The induced drag correction factor

1
𝑘=
𝜋 ∗ 𝑒 ∗ 𝐴𝑅

19
‘e’ represents Oswald efficiency and is calculated with the formula below,

𝑒 = 1.78(1 − 0.045𝐴𝑅 0.68 ) − 0.64

3.7.3. Crud Drug

Crud drag is characterized as drag caused by leakages, protuberances, and other

imperfections. Crud drag can be taken as 28 percent of (𝐶𝑑0 + 𝐶𝑑𝑖 ) regardless of aircraft size,
as Feagin and Morrison stated.

3.7.4. Thrust Calculation

−8
𝑑 3,5
𝐹 = 4, 3923.10 ⋅ 𝑅𝑃𝑀 ⋅ ⋅ (4, 233.10−4 ⋅ 𝑅𝑃𝑀 ⋅ 𝑃𝑖𝑡𝑐ℎ − 𝑣0 )
√𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑐ℎ
Due to competition requirements, AXI Gold 2826/10 engine and APC-E 10x6 propeller
will be used in aircraft. According to Gabriel Staples Equation [4], 12N thrust will be obtained
at 0 m/s by assuming about 16% of the efficiency loss of the engine. Cruise speed has been
predicted as 13-14 m/s taking into account the decrease in thrust and increased drag force with
increasing speed.

3.7.5. Drag and Thrust Calculation Results

Figure 23: Drag versus Velocity Graph

The variation of induced drag and parasitic drag depend on the velocity that is used to
estimate the region with minimum total drag.

20
 Figure 24: Drag-Thrust Comparison

The drag-thrust comparison graph was used to estimate the cruise speed.

Figure 25: Contribution to drag of aircraft components

Distribution of drag forces that the aircraft will be exposed to at 12m/s, which is calculated
as the minimum speed at which the minimum lift force is required for the aircraft to take off.

3.7.6 Verification of Wing Produced Lift and Drag

The parameters selected while designing the aircraft are close to the UAV's limits. To
ensure that the UAV will fly, it must be confirmed whether it can produce the necessary lift
force, and even whether the engine is strong enough to overcome drag force. Therefore, it
seemed necessary to perform CFD analysis for more realistic results. The outputs of the CFD
analysis for the lift and the drag are as follows;

21
 Figure 26: CFD Results for Cl calculation from ANSYS Fluent

We also have XFLR5 results for the 3D wing’s lift coefficient. To compare the lift
coefficient results both results are listed here.

Table 5: XFLR5 and ANSYS Fluent Comparison for Cl calculation

XFLR5 Ansys Fluent %error (XFLR5)

0.825335 0.802203 2.88

Figure 27: CFD Results for Cd calculation from ANSYS Fluent

Drag coefficient estimated with component build-up method to create Drag-Thrust figure.
Moreover, the method’s results gave an opinion to decide on cruise speed. However, for future
calculations, it is better to work with more accurate sources. For this purpose, the 3D wing’s
drag coefficient was obtained from XFLR5 and Ansys Fluent.

Table 6: Comparison for 𝐶𝑑0 calculations

Method/Source 𝑪𝑫𝟎 %error

XFLR5 0.041133 8.38
Component Build-Up 0.040806 9.11
Ansys Fluent 0.044898 -

22
 As can be seen, the lift coefficient results are accurate but drag results are higher than
estimated. On the other hand, if we consider that the UAV will fly at low speeds, this error will
not make much difference in drag force. So, drag force results are still inside of the safety
margin that we considered in the designing phase.

Figure 28: Streamlines for tip vortices from ANSYS Fluent

Figure 29: Streamlines on wing surface from ANSYS Fluent

4. STRUCTURAL DESIGN
4.1. Wing Structural Design
A total of fourteen ribs, two spars and two carbon pipes will be used in the internal structure
of the wing. Ribs have functions such as transferring the aerodynamic loads on the skin to the
structure, stability against buckling, and protection of the aerodynamic profile structure [5].
Due to the higher loads in the root part, the distance between the ribs is shorter and the thickness
of the ribs to be positioned in this part is greater. As can be seen in Figure 2.1.1, the ribs shown
in pale brown have a thickness of 4 mm, while the remaining ribs have a thickness of 3 mm.
Ribs are planned to be produced from balsa.

23
 Figure 30: Wing Structure

One of the spars to be used in the internal structure of the wing will be placed at 25
percent of the chord length of the wing. The other will be placed just in front of the control
surface. Spars are the main carrier elements of the wings. The reason for using two spars in the
wing is to prevent bending. The two spars will both distribute the load and provide the torsional
rigidity of the wing. Due to the sweep angle on the wing, the front spar will be produced as
refracted. As can be seen in Figure 31, the front spar is placed to be compatible with the sweep
angle of the wing from the fifth rib. Two different spar shapes will be used in the structure of
the front spar. The carbon pipes in the front of the wing are to be used to fix the wing to the
fuselage. In order to increase the rigidity of the structure, the upper flange and lower flange to
be used in the front spar will be produced in one piece. Fastener and adhesive will be used for
the connection of the fifth and the sixth ribs with each other. The rear spar is easing the
connection of the aileron. In order to increase the strength of the wing, all spars will be produced
in such a way that they are intertwined with ribs. For the manufacture of the front spar, birch
plywood will be used. Balsa will be used for the rear spar.

Figure 31: Fuselage Connection (Root Section)

As can be seen in Figure 32, four structures inside the wing will extend along the span.
Two of them are the front and rear spars and the others are the carbon pipes. Square carbon pipe
will be used on the front. This pipe was placed at an angle of 3.5 degrees while being placed.
In this way, the tilt angle to be given to the wing will be provided while connecting the wing
body. The round pipe to be used in the middle is larger than the square pipe. Wing body
connection will be made by using these two pipes. Furthermore, these pipes will support the
spar by carrying some of the aerodynamic forces. As can be seen in Figure 2.1.3, the connection

24
between the first and last rib will be made with spars. The carbon pipe to be used in the front
will extend to the fifth rib, while the round carbon pipe to be used in the middle will extend to
the eleventh rib.

Figure 32: Connections View From Above

4.2. Tail Structural Design

The tail has a conventional configuration. It is planned that the tail will be designed in three
parts and be detachable. The horizontal tail will be produced in two pieces, and the vertical tail
in one piece. The horizontal tail contains two elevators, and the vertical tail includes a one-
piece rudder. The rudder and elevators of the tail are connected to the fuselage with a carbon
fiber pipe. Also, the ribs in both the horizontal stabilizer and the vertical stabilizer are attached
with each other using the carbon pipes.

Figure 33: Tail internal structure and control surfaces

The connection of the elevator, rudder and carbon fiber pipe with the fuselage was
provided with a 3-D printed component. The reason for the fitting to be printed from the 3D
was the ease of use in the installation and removing processing.

25
 PLA filament was used for the part printed from the 3D printer. The feature that
distinguishes PLA from other filaments is that it is more accessible and easier to print.
Unlike other filaments, PLA is completely natural and soluble.

The position of the last ribs connecting the piece in the rudder and elevator supports the
connection between the horizontal tails, vertical tail and the 3D piece.

The carbon fiber pipes which hold the ribs in the rudder are inserted into the holes that
open into the main pipe of the body. Moreover, the pipes passing through the horizontal and
vertical tails are used to better fix the ribs and hold them together. In order to gain strength in
the root, the ribs on the right and left roots are made thicker than the ribs on the ends.

4.3. Fuselage and Mechanical Systems

4.3.1. Fuselage
While choosing the material in the fuselage design, parameters such as durability, weight,
ease of production and cost were evaluated. As a result of these evaluations, the durability and
lightness of the material were the first criteria, while the ease of production and cost were also
taken into consideration. As a result of the comparisons, it was decided to use carbon fiber
reinforced composite as the main material for fuselage production. In addition, foam
reinforcement will be made between carbon composites due to their light and flexible structure.

Table 7: Fuselage Material Selection

Percentage Carbon Fiber

Parameters Kevlar Balsa Aluminum Foam
(%) Fiber Glass
Durability 40 5 4 5 1 4 2
Weight 30 3 2 4 5 2 4
Manufacturability 15 4 3 1 5 4 5
Cost 15 2 2 1 4 3 5
Total 100 3.8 2.95 3.5 3.4 2.95 3.5

4.3.2. Mechanical Systems

The same parameters were evaluated while choosing the material for the wing-tail and
landing gear mechanisms that make up the mechanical systems.

4.3.3. Wings and Tail

Considering the low weight parameter for the wing, the use of balsa was emphasized. For
the wing interior structure to have high durability, plywood was used as the front spar from the
root to the tip, and carbon pipe was used as the rear spar.

26
 For the tail design, importance was given to the lightness of the tail, so it was decided to
use balsa. At the same time, carbon pipe is used to make the skeleton durable.

Table 8: Wing-Tail Material Selection

Carbon
Parameters Percentage (%) Plywood Balsa Foam
Fiber
Durability 40 4 3 1 5
Weight 30 3 5 5 4
Manufacturability 20 4 5 4 3
Cost 10 3 3 5 1
Total 100 3.6 4 3.2 3.9

4.3.4. Landing Gear

The landing gear performs tasks such as carrying the main weight of the UAV and
providing balanced movement on the ground. For this reason, importance was given to the
durability and weight parameters in material selection. As a result of the evaluations, it was
decided to use aluminum for both the front and rear landing gear.

Table 9: Landing Gear Material Selection

Parameters Percentage (%) Aluminum Carbon Fiber Plastic

Durability 40 4 5 1
Weight 30 3 4 5
Manufacturability 20 5 2 2
Cost 10 3 1 5
Total 100 3.8 3.7 2.8

4.4. Wing Structural Analysis

In the structural analysis section, finite element analysis was applied to the wing model.
MSC Patran/Nastran were used for finite element analysis. According to plane stress theory, if
the stress variation across the thickness of a structure is very small, it can be modeled in two
dimensions. Due to this assumption, all of the internal structure parts are modeled as two-
dimensional shell elements. In the material property section, for simplicity all materials are
assumed as isentropic and average values of Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio and densities
are used.

In the calculation of force acting on wing structure, the load factor value determined by the
airworthiness authorities was used [6].

24000 24000
𝑛 = 2,1 + ( ) = 2,1 + ( ) = 3,9
𝑊 + 10000 3352 + 10000

27
 𝑚
Total Lift Force = (3.9) x (9.81 𝑠2 ) x (3.352 kg) = 128.24 Newton

The Schrenk method was used to calculate the approximate distribution of the lift force on
the wing [7].

4𝑆 2𝑦 2
𝐿’𝐸𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 = √1 −
𝜋𝑏 𝑏2

2𝑆 2𝑦
𝐿’𝑃𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 = (1 + (𝜆 − 1))
(1 + 𝜆)𝑏 𝑏

𝐿’𝐸𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 + 𝐿’𝑃𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚
𝐿’𝑆𝑐ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑘 =
2

S: Wing Area (m2)

λ: Taper Ratio

y: Distance to root (m)

b: Wing Span

After calculation of lift distribution over the wing, the force is adjusted to be applied from
the middle of each two ribs. While transferring load to structure, RBE3 rigid connectors are
used. RBE3 rigid connectors transferred loads to the internal structure from the stations
determined in the structure.

Figure 34: Shrenk Approximation results and calculated lift distribution over wing

28
 As seen in the Figure 35, approximate distribution of lift force was calculated. Then the
ratio of distribution was calculated and applied to the total lift. Due to the last station which is
wing tip, lift was slightly increased. Total lift force which is 128.477733 N is applied to the
finite element model.

Figure 35: Lift distribution over wing surface for Schrenk Approximation

Figure 36: The Finite Element Model with Applied Forces in the MSC Patran

Figure 37: The displacement results for static analysis obtained by MSC NASTRAN

29
 As a result of the static analysis, a deformation of 8 cm is expected in the structure as seen
in Figure [38]. When the static tests specified in the production phase are applied to the
structure, the experimental deformation that will occur in the structure will be determined.

5. AVIONICS

5.1. Batteries

Considering the regulations, our battery should be able to deliver more than 30A. The
GensAce Li-Po battery with specs: 3S 2.5Ah 25C are chosen as the main battery to feed the
ESC and motor. Maximum discharge rate is calculated as: 25C x 2.5Ah = 62.5 >> 30A.

Assuming that we save a 20% capacity on the battery to avoid deterioration of the
chemistry. Expected flight time at full throttle is:
𝐵𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑦 𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 2.5𝐴ℎ
𝑡= = 0,8 · = 0,0833 ℎ = 5 𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 30𝐴

In the regulation, a second battery was requested to feed the radio equipment. In this
direction, a 2S 880 mAh Li-Po battery will be used.

5.2.ESC

Same as with the batteries the speed controller has to be able to deal with 30A continuous
so we chose a 60A SKYWALKER ESC.

5.3. Connectors

XT60, which is a reliable choice for connector, will be used with motor and ESC connection.
5.4. Servos

The servos are chosen to actuate the differential ailerons and flaps, the rudder and elevator
as well as the wheel steering have been Tower Pro SG-5010 RC Servo Motor.

5.5. Radio Control

Radiolink AT10 II controller with 2.4 GHz frequency value will be used as expected from
us in the regulations.

30
6. PAYLOAD PREDICTION

As a result of the aerodynamic analysis, a lift force was estimated with the calculation
based on the aircraft's lift coefficient at 0 angle of attack (0.775) and the average weather
conditions of the region where the competition will be held. While this calculation, cruise speed
was accepted as 12 m/s and air density at nearly 620 meter altitude (altitude of Munich + 100m)
was calculated as 1.13146 kg/m3. If the lift equation is applied to these values, 34.63 Newton
(3.53 kg) lift force will be obtained.

𝐿𝑖𝑓𝑡(𝑁) = 𝑊𝐴𝑖𝑟𝑐𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑡 (𝑁) + 𝑊𝑃𝑎𝑦𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 (𝑁)

The weight of aircraft without a payload is 2.122 kg. It is seen that approximately 1.4 kg
payload can be carried as a result of subtracting the weight of the aircraft from the lift force
obtained. Safety margin was used as taking into account the problems that may arise during the
competition and the total payload was determined as 1.2 kg.

𝑊𝑃𝑎𝑦𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 (𝑁) = 34.63 − 20.81682 = 13.813𝑁

𝑦 = 3,12𝑥 − 2,122

Payload Prediction
8

6
y = 3,12x - 2,122
4
Payload

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
-2

-4
Density

Figure 38: Payload prediction graphic

31
7. OUTLOOK

Figure 39: Side view of final aircraft

Figure 40: Isometric view of final aircraft

In preleminary design phase, the competition requirements were analyzed and the final
design emerged as a result of the researches. Tapered overhead wing, conventional tail and tail-
dragger landing gear were chosen as the final configuration. Then the structure is sized as a
result of detailed drag and lift analysis. Finally manufacturing process has started according to
the determined design.

32
REFERENCES

[1] Yechout, M. “Introduction to Aircraft Flight Mechanics”, AIAA Education Series, 2003
[2] Sadraey, M. “Aircraft Design: A Systems Engineering Approach” 2013
[3] Feagin, R. C., & Morrison, W. D. “Delta method, an empirical drag buildup technique”.
NASA. 1978
[4] Staples, G. "Propeller Static & Dynamic Thrust Calculation" 2014
[5] Raymer, Daniel P., “Aircraft design: A conceptual approach” , 2nd ed., AIAA Education
Series, AIAA, Washington, DC, 1992
[6] Megson, THG. “Aircraft Structures for Engineering Students” 1999
[7] Schrenk, O. "A simple approximation method for obtaining the spanwise lift distribution."
1941

33