Hand-Launched Electric Fuel Cell UAV

PT2020 High Endurance Aircraft

Critical Design Review | Senior Team 5

December 6th, 2010 | 10:45am

Team 5 Member Introduction
Agenda
• Overview of Purpose & Mission
• Design Requirements
• Compliance Assessment
• Approach
• Program Plan
• Design Walkthrough w/ Individual Reports
• Appropriate Standards & FARs
• Constraints & Risk Assessment Matrix
• Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
• Environmental, Societal, and Global Impacts
Purpose Statement
“Produce a detailed design for a hand launched, fixed
wing, electric fuel cell powered Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle (UAV) engineered for maximum endurance”

AeroVironment© Raven B System UAV Lockheed Martin © Desert Hawk UAV

Photo courtesy of www.avinc.com Photo courtesy of www.lockheedmartin.com
Why Develop this UAV?
• Electric fuel cell provides large possible performance
gains in small, hand launched UAV field
• Hand launching enables quick and easy use in dynamic
situations (warfare, law enforcement)
• Multi-mission versatility provides wide variety of uses
• Provides a real world design task to learn introductory
design practices by trial & error methods
• Enter a new niche in the UAV field
Simulation Video

AeroVironment© Raven RQ11 Simulation Video

http://www.avinc.com/
Design Requirements
• Hand launchable by human of average physical strength
• Uses a real world, market available electric fuel cell
• Payload of 200 in3 volume, 5 pounds, and 20 watts
• 3 UAV units can be transported in a small pick up truck
• Capable of skid landings
• 25 to 35 knots speed range
• 14,000 feet MSL service ceiling
• 1,000 feet AGL operating altitude
• Lockheed Martin Corporation©
Lockheed Martin © Desert Hawk UAV
Photo courtesy of www.lockheedmartin.com
Baseline Deliverables
Requirements
Requirement Verification
Derivation Matrix
Project Plan
(Gantt Chart)
Performance
Analysis

Risk Matrix,
and Risk Aerodynamic
Mitigation Analysis
Plan

Mechanical
Design and
3D Render

B Level Team Grade

Supplementary Deliverables
Longitudinal Completed Extra
Aerodynamic
Stability Deliverables
Component
Interior
Structure
Future
CAD
CAD
Modeling
Modeling Possibilities
Control
Range &
Production Surfaces
Endurance
Feasibility CAD
Calculations
Modeling

Interior
Cruise Speed Disassembly
Cost Analysis Structural
Calculations Methods
Design
Design Outline
1.9 Meters (6.3 Feet)
Tip-To-Tail
3.7 Meters (12.4 Feet)
Wingspan

17 Inch Diameter
Propeller
9.1 Kilograms
(20.1Pounds)
Total Mass
Compliance Assessment
• Hand Launchable
• Electric Fuel Cell Usage
• Payload Specifications
• Transportability
• Skid Landing Capable
• Speed Range
• 14,000 Feet MSL Service Ceiling
• 1,000 Feet AGL Operating Altitude
Compliance Assessment
• Hand Launchable
– Challenges of Weight, Wingspan, and Takeoff Velocity
– Built a Prototype UAV: Same Mass & Dimensions
– Tested by Performing 3 Test Throws
Compliance Assessment

Hand-Launchable Test Compilation Video

Team 5 Recorded 11/22/2010
Compliance Assessment
• Powered by Electric Fuel Cell
– Choose Horizon Energy Systems Aeropak
• Payload Requirements
– UAV has 200 in3 volume, 5 pounds, and 20 watts
payload split into two compartments
Compliance Assessment
• Transportable by Small Truck
– Easily Transport 3 UAVs in
the Truck Bed
– Chevy S10 Truck Modeling
(72” x 50”)
Compliance Assessment
• Capable of Skid Landing
– Designed to Sustain Impact
– However, Computational Analysis &
Real Testing was Not Completed
– Time and Expertise
Compliance Assessment
• 25 to 35 Knots Speed Range
– Meets min/max cruise speed
– Stall speed never exceeds 18 knots
– Maximum dash speed is 65 knots, cruise at 35 kts
has 5 hours endurance
• 14,000 feet MSL service ceiling
– Operating altitude up to 14,000 feet
– Speed requirements met at 14,000 feet
• 1,000 feet AGL operating altitude
Assessment Conclusions
• Hand Launchable
• Electric Fuel Cell Usage
• Payload Specifications
• Transportability
• Skid Landing Capable
• Speed Range
• 14,000 Feet MSL Service Ceiling
• 1,000 Feet AGL Operating Altitude
Approach
• Identify Driving Requirements
• Initial Sizing as Team
• Breakdown into Components
• Integrated Design
• Identified Problems
• Rebuilt from Basic Sizing to Solve Problems
• Performed Computational and Physical Tests
• Finalized Design
• Calculated Capabilities
Program Plan
Requirements Re-Evaluation:
November 12th, 2010
Preliminary Design Review:
October 29th, 2010

Critical Design Review:

General Sizing: December 6th, 2010 (Today)
October 8th, 2010
Requirements Defined:
September 24th, 2010
Start Date:
September 8th, 2010
Nick Kranowski Task Report

Systems
Engineering

Design
Appropriate Reviews
Standards Presentation

Sponsor & Requirement

Faculty Component
Derivations Integration
Liaison & Matrix
Design Walkthrough
How Does a Fuel Cell Work?
• Water from the
reservoir is separated
• Hydrogen enters Anode
and breaks down
• O2 enters Cathode and
breaks down
• Hydrogen Protons
migrate through PEM Video courtesy of www.howstuffworks.com

• Electrons pass around

PEM
Fuel Cell Selection
• Horizon Energy Systems Aeropak
– Available Power:
240 Watts (Sea Level)
– Available Continuous Current:
10 Amps
– Output Voltage Range:
20-32 Volts
– Mass (w/ Fuel Cartridge):
2 Kilograms
Photo courtesy of www.sae.org
– Deliver Up to 900 Watt-hours
Fuel Cell Advantages
• Batteries to Fuel Cells • Benefits of Fuel Cells
– Lithium ion battery: 150Wh/kg – Have endurance of 3x that
– Horizon Aeropak: 450Wh/kg of comparable batteries
– 3x Improvement – Easy refueling (no recharge)

Battery Type Energy Density (kJ/kg)

Lead – Acid 79.2
Lithium Polymer 602
Sodium – Sulfur 792
Mg hydride with Ni catalyst 8,280
Gasoline 47,500
Hydrogen 120,000 – 142,000
Altitude Restriction

Photo courtesy of www.horizonfuelcell.com

Addition of Battery Pack
• Initial estimates showed insufficient speed/altitude
• Battery pack needed to extend flight envelope
• Takeoff and climb assistance
• Choice: Thunder Power Pro
Lite MS Series TP-40004S2PL
• Endurance = 4000mAh
• Constant Voltage = 14.8V
• Max Burst Current = 100A
• Weight = 338g Photo courtesy of www.rctoys.com
Electronic Speed Control
• Castle Creations Phoenix 60 ESC
• Max Current = 60A
• Weight = 58g
• Programmable with auto-shutoff
• For brushless motors

Photo courtesy of www.rctoys.com

Individual Conclusions &
Recommendations
• Fuel Cell Selection
– Horizon Energy Systems Aeropak
– Zero greenhouse gas emissions
– Greater endurance than batteries
– Longer range
• Further work
– Research fuel cells with higher energy densities
– Increase altitude operation of fuel cell
Cameron Japuntich Task Report

Fuel Cell
Selection

Motor &
Fuel Cell
Motor
Limitation
Controller
Research
Assistance

Propeller Plane
Gantt Chart
Selection Storage
Creation
Assistance Modeling
Wing Design
Wing Design
Wing Design

Chart courtesy of Aircraft Design (Raymer)

Wing Design
Wing Design
• Using metal CNC die, carbon wing shell can
be vacuum bag molded
• Use of mold/casting methods eliminates
need for foam core
• Vacuum bagging produces lightest weight
and highest quality
• Carbon wing spar with honeycomb internal
structure offers high weight to strength
Individual Conclusions &
Recommendations
• Conclusions
– Low Reynolds flow is a growing field
– Structural analysis of composites is difficult
• Recommendations
– Full FEA analysis of wing structure
– Thorough verification of aerodynamic characteristics
using more advanced CFD
– Talk to composites expert about best options
Garrison Hoe Task Report

Wing Airfoil
Selection

Analysis of Wing
Wing Structure &
Capabilities Materials

Failure
Risk Matrix Cost
Modes and
Mitigation Analysis
Effects
Plan Assistance
Analysis
Tail Structure
Tail Design
Airfoil Selection Tail
•
Tail Control Surfaces
• Rudder and elevator are usually 90% span
starting at fuselage with 25-50% of chord
• Taper ratios are same as tail’s
Individual Conclusions &
Recommendations
• UAV tail is sufficient for stability
• Matches specifications based on main wing
dependence
• More tail loading analysis to minimize weight
• Tools like ANSYS could be used
• Further research into composites
• Review NACA 0015 airfoil (increases stalling angle)
Fuselage Design Factors

Materials Profile

Structures Performance Dimensions

Skid Landing
Payload Support
Truck Transport
Hand Launched
Bottom-Up Design
Requirements
• Major Components
Component Selection & Sizing
• Fuel Cell
• Avionics Payload Component Layout
• Motor
Profile and Cross Sections
• Minor Components
• Motor Controller Lofting and Structures

• Servos
Materials
• Battery
Stability and Performance
Avionics Camera
• Cloud Cap Technologies
Tase LT
• SWAP: (12.1 x 9.71 x 8.99)
cm, 1 lb and 10 W
• Sony FCB-IX11A EO
camera with 10x optical
zoom Photo courtesy of www.cloudcaptech.com
Component Layout
Battery
Motor

Front Payload Rear Payload w/

Fuel Cell Camera
Fuselage Exterior
Structures and Materials
• NACA inlets
• Carbon fiber-Kevlar
hybrid Skid Plate
• Lexan Camera
Protection
• Carbon fiber balsa core
bulkheads and firewall
• 2 layers of twill weave
carbon fiber body
• Mass=670 g, L=0.985 m Photo courtesy of www.dragonplate.com
Tail Boom
• Length=87 cm,
Diameter = 3.81 cm
• Mass = 200 g
• 1 mm thick carbon
fiber epoxy
• Carbon fiber-Kevlar
Hybrid skid plate
• Detachable from
fuselage
Individual Conclusions &
Recommendations
• Structural Analysis Required
– Impact Analysis, FEA
• Wind Tunnel Testing on scale model
– Verify XFLR5 data
• Highly desirable for military operations
– Long range, transportable, hand launched
Greg Hoepfner Task Report

Fuselage
Design

CAD CAD
Modeling Modeling Tail
Fuselage Boom

CAD XFLR5 CAD

Modeling Full UAV Modeling
OML & Final Analysis Internals
UAV
Airfoils Selection
• Wing root uses S4022 airfoil
• Wing tip uses Wortmann FX 60-126 airfoil
• S4022 is design for low Reynolds number and
high lift
• Wortmann FX 60-126’s geometry is design to
achieve aerodynamic twist for stability
• Use XFLR5 to analyze the wing
Wing Aerodynamics
• Based on the wing analysis, take-off speed at
sea-level is:
1/ 2
W 2 
VTO = 1.2   = 8.89 m/s
 S ρC L max 

• The initial estimated weight is 7 kg

• This is only based on the wing’s aerodynamic
analysis.
 CL vs α
1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2
Lift coefficient, C L

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0 Main Wing
Aircraft
-0.2
-5 0 5 10 15 20

angle of attack, α (degree)

 Drag Polar
0.15
Main Wing
Aircraft
Drag coefficient, CD

0.1

0.05

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

Lift Coefficient, CL
Aircraft Aerodynamics
• Static Margin
– 13% of the Chord
K n = hn − hcg = 0.13

• Center of Gravity
– 55.2 cm from the nose
– Change in the fuel has a negligible effect on the
center of gravity
Longitudinal Aerodynamic Stability
Derivatives
Derivatives Value
• Axial force due to velocity X u = −0.1019
• Axial force due to “incidence” X W = 0.4534
• Axial force due to pitch rate X q = −0.0498
• Axial force due to downwash lag X • = −0.0158
W

• Normal force due to velocity Z u = −1.732

• Normal force due to “incidence” ZW = −4.425
• Normal force due to pitch rate Z q = −2.2150
Longitudinal Aerodynamic Stability
Derivatives
Derivatives Value
• Normal force due to downwash lag Z • = −0.7026
W
• Pitching moment due to velocity Mu ≈ 0
• Pitching moment due to “incidence” M W = −0.7484
• Pitching moment due to pitch rate M q = −6.8846
• Pitching moment due to downwash lag M • = −2.1838
W
Individual Conclusions &
Recommendations
• Use XFLR5 to analyze the aircraft with
elevator, rudder, and ailerons on
• Perform lateral stability analysis
• Perform second iteration of longitudinal
stability analysis
• Match XFLR5 Model with CAD model
• Perform Stability Augmentation analysis
Chandra Tjhai Task Report
Real World
UAV
Research

Hand
Aerodynamic
Launchability
Calculations
Analysis

Center of Longitudinal XFLR5

Mass Stability Profile
Identification Calculations Calculations
Components/Avionics
Components/Avionics
Torque Required
18
16
Torque Required (kg-cm)

14
12
2cm Chord
10 Flap 4cm Chord
8 6cm Chord
6 8cm Chord

4 10cm Chord
Aileron Elevator
12cm Chord
2 Rudder
0
0 50 100 150 200
Control Surface Span (cm)
 Components/Avionics
Ailerons & Elevator Rudder Flaps

Image courtesy hobbyking.com Image courtesy modellbauen.ch Image courtesy romaniamall.ro

• MKS DS450 • BMS-306MAX • BMS-820DMG

• Weight: 9.5g • Weight: 7.1g • Weight: 45g
• Torque: 3.1 kg-cm • Torque: 1.6 kg-cm • Torque: 9.2 kg-cm
Motor and Propeller
Motor Propeller
• Lightweight and efficient • Folding propeller for skid-
• Effective at various power landing
levels • Large enough to provide
• Brushless thrust required
• No gearbox necessary • Maximum efficiency at
• Small enough for upper speed limit
fuselage • Matched diameter/pitch
• Sufficient documentation with motor RPM
Motor and Propeller
• Motocalc used to
model efficiency
• Entire range of
documented motors
iterated
• Propellers from 10”x5”
up to 24”x12”
• Tested at fuel cell rated
power output: 200W
Motor and Propeller
Motor
• Neu 1915-2Y
• Kv = 360 RPM/V
• Weight = 397g
• Max rated power =
1800W
Propeller Image courtesy fastelectrics.com
• Aero-Naut CAMcarbon
folding propeller
• 17” diameter by 11” pitch
Image courtesy hacker-motor-shop.com
Motor and Propeller
• 63% total propulsive
efficiency at 35kts
• 32N static thrust at
600W: 4m/s2 takeoff
acceleration
• Sufficient power for
launch speeds down
to 7 m/s
Performance Analysis

Without
Battery
• Max
Altitude =
11500 ft
• Max
Velocity =
37 kts
Performance Analysis

With Battery
• Altitude and
velocity no
concern
Performance Analysis
Maximum Rate of Climb
12

Max ROC
10 Max ROC with Battery

8
Rate of Climb (kts)

• Max ROC =
9.6 kts
6
• Climb 1000ft
in 62s
4

0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Altitude (ft)
Performance Analysis
Endurance vs. Power Output
16

14

12
Endurance (hrs)

10

4
y = 989.03x-1.07
2

0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Power Output (Watts)
Performance Analysis
Endurance
12
Takeoff Velocity
Takeoff Velocity With Battery
10 25 kts Cruise
25 kts Cruise With Battery
35 kts Cruise
8 35 kts Cruise With Battery
Endurance (hrs)

6 • Max
Endurance:
4
10.3 hrs
2

0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Altitude (ft)
Performance Analysis
Range
250 25 kts Cruise
25 kts Cruise With Battery
35 kts Cruise
200 35 kts Cruise with Battery
Maximum Range
Maximum Range with Battery
150
Range (nmi)

100 • Max Range:

235nmi
• Achieved at
50
11000ft, 30.7
kts
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Altitude (ft)
Individual Conclusions &
Recommendations
• Fuel cell technology needs more improvement for
aerospace applications
• Documentation of fuel cells on the market very lacking
• Fuel cell difficult to model in performance-estimating
applications
• A lighter payload and/or no hand-launch restriction would
allow greater performance
• ANSYS data could provide better drag characteristics
Erik Eid Task Report

Avionics
Analysis

Motor &
Performance
Propeller
Analysis
Selection

Range & Altitude & Speed

Endurance Speed Controller
Calculation Analysis Selection
Risk Assessment
Risk Probability Impact

Fuel Cell Operation at High Altitude Medium High

Light-weight Composite Wing & Fuselage Design High Low

Meeting Hand Launch Requirement Low High

Meeting Speed/Altitude Requirements Medium Medium

Aircraft Aerodynamics and Static Margin Medium Medium

Prop Strike on Skid Landing Low Low

High Lift Devices (Flaps) High Low

Easy Assembly on Ground Low Medium

FMEA
MODES OF FAILURE PROBABILITY SEVERITY SOLUTION
FEA and flight testing as
Wing structural failure Low High well as frequent field
inspections
Control surface Kevlar hinges and flight
Low Medium
detachment testing
Ensure that fuel cell is
Fuel cell malfunction Low High operated within
manufacturer limits
Control surfaces have
Aircraft loses control Extremely Low High programed default positions
that spiral airplane
Engine failure Extremely Low Medium Emergency landing required
Prop is located in the front
Prop strike on hand
Low Medium of aircraft away from
launch
launcher
FMEA
MODES OF FAILURE PROBABILITY SEVERITY SOLUTION
Bird strike Extremely Low High No solution
Lithium Polymer Follow Li-Po handling
Low High
battery explosion procedure
Set thresh-hold for operable
High winds Medium Medium
wind conditions
Define environmental
Icing Extremely Low High constraints or install anti-
icing for wings or pito-probe
Kevlar and impact foam
Hard impact on skid
Low Medium implemented for shock
landing
absorption
Transportation case is
Damage during designed to take abuse
Low Medium
ground transport while retaining internal
integrity
Federal Aviation Regulations
• Two means of operating UAS in NAS outside of “restricted” airspace
– Special Airworthiness Certificate – Experimental Category
– Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA)
• FAA created the Unmanned Aircraft Program Office (UAPO) and the Air
Traffic Organization (ATO) UAS office to help integrate UASs into the
NAS
• FAA is working with members of the UAS community to define operating
and certification requirements that are critical for allowing UAS access to
the NAS
• The FAA has tasked RTCA to advise on technical issues of developing
UAS standards targeted to be complete before 2015. Two questions that
need answering;
– How will UASs handle communication, command, and control?
– How will UASs “sense and avoid” other aircraft?

Source: www.faa.gov, Published Sept. 20, 2010

Production Feasibility
• Wing and tail are the hardest parts to build
• Creativity skills needed, especially for homebuilt
• Material selections important
– Heavy fuel cell
– Met hand launch requirement
• Not hard to build from industrial point of view
Cost Analysis
COMPONENT DESCRIPTION COST
Wings Total Cost $250
5.7oz 3k 2x2 Twill Carbon Fiber $48.06
Honeycomb Dragon Plate $154.86
Balsa $20
Fuselage Total Cost $200
5.7oz 3k 2x2 Twill Carbon Fiber $38.80
Carbon/Kevlar Twill $6.18
1/8” Lexan $3.45
Balsa Core Dragon Plate $134.80
Tail Boom Total Cost $130
Carbon Fiber Tube $120
Carbon/Kevlar Twill $1.33
Cost Analysis
COMPONENT DESCRIPTION COST
Electronic Total Cost $671
Components
Servos $227.95
Brushless Motor $235
4000mah 4S Li-Po $189.99
Battery
Prop and Spinner $18
Tail Total Cost $47
Carbon Shell $21
EPS Foam Core $6
Carbon Tube $20
Aircraft Materials Cost
(Fuel Cell Not Included) $1300
Environmental Impacts
• Environmentally Friendly
– No Greenhouse gas emission
– Requires no recharge
– Byproducts are water and heat
– Step away from dependence on
harmful batteries
• Concerns
– Aided by lithium battery use (disposal
Photo courtesy of
is hazardous to environment) www.constructiondigital.com
– Need to create a recycling procedure
Societal Impacts
• UAV potential search operations
• Lead to more extensive research
in fuel cell technology
• Displace human (solely) pilots
• Invasion of privacy regarding
citizen spying
• Air traffic control issues in
domestic flight patterns
• Possible bomb usage at further
distances, lessening moral conflict
Photo courtesy of
www.acecombatskies.com
Global/Military Impacts
• Can provide battlefield
intelligence to save lives
• Creates new role for quick-
deploying, high endurance
surveillance
• Benefits allies on the United
States of America in areas of
high secrecy and security
• Large hydrogen consumption
(more efficient hydrogen
isolation methods needed) Photo courtesy of New York
Times Newspaper
• Provide exploration of
dangerous territory
Hand-Launched Electric Fuel Cell UAV
PT2020 High Endurance Aircraft
Critical Design Review | Senior Team 5

December 6th, 2010 | 10:45am

 APPENDICES

Additional Documentation
NACA 64-012A
NACA 64-012A
NEW Recommendations from Steve of Tail Airfoil Selection
NACA 0015 SPECS RECOMMENDATION FROM STEVE
Mass Balance
Mass Balance
Aircraft Aerodynamics
• Static Margin
a1  dε 
hn = h + V T 1 − 
a  dα 
 2  
 x +   fi π   
 fi π   + z 
2
x +  0.5 cos
2 2
0.5 cos     180    
dε  180   +  π
85
a x
= 2
dα π Ar
∑  2 2
+ 2
)  180
fi = 5   fi π  
2
  fi π   ( x z
 + z   0.5 cos  + z 
2
x +  0.5 cos
2 2

  180      180   
 

K n = hn − hcg = 0.1822
Longitudinal Aerodynamic Stability Derivatives
• Aerodynamics of aircraft
a = 4.372 /rad a1 = 4.784 /rad c = 0.4086 m lT = 1.27 m
dε a1 = 4.784 /rad
= 0.3172 /rad V T = 0.45
dα

At trim condition (C_M = 0):

α = 4.7° C L = 0.866 C D = 0.053 V0 = 14 m/s
∂C D ∂C D ∂C DT
= 0.4125 /rad = −0.0003175 s/m = 0.1076 /rad
∂α ∂V ∂α T
∂C L ∂C M
≈0 ≈0
∂V ∂V
Longitudinal Aerodynamic Stability Derivatives

∂C D 1 ∂τ
X u = −2C D − V0 +
∂V 1
ρV0 S ∂V
2
∂C DT
X q = −V T
∂α T
∂C D
X W = CL −
∂α
dε
X • = Xq
W dα
Aircraft Aerodynamics
• Use XFLR5 to analyze the aircraft aerodynamics
Longitudinal Aerodynamic Stability Derivatives
∂C L ∂CM
Z u = −2C L − V0 M u = V0
∂V ∂V
∂C L MW =
dCM
ZW = −C D −
∂α dα
Z q = −V T a1 lT
M q = −V T a1
c
dε dε
Z • = Zq M • = Mq
W dα W dα
Real World Large Scale UAVs

ASM Swift Flight Hand Launched Flight Video

http://www.youtube.com/
Component Placement
Truck Transportation Methods
Wing XFLR5 Analysis
Wing Polars from XFLR5
First Order Airplane Polars From XFLR5