DESIGN OF RC AIRCRAFT
Submitted by,
GROUP  M4
1. Debolina Dasgupta
(AE12M002)
(AE12M004)
(AE12M005)
4. Jijo Unni K
(AE12M007)
5. Jitendra Kumar
(AE12M008)
Submitted to,
Dr Luoyi Tao, Dr. G. Rajesh
Department of Aerospace Engineering
In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements of
AS5210 Aerodynamic Design
JanMay 2013
IIT Madras, Chennai
Contents
LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................ ix
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................. xi
LIST OF SYMBOLS ..........................................................................................xii
CHAPTER 1: GOAL DETERMINATION AND MISSION SPECIFICATIONS ............. 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 GOAL DETERMINATION................................................................................................................. 1
1.3 MISSION PROFILE .......................................................................................................................... 2
1.4 PRELIMINARY DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................................................... 3
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 85
iv
vii
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
ix
Figure 8.4 Subsonic maximum lift of high aspect ratio wings [1] ........................................................... 68
Figure 8.5 Mach number correction for subsonic maximum lift of high aspect ratio wings [1] ............ 68
Figure 8.6 Angle of attack increment for subsonic maximum lift of high aspect ratio wings [1]........... 69
Figure 8.7 Parasite Drag vs. Mach number ........................................................................................... 74
Figure 8.8 Modified drag polar ............................................................................................................. 75
Figure 9.1. Side view of the aircraft in cartesian coordinate system . .................................................. 86
Figure 9.2. Top view of the aircraft in cartesian system ....................................................................... 87
Figure9.3. CG location of fuselage ........................................................................................................ 88
Figure9.4. CG location of wing .............................................................................................................. 88
Figure 9.5 Schematic of the important geometric points for tail CG calculation [2] ............................. 89
Figure 9.6. CG location of horizontal tail .............................................................................................. 91
Figure9.7. CG location of vertical tail .................................................................................................... 92
Figure 9.8 Landing Gear Arrangement about Aircraft CG ..................................................................... 96
Figure 10.1. Position of root chord [1] .............................................................................................. 104
Figure 11.1 CD values for Landing Gear (Fixed Type) [2] ...................................................................... 119
Figure 11.2 CD values for Landing Gear (Fixed Type) [2] ...................................................................... 120
Figure 11.3 Parasite Drag vs. Mach number ....................................................................................... 124
Figure 12.1 Vn diagram for a general aviation aircraft ...................................................................... 139
Figure 12.2 Vn Diagram ..................................................................................................................... 143
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1 Design Specifications ............................................................................................................... 2
Table 1.3 Preliminary design considerations .......................................................................................... 3
Table 2.1 Weight specification for RC airplanes ..................................................................................... 5
Table 2.2. Result table of iterative process............................................................................................. 7
Table 3.1 Airfoil Data .............................................................................................................................. 9
Table 3.2 Characteristics of NACA 2310................................................................................................ 10
Table 3.4 Wing Specifications ............................................................................................................... 14
Table 3.5 Parameter values at different velocities ............................................................................... 17
Table 4.1 Ground Rolling Resistance[1] .................................................................................................. 24
Table 4.2 Wing Loading at different flight conditions .......................................................................... 26
Table 4.3 Engine power at different flight conditions .......................................................................... 31
Table 4.4 Thrusttoweight at different flight conditions ..................................................................... 31
Table 5.1 Weight of each component................................................................................................... 44
Table 6.1 Initial Sizing Summary ........................................................................................................... 49
Table 6.2 Wing and Empennage Wetted Area Calculation ................................................................... 52
Table 7.1. Historical Data for propeller selection of RC aircrafts [3] ...................................................... 56
Table 7.2 Propeller Parameters ............................................................................................................ 64
Table 7.3 Propeller performance in each segment............................................................................... 64
Table 8.1 RC Model Airplane (W0 = 1.98 kg) Component Geometric Data .......................................... 72
Table 8.2 Parasite Drag Calculation for design cruise speed of 20 m/s ................................................ 73
Table 8.3 Parasite Drag Coefficients for RC Model Airplane Speed Range........................................... 73
Table 8.4 Wing Loading at different flight conditions .......................................................................... 78
Table 8.5 Engine power at different flight conditions .......................................................................... 82
Table 9.1 CG location and weights of different components ............................................................... 94
Table 11.1 RC Model Airplane (W0 = 1.98 kg) Component Geometric Data ...................................... 121
Table 11.2 Parasite Drag Calculation for maximum cruise speed of 20m/s ....................................... 122
Table 11.3 Parasite Drag Coefficients for RC Model Airplane Speed Range....................................... 123
Table 12.1 Wing loading for different segments ................................................................................ 135
Table 12.2 Thrusttoweight ratio of different segments ................................................................... 137
Table 12.3 Parameters required for Vn diagram ............................................................................... 140
xi
LIST OF SYMBOLS
AR
Aspect Ratio
BP
Balance Point
Wing span
Chord
Maximum value of coefficient of lift for wing
CL
Cp
Coefficient of Power
Croot
Root chord
CS
CT
Coefficient of Thrust
Ctip
Root chord
Drag
hf
Flare Height
hob
Obstacle Height
HP
Engine Horsepower
Advance Ratio
k
L
Load Factor
xii
Speed in RPM
Speed in RPS
P
P
PTO
()
Turn Radius
Maximum Rate of Climb
Wing Area
Sa
Approach Distance
Sf
Flare Distance
Sg
STO
SL
Landing Distance
Thrust
!"
#/
!"
Pitch
!"
Engine Power
Vf
Flare Velocity
VLO
Vloiter
Loiter Velocity
Vmax
Maximum Velocity
VstallStall Velocity
W
xiii
Weight
!
% &'()*+
"
!
%"
!
,),.
"
%
!
% */
"
!
%
"
!
%"
Wing Sweep
XCG
YCG
ZCG
45
Density of air
6
Approach Angle
637
Obstacle Angle
8'
xiv
12'32
45
Coefficient of friction
Angle of attack
Density of air
Sweep Angle
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Aircraft design is an iterative process. The design depends on many factors such as customer and
manufacturer demand, safety protocols, physical and economic constraints etc. It is a compromise
between many competing factors and constraints and accounts for existing designs and market
requirements to produce the best aircraft. The design starts out in three phases:
(a) Conceptual Design
This involves sketching up a variety of possible configurations that meet the required design
specifications. Fundamental aspects such as fuselage shape, wing configuration and location,
engine size/power plant size and type are all determined at this stage. Constraints to design
are all taken into account at this stage.
The goal is to design a flying model of a miniature aircraft mainly intended to undertake missions viz.
reconnaissance/ surveillance. The most common aircrafts i.e. the remote controlled aircraftshave
multiple applications such as in military, weather forecast, topological survey, reconnaissance etc.
The teams primary plan is to design for surveillance in forest areas to track the wildlife movements
and to study their habitual patterns through the collected data. The surveillance aircraft can also be
used to capture poacher activities within the reserve area.
1.3MISSION PROFILE
The required mission profile for the RC model airplane to be designed is given in Figure 1.1 below.
LOITER
CRUISE
CRUISE
DESCENT
LANDING
Figure 1.1: Mission Profile
Table 1.1 below enlists the design specifications for the aircraft to be designed.
Table 1.1 Design Specifications
S. No
PARAMETER
DESIGN VALUE
1.
Vstall
10 m/s
2.
Vcruise
20 m/s
3.
Vmax
25 m/s
4.
50 m
5.
Range / Endurance
6.
Landing distance
50 m
The data mentioned in Table 1.1provide a basis for the design. However, these are the initial
specifications of the RC model airplane concept under consideration and may be altered based on
the constraints imposed during the course of preliminary and detail design stages.
The preliminary design considerations arrived at, after literature survey, are enlisted in Table 1.3
below. These may be amended at a later stage after appropriate estimates and calculations.
Table 1.3 Preliminary design considerations
S.NO.
PARAMETER
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE
1.
Flying Weight
~1.0  2.0 kg
2.
~68
3.
ARW/ARref
~45(1)
4.
(L/D)max
~9.512.5(2)
5.
Wing Type
6.
Power Plant
7.
Aerodynamic Control
Surfaces
8.
To be decided
9.
Range
Propeller
Fuselage
A conceptual configuration of the Radiocontrolled Electrical powered model airplane has been
shown in the Figure 1.2.
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Literature survey of the available RC aircrafts is crucial for assuming initial specifications for the
aircraft to be designed. These provide a basis for estimation of the weight of the aircraft as
presented in this chapter.
RC AIRPLANE
Flying Wt,
W0 (kg)
Structural
Wt, We (kg)
Powerplant
Wt, Wpp (kg)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Revolution 3D trainer
Foamtana
Electrifly Yak 55M
Electrifly Extra 330SC
Hobbico Superstar EP
Extra330 L
Edge 540
Carbon Z Yak 54
Hawker Hurricane 25e
F3A/Gadfly
Nemesis Racer EP
0.430
0.450
1.700
0.234
1.230
0.620
1.650
1.730
2.100
2.350
2.100
0.282
0.280
1.187
0.178
0.918
0.427
1.157
1.139
1.528
1.713
1.390
0.148
0.170
0.513
0.056
0.312
0.193
0.493
0.591
0.572
0.637
0.710
Using Table 2.1, following two graphs, comparing the structural (also called empty weight) weight
fraction and the powerplant weight fraction to the flying weight or AUW (i.e. AllAllup weight termed
as AUW, since for electric powered RC airplanes weight during the flight remains
remains same), respectively
have been plotted.
Figure 2.2 and Figure 2.3 also show the least square fitted linear regression equations, which has
been used to do the preliminary weight estimate of the RC model airplane.
W0 = WP / L + WE + WPP
This can be rewritten as,
W
W0 = WP / L + W0 E
W0
W
+ W0 PP
W0
W0 =
WP / L
W W
1 E PP
W0 W0
(2.1)
Following initial estimate has been used for the iterative process to arrive at the preliminary weight
estimate of RC EP model airplane;
From mission requirements;
WP/L = 0.15 kg
W0 = 1.1 kg
From Figure 2.2 and Figure 2.3, the powerplant and structural weight fractions have been used for
the iterative estimation of AUW or flying weight.
The intermediate results of the iterative process is compiled and shown in Table 2.2. The process
was allowed to continue till an error of less than 0.5% had been achieved.
Fractional Weights
Estimated
AUW
Error
W0
WP/L
We/W0
Wpp/W0
W0
%age
1.100
0.150
0.594
0.306
1.500
36.364
1.500
0.150
0.596
0.303
1.493
0.548
1.493
0.150
0.596
0.303
1.493
0.002
2.4 CONCLUSION
The first weight calculation estimates the flying weight of the aircraft to be 1.493 kg. However, this is
a very preliminary estimate. Assuming a safe margin the initial weight of the aircraft is taken as 1.5
kg. The aircraft will be battery operated; hence all the weight fractions will be equal to the first
weight estimate, WO. Thus, the final mission leg weight fractions are as follows:
2, W2
0, WO
3, W3
4, W4
1, W1
Figure 2.3 Mission leg weight fractions
5, W5
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The first weight estimate carried out in the previous chapter was completely based on historical
data. In this chapter requirement specific airfoil and wing is chosen. Based on those, the power plant
estimation is carried out.
3.2 AIRFOIL
A considerable amount of airfoil data has been accumulated from windtunnel tests and inflight tests
over the years and the compilation is available in the airfoil catalogues. The selection of the airfoil
from such a catalogue depends upon the design specifications that are required to be met, such as
cruise and stall characteristics. A similar approach has been adopted to select an appropriate airfoil
for the RC model airplane.
Cl,max
NACA 1408
1.1
0.875
14
39.7
11
2.6
85.6%
NACA 1412
1.11
1.417
15
54.2
16.5
3.5
64.9%
NACA 2310
2.04
1.467
15
56.4
12.1
1.2
66.8%
NACA 2312
2.05
1.377
15
56
14.5
1.7
48.2%
NACA 2414
2.23
1.372
15
56.4
17.8
50.5%
Airfoil
stall
(L/D)max
Trailing
edge angle
Leading edge
radius (%c)
(degrees)
Lower
Flatness
(%c)
After thoroughly investigating the available airfoil dataset and based on the requirement of low stall
speed, high maximum section lift coefficient and maximum aerodynamic efficiency the NACA 2310
airfoil has been chosen for the airplane design.
Figure 3.1, shows the profile of the selected airfoil designated as NACA 2310.
The aerodynamic and geometric characteristics of NACA 2310 airfoil are as follows:
Table 3.2 Characteristics of NACA 2310
Geometric Characteristics
Aerodynamic Characteristics
Camber
2% of chord
Clmax
1.467
Chord Length
0.25 m
stall
15
8.5
Maximum Thickness
10% of chord
(L/D)max
56.4
12.1
Lower flatness
66.80%
1.20%
10
As per design specification of stall speed of 10 m/s and cruise speed of 20 m/s, the operating
Reynolds number envelope of airfoil has been estimated.
Density of air() : 1.15 kg/m3
Viscosity of air: 1.983x105 Nsec/m
sec/m2
Hence,
Reynolds number (stall) = 1.67x105
Reynolds
lds number (cruise) = 3.33x105
For the Reynolds number of 1.67x105 and 3.33x105, the airfoil liftcurve
curve and drag as estimated using
DESIGNFOIL Software are shown in Figure 3.3 and Figure 3.4 respectively.
Figure 3.3: Lift Curve For NACA 2310 In The Operating Envelope
Figure 3.4: Drag Polar For NACA 2310 In The Operating Envelope
11
Length
Span
Wing
Aspect
Wing Loading
Wt (kg)
(m)
(m)
Area (sq m)
Ratio
(kg/sq m)
W0
Sref
AR
W0/Sref
Revolution 3D trainer
0.430
0.965
0.864 0.245
3.04
1.754
Foamtana
0.450
0.978
0.991 0.254
3.86
1.770
1.700
1.194
1.283 0.328
5.02
5.187
0.234
0.889
0.826 0.172
3.96
1.358
Hobbico Superstar EP
1.230
0.917
1.238 0.259
5.91
4.743
Extra330 L
0.620
0.889
0.925 0.170
5.03
3.647
1.650
1.029
1.151 0.246
5.39
6.713
Carbon Z Yak 54
1.730
1.232
1.219 0.339
4.39
5.108
2.100
1.067
1.359 0.310
5.96
6.781
Funster V2
2.350
1.346
1.842 0.546
6.21
4.306
Nemesis Racer EP
2.100
1.200
1.560 0.392
6.21
5.357
Using Table 3.3, the two comparison graphs of the aspect ratio of wing (AR) against the AUW and
the wing loading to the flying weight or AUW have been plotted in Figure 3.5 and Figure 3.6
respectively.
12
13
Figure 3.5 and Figure 3.6 also show the least square fitted linear regression equations, using which
following preliminary wing specifications have been estimated for AUW of 1.5 kg for RC model
airplane.
Table 3.4 Wing Specifications
Wing Specification
Aspect Ratio
5.35
0.25
Wing type
All the RC Airplane considered in the historical dataset have high wing with rectangular planform.
This allows designers to have high ground clearance as the height of the RC model airplane is very
small and also gives more internal volume and stability to the airplane. Further, rectangular wings
are easy to manufacture and integrate with the airplane fuselage.
3.3.2 Wing area (S)
The design Vstall=10 m/S.
We know that,
1
: = < = 45 #*/ ?
@
2
From Chapter 1, W = 1.5 kg = 14.715 N and from section 3.2.2 CLmax= 1.467
Thus,
@=
2<
45 #*/
?
@ = 0.174 I?
J =
AR=5.35 and S=0.174 m2
Thus, b= 0.951 m
14
2 x 14.715
1.15 x 10? x 1.467
K?
@
The weight of an RC EP model airplane during first estimate was estimated in Chapter 2 by,
W0 =
WP / L
W
1 E
W0
W PP
W0
Now, as we have more insight into the geometric and aerodynamic details of airplane components,
we can revise the equation and arrive at a more accurate estimate using calculated payload and
powerplant weight instead of using the powerplant weight fraction from historical data.
Therefore, the revised equation becomes:
W0 =
W P / L + W PP
W
1 E
W0
(3.1)
The payload for the aircraft is chosen as an infrared camera to serve the purpose of forest area
surveillance. The camera best suited for the missions requirements is the Tau 320.
The Tau is a long wavelength camera (814 microns) uncooled microbolometer camera designed
for infrared imaging applications with minimum size, weight and power consumption.
15
Specifications:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
= 70 + 45 + 35
WPL = 150 grams
Density of air
: 1.15 kg/m3
: 20 m/sec
For wing:
Aspect ratio
: 5.35
Wing span
: 0.951 m
Reynolds number
: 3.33x105
16
Thus,
L=
1
= 0.072
MNJ
CD = CD0+ KCL2
CD = 0.0107 + 0.072 CL2
We know that,
1
: = < = 45 # ?
@
2
=
2<
45 # ? @
For each value of velocity, CL can be calculated. Thereafter using drag polar, CD can be evaluated.
Now,
Q
O = P = ? 45 # ? @and
1
RSNT = O # = 45 # U @
2
Table 3.5 below tabulates the values of CL, CD and power for different velocities.
Table 3.5 Parameter values at different velocities
S.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Velocity
(m/s)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CL
1.467
1.215
1.021
0.870
0.750
0.654
0.575
0.509
0.454
0.407
0.368
0.334
0.304
0.278
0.255
0.235
CD
0.1657
0.1171
0.0858
0.0652
0.0512
0.0415
0.0345
0.0293
0.0255
0.0227
0.0204
0.0187
0.0173
0.0163
0.0154
0.0147
Power
(W)
16.57
15.59
14.84
14.34
14.07
14.00
14.12
14.43
14.90
15.54
16.36
17.33
18.48
19.80
21.29
22.96
Using Table 3.5 CL v/s CDand Power v/s Velocity can plotted:
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
CD
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
CL
25
Power
20
15
10
5
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
Velocity
The maximum velocity that we have chosen for our design is 25 m/s. The power requirement for this
velocity is 22.96 W.
18
Based on this power requirement of 22.96W, following powerplant components have been chosen.
Features
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
High Efficiency
High Power
High Torque
Lightweight
includes propeller adapter and motor mounts
Specifications
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
19
Weight: 0.198 kg
Max Power: 850 W (maximum burst 1480 W)
Max RPM: 20,000 RPM
Diameter: 42 mm
Length: 50mm
Shaft Diameter: 5.0mm
Voltage Range: 11.1 14.8 / 34S LiPo
(c) PROPELLER
Specifications:
(a) 13x8 (length228.6 cm, pitch152.4 mm)
(b) Weight : 0.03 kg
20
Specifications:
(a) 5V/2A BEC
(b) Weight: 0.05 kg
Thus, the total powerplant Weight (Wpp) is:
Wpp = Wmotor + Wbattery + Wprop = 0.198 + 0.235 + 0.03 + 0.05
Wpp= 0.513 kg.
3.4.3 Weight Calculation
Using the payload and powerplant weights estimated above and the empty weight fraction from
Chapter 2, following second estimate of the RC model airplane takeoff gross weight has been
calculated:
W0 =
Thus,
< =
W PL + W PP
W
1 E
W0
(0.15 + 0.513)
(1 0.596)
< = 1.6411 kg
3.5 CONCLUSION
NACA 2310 airfoil has been chosen for the design of the RC model airplane.
The second weight estimation has been done by approximating the structural weight ratio of the
airplane based on the historical data and using estimated values of power plant and payload.
After the second weight estimate, WO=1.6411 kg. The change from the first estimate is 8.6%
21
< 1
= 45 #*/ ?
@
2
1
< = : = 45 #*/ ?
@
2
(4.1)
Thus,
<
1
_ `
= x 1.15 x 10? x 1.3203
@ */ 2
<
_ `
= 75.92 a/I?
@ */
<
_ `
= 7.74 \]/I?
@ */
22
@ = @. + @ + @b = 50I
=
Assuming 6 = 33
[?]
b = (1 hR^6 )
(1.23x10)?
9.81x0.2
(4.2)
= 77.1 I
(4.3)
b = 77.1(1 hR^33 )
b = 0.106 I
Assuming hob= 1 m. The approach angle for this height considering the entire length of the runway is
1.15o. This is lower than the assumed approach angle and can be taken as a safe estimate for hob.
23
(4.4)
1 0.106
@ = _
` = 17.06 I
jke3m
Flare distance, Sf
@b = ^ne6
Hence,
37 b
l
jke6
(4.5)
Thus,
(4.6)
Assuming that the lift is small due to rather level orientation of the airplane relative to the ground,
no provision for thrust reversal and ignoring the drag compared to the friction force between the
tires and the ground[2] we get,
2 < 1
o ? (< @)
@. = oap
+
45 @
]45
8'
Here, VTD=j Vstall and j=1.15[2]
N is the time increment for free roll immediately after touch down. Assuming N=3 s [2]
Table 4.1 Ground Rolling Resistance[1]
24
(4.7)
Even though our aircraft does not have brakes we choose 8' = 0.4 as suggested in [2] to have a safe
estimate of wing loading.
Thus,
s
1.15? "
2 W 1
t
28.905 = 1.15x3p
+
1.15 S 1.3203 1.15 x 9.81 x 1.3203 x 0.4
<
<
28.905 = 3.9596p + 0.2219 _ `
@
@
Solving the above quadratic equation and taking the lower root we get,
<
_ `
= 30.95 a/I?
@ ,),.
<
_ `
= 3.155 \]/I?
@ ,),.
4.1.3 Wing loading for Cruise conditions
For cruising conditions we know that L=W. For cruise conditions, it is required to maximise the range
and hence (L/D) for propeller aircraft, to calculate the wing loading.
Thus, for maximum range and hence maximum (L/D) we get,
= \
?
(4.8)
= p = uM x e x AR x
\
0.0107
= 0.3855
0.072
25
(4.9)
< 1
= x 1.15 x 20? x 0.3855 = 88.67 a/I?
@
2
<
_ `
= 9.038 \]/I?
@ &'()*+
(4.10)
Thus,
3 x 0.0107
= p
= 0.6677
0.072
(4.11)
< 1
= x 1.15 x 20? x 0.6677 = 153.57 a/I?
2
@
<
_ `
= 15.65 \]/I?
@ 3)/+'
Mission Segment
Stall
Landing
Cruise
Loiter
The least wing loading is chosen from the above values as the design wing loading. Thus,
<
_ ` = 3.155 \]/I?
@
26
=
= @z + @ = 50 I
=
6.96(#*/ )?
]
6.96 x (10)?
= 70.95 I
9.81
637 = hR^ {Q _1
27
37
`
1
` = 9.633
70.95
(4.12)
(4.13)
Thus,
@z = @
(4.14)
@ = 50 11.87 = 38.13 I
1.21 <@
]45
O<
(4.15)
m.
m.
1.21 <@
]45
@z
O<
m.
(4.16)
O<
m.
= 0.066
V=0.7 X 1.1 Vstall=0.7 X 1.1 X 10= 7.7 m/s and using prop=0.6 [3]
Engine shaft brake power,
=
O<
m.
x W x V5 x ]
12'32
28
13.64 <
(4.17)
Thus,
3 0.0107
= 0.6677
= p
0.072
Now,
#/
2 < 1
=p
45 @
(4.18)
#/
2 x 3.155 x 9.81
=p
= 8.98 I/^
1.15 x 0.6677
12'32
\ <
1.155
2
p
<
45 3 @ (:P )
12'32
\ <
2
= ( ) + p
<
45 3 @
1.155
(:P )
= \ ?
Thus,
u
:
1
_ `
=_ `
=
=
P
+ \ 4 \
29
(4.19)
Thus,
12'32
1.155
= ( ) + #/
Q
<
(4.20)
We get,
12'32
O
_ `
=
< / #/
<
O
0.6 69.1
_ `
=
< / 8.98 1.6411 9.81
O
_ `
= 0.29
< /
1
2\ <
O
= 45 # ?
+
< @ 45 # ? @
< 2
(4.21)
O
1
0.0107
2 x 0.072 x 3.155 x 9.81
= x 1.15 x 25?
+
< 2
3.155 x 9.81
1.15 x 25?
O
_ `
= 0.13
<
30
"
!
<#
12'32
(4.22)
O
1
e?
<
= 45 #/(', ?
+Q
_ `
?
< 2
< @
45 #/(', MJ @
(4.23)
O
0.0107
4
_ `
= 0.5 x 1.15 x11.5? x
+
x 3.155 x 9.81
< /(',
3.155 x 9.81 0.5 x 1.15 x11.5? x M x 5.35
O
_ `
= 0.126
< /(',
Now,
=
!"
/(',
< #/(',
12'32
= 38.86 <
Tabulating the values of (T/W) of other segments using this value of power
Table 4.4 Thrusttoweight at different flight conditions
S.No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
31
Mission Segment
Takeoff
Climb
Vmax
Turning
(T/W)
0.422
0.362
0.130
0.283
The maximum (T/W) is chosen as the design parameter for the aircraft. Thus,
O
_ ` = 0.422
<
1.21 <@
@z =
]45
O<
m.
Thus,
<
_ `
@
m.
(4.24)
We first have to convert the (T/W) for climb conditions to the (T/W) for takeoff conditions. The
power remains constant.
Now,
O
_ `
<
<
_ `
@
O
_ `
<
12'32
<#5
0.6 x 87.2
= 0.422
1.6411 x 9.81 x 7.7
= 20.19 \]/I?
<
_ `
@
32
> 3.155
It is known that
Q/?
12'32
2
\ <
= ( ) + p
<
45 3 @
1.155
Q
On rearranging,
<
45 3 12'32
1
1
p
_ `
=
_
( ) `
@ /
2
\
<
4 \ 1.155
(4.25)
0.6 x 87.2
1 ?
<
1.15 3 x 0.0107
1
p
_ `
=
2`
_
0.072
1.6411 x 9.81
@ /
2
4 x 0.0107 x 0.072 1.155
<
= 145.89 a/I?
_ `
@ /
<
_ `
= 14.87 \]/I?
@ /
<
_ `
> 3.155
@ /
We first convert the (T/W) for climb conditions to the (T/W) for Vmax. The power remains constant.
12'32
O
_ `
=
< <#
O
0.6 x 87.2
_ `
=
= 0.130
< 1.6411 x 9.81 x 25
Now,
O
1
2\ <
= 45 # ?
+
< 2
< @ 45 # ? @
(4.26)
< ?
O
<
1
_
_ ` + 45 # ?
? @ ` _< `
2
45 #
@
33
< ?
<
0.0002 _ ` 0.130 _ ` + 3.845 = 0
@
@
<
_ `
= 31.06 a/I?
@
<
_ `
= 3.166 \]/I?
@
<
> 3.155
_ `
@
( ! ) { u( ! )? 4e? KP
<
_ ` =
?,
@
(4.27)
Thus,
12'32
O
_ `
=
< /(', <#/(',
O
_ `
= 0.283
< /(',
<
_ ` = 3.592 > 3.155
^
4.6 CONCLUSION
The wing loading for the aircraft is fixed at 3.155 kg/m2.
The maximum power for which the aircraft is to be designed for is 87.2 W.
4.7 REFERENCES
[1] RAYMER D., Aircraft DesignA Conceptual Approach 2nd ed., AIAA Education Series,AIAA, 1992
[2] ANDERSON J.D., Aircraft Performance and Design, WCB/McGraw Hill,1999
34
35
Wings are the most vulnerable parts of an aircraft which contribute a large amount of lift
(approximately 2 times the weight of aircraft). Hence a large amount of bending moment acts on
aircraft wings. The bending moment produces direct stresses which are resisted by the spars of
wing. The necessary buckling strength is provided by the ribs. For surveillance RC aircraft the design
mission consists of taking off the land, climbing, cruising, turning (accelerated) and landing
segments. Out of these the most severe condition on structural loading (i.e. maximum load factor) is
accelerated turning, where the wing carries the maximum load among all flight conditions.
From Chapter 4, the wing loading is calculated as 3.155 kg/m2 and aspect ratio is fixed at 5.35 for
aircraft gross takeoff weight of 1.6411 kg. Therefore, the wing span (b) and chord length (c) has
been reestimated as,
@=
<m
!
% "
= 0.52 I?
K = (@ J) = 1.67 I
h=
@
= 0.31 I
K
36
Based on Schrenks approximation [6] (as shown in Figure5.1), that the load distribution (lift in case of
wing) on an untwisted rectangular wing is approximately rectangular. As the wing planform shape
decided to be used for the design work is rectangular, therefore the lift load can be assumed to be
uniformly distributed across the wing sections. This gives,
Intensity of distributed load
Therefore,
M = 6.72 Nm
Semispan
b
=
y
=
We know that, the maximum compressive strength of balsa wood max = 12 MPa.
37
As per available literature, there are following types of loading conditions that affect the service and
safety conditions for any structure:
(a) The maximum load at which the structure perform the service throughout its lifecycle
without any permanent deformation, called as the Limit Load.
(b) The ultimate or design load at which material fails. The design load should be more than the
limit load by a factor of safety.
The safety factor is usually specified as 1.5, for general purpose aviation aircrafts [6].
For our surveillance RC model aircraft,
Normal factor of safety FOSnormal = 1.5
Fatigue factor of safety FOSfatigue = 2.0
Using the above two factors of safety allowable stress has been estimated as,
37+ =
@,3' @b/).(+
37+ =
12
= 4 k
(1.5 2.0)
Front Spar
The front spar is generally located at the quarter chord point of the wing. It takes up about 60% of
the total bending moment of the wing.
Therefore,
Bending moment taken by the front spar = 0.6 M = 0.6 x 6.72 = 4.03 Nm
The thickness of the airfoil (NACA 2310) at quarter chord point is equal to maximum thickness of the
airfoil i.e.
Thickness of aerofoil at quarter chord point = 0.10c = 0.10 x 310 = 31 mm
As the front spar is going to be fixed at this location, the height of the spar is assumed to be 20 mm
as some thickness of the airfoil will be used for integration of the spar to the airfoil.
Therefore,
Height of the spar,
d= 20 mm.
38
4030 10
=
= 10075 II
We have considered the shape of the spar as rectangular, therefore moment of inertia has been
calculated as
I = bd3 /12.
Where,
b = width of the spar
d = height of the spar
Hence,
b = 12*I/d3 = 12*10075/203 = 15.11 mm 16 mm
Volume of spar = crosssectional area of spar x wing semispan
= 16 x 20 x 835
= 267200 mm3.
Density of balsa wood = 150 kg / m3
Therefore, weight of spar = density of balsa wood x volume of spar
= 150 x 109 x 267200 = 0.0401 kg.
= 40.1 g
Number of front spars = 2 i.e. one per wing
Therefore, total weight of front spars = 2 x 40.1 = 80.2 g
Rear Spar
The rear spar is located approximately at 75% chord of the wing and takes 40% of the total bending
moment.
Bending moment shared by the rear spar = 0.4 M = 0.4 x 6.72 = 2.69 Nm
The thickness of the airfoil (NACA 2310) at 75% chord = 0.052c
= 0.052*310 = 16.12 mm
As the rear spar is going to be fixed at this location the height of the spar is assumed to be 10 mm as
rest of the thickness of the airfoil will be used for spar and airfoil integration. Therefore,
Height of the spar,
Perpendicular distance from neutral axis,
39
d= 10 mm.
y = 10/2 = 5 mm
Therefore,
=
Hence,
2690 5
=
= 3362.5 II
40
Based on the historic data collected in Chapter 1 (presented here for convenience) we plot fuselage
length v/s total weight. From this plot we can get the fuselage length for our aircraft.
Table 5.1 Historic data for fuselage length and total weight of the aircraft
S.No
Revolution 3D trainer
Foamtana
Electrifly Yak 55M
Electrifly Extra 330SC
Hobbico Superstar EP
Extra330 L
Edge 540 25 45" RC EP
Carbon Z Yak 54
Hawker Hurricane 25e
Funster V2
Nemesis Racer EP
Fuselage length
(m)
0.965
0.978
1.194
0.889
0.917
0.889
1.029
1.232
1.067
1.346
1.200
1.400
1.200
1.000
y = 0.167x + 0.841
0.800
0.600
0.400
0.200
0.000
0.000
0.500
1.000
1.500
2.000
Weight WO (kg)
41
2.500
42
Volume of stabilizer
Weight of stabiliser
Design skin thickness is taken as 1 mm. The material of skin is assumed as foam.
5.1.6.1 Skin Weight for Wing
43
S.No
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Component
Wing
Fuselage
Horizontal Tail
Vertical Tail
Skin Weight
Servo
Casing
Receiver
Tricycle Landing gear
Other (bolts etc.)
Weight (g)
373.6
386.04
194.2
135.9
76.172
30[4]
40[4]
9[5]
50
20
From the historic data collected we can plot fuselage length and weight of the aircraft. From this plot
we can find the fuselage length for our aircraft.
From Figure 5.4, for WO=1.980 kg, we get
Fuselage length, l= 1.174 m
5.2.2. Wing Sizing
The primary purpose of the tail is to counter the moments produced by the wing. Thus, the tail size
is related to the wing size. The force due to tail lift is proportional to the tail area. Thus, the tail
effectiveness is proportional to the tail area times the tail moment. This product has the units of
volume, which leads to the tail volume coefficient method for initial estimation of tail size.
45
For a vertical tail, the wing yawning moments which must be countered are most directly related to
the wing span bW. This leads to the vertical tail volume coefficient defined as:
h =
: @
K! @!
The moment arm (LVT) is approximated as 60% of the fuselage length for front propeller aircraft [6].
Thus,
LVT = 0.6 x 1.174 = 0.7044 m
Table 5.3 Tail Volume Coefficient [6]
From the table above, we pick a value of 0.04 for CVT in absence of any reliable estimate for RC
model airplanes.
46
Thus, we get
@ =
@ =
h K! @!
:
Assuming an aspect ratio for the vertical tail wing to be equal to 1.4 [6]
J = K ? @
1.4 = K ? 0.0595
Now,
K = 288 II
@ = K h
Chord c = 207 mm
Let taper ratio for the vertical tail wing =0.4 [6]
@ = 0.5 K (' + / )
2h = 1.4'
Cr=295 mm
Ct=118 mm
For a horizontal tail, the pitching moments which must be countered are most directly related to the
: @
! @!
The moment arm (LHT) is approximated as 60% of the fuselage length for front propeller aircraft [6].
Thus,
LHT= 0.6 x 1.174 = 0.7044 m
From Table 5.3, cHT = 0.5 for homebuilt airplane has been selected, in absence of any reliable
estimate for RC model airplanes.
Thus,
@ =
47
h
! @!
:
@ =
S.No.
1.
Fuselage Length
1174 mm
2.
Aspect Ratio
5.35
3.
Wing Area
0.6276 m2
4.
685 mm
5.
201.5 mm
6.
0.138 m2
7.
118 mm
8.
288 mm
9.
295 mm
10.
0.0595 m2
11.
235 mm
5.4 REFERENCES
48
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
http://www.ehow.co.uk/list_6164413_propertiesbalsawood.html
http://www.auszac.com/Balsa%20wood%20Properties%20Guide.pdf
http://www.indoorflyingmodel.com/DesignParameters.html
http://www.futabarc.com/servos/analog.html
http://www.hobbylobby.com/spektrum_sr300_3_ch._dsm_sport_surface_receiver_81204_
prd1.htm
[6] D.RAYMER, Aircraft Design A Conceptual Approach 2nd ed, AIAA Education Series, AIAA,
1992.
Dimensions
Fuselage Length
1174 mm
80mm x 80mm
Aspect Ratio
5.2
Wing Area
0.6276 m2
Reference [1]
Wing Span
1832.4 mm
Wing Chord
342.5 mm
685 mm
201.5 mm
0.138 m2
10
118 mm
11
288 mm
12
295 mm
49
13
0.0595 m2
14
235 mm
Fairing between noseattachment for propeller (circular) and the fuselage forebody (square)
to have smooth aerodynamic flow and proper integration of propeller and airframe.
Aftbody of fuselage has been tapered to facilitate better landing conditions by way of
increasing tailscrape angle.
The ground clearance is chosen after a survey of the available landing gears for RC planes
such that the propeller blades will not touch the ground.
200 mm
50
51
All the required dimensions for the aircraft have been shown in Figures 6.2 and 6.3
(6.3.1)
(6.3.2)
t/c
ratio
Span
Sexp
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)
(mm2)
Wing
1832.4
342.5
343
627600 0.1
1273400
Horizontal Tail
685
201.5
201.5
138027 0.1
280057
Vertical Tail
295
288
118
59885
121507
52
0.1
Swet
(mm2)
Similarly, using relation from [1] for fuselage wetted area calculation,
Wetted area of fuselage;
(Swet)fuselage = 3.4 [Atop + Aside] / 2
where,
Atop = Top views projected areas of fuselage
Aside = Side views projected areas of fuselage
(6.3.3)
(6.4.1)
As wing and empennage are not used for fuel storage, volume estimation is not required for the
purpose of fuel volume availability. Here, fuselage volume estimation has been done to ensure that
enough volume is available for payload, wiring and other systems.
6.5 CONCLUSION
Based on initial sizing of the aircraft, threeview drawing of the airplane has been generated and
using the geometry data total wetted area of 1771305 mm2 and total fuselage internal volume of
6386560 mm3 has been estimated.
This data will be used for further work on estimation of drag coefficients.
6.6 REFERENCES
[1] D. P. RAYMER, Aircraft Design A Conceptual Approach 2nd ed, AIAA Education Series, AIAA, 1992.
53
The primary purpose of the propeller is to convert the power from the battery and motor power
plant to axial thrust through torque transfer to the propeller. Propellers may be classified as to
whether the blade pitch is fixed or not. The demands on the propeller differ according to
circumstances. For example, in takeoffs and climbs more power is needed, and this can best be
provided by low pitch. For speed at cruising altitude, high pitch will do the best job. Propellers are
primarily classified as:
(a) Fixed Pitch Propeller:
The propeller is made in one piece. Only one pitch setting is possible and is usually two
blades propeller and is often made of wood or metal.
Twobladed propellers are commonly used because they are relatively efficient and easy and cheap
to produce. Adding more blades decreases the overall efficiency of the prop because each blade has
to cut through more turbulent air from the preceding blade  in fact a single bladed propeller is the
most efficient but these are rarely seen in our hobby although they have been experimented with.
D=22(Q/ )[2]
(7.1)
D= 22(87.2/746)Q/ inches
D=12.864 inches 12 inches or
D= 30.48 cm
L=15.24 cm
Propellers are measured by the diameter and pitch. The pitch is the theoretical distance travelled, by
the prop, in one revolution. The higher the pitch the higher the air speed and viceversa. The engine,
however, must have enough power to turn the prop faster.
Table 7.1. Historical Data for propeller selection of RC aircrafts [3]
Brand
Description
Gemfan
104.5
12.7
Gemfan
114.7
13.97
Gemfan
124.5
15.24
APC
Slowflyer Prop
113.8
13.97
APC
Slowflyer Prop
123.8
15.24
APC
Slowflyer Prop
126
15.24
AeroNaut
4.9x4.3
6.22
ParkZone
propeller
9.57.5
12.06
APC
Electric prop
118.5
13.97
APC
Electric prop
1111
13.97
Higher power
APC
Electric prop
1210
15.24
Flyer
APC
Electric prop
1310
16.51
AeroNaut
10.57
13.33
AXI
Wood prop
3020
38.1
Propeller type
Slowflyer
56
The higher pitch prop (e.g. 10x8) takes only one and a half turns to cover the same distance that the
lower pitch prop (e.g. 10x4) takes 3 turns to. Thus, with both engines and props spinning at identical
RPM, the higher pitch prop will travel further in the same amount of time  hence a faster flying
plane.
Thus we can see that selecting a different propeller pitch size would significantly change the
airplane's performance, with speed being the primary factor.
Hence from the above table we select a Propeller 126 APC Slowflyer prop
Figure 7.5 Special thin, light, and wide blade (126 APC Slowflyer prop)[3]
57
N = (65000/D) [4]
= (65000/12) = 5417 RPM
Therefore,
N = 5417/60 = 91 RPS
The standard variation of propeller parameters is given below in Figures 7.6 and 7.7
58
59
60
61
62
63
7.5 CONCLUSION
1. Propeller chosen is APC slow flyer 12 X 6 .
Table 7.2 Propeller Parameters
S.No.
Parameter
Value
1.
12 in/ 0.3048 m
2.
15.24 cm
3.
6 in
4.
0.5
Segment
CT
CP
T(in N)
P( W)
CS
1.
Takeoff
03965
0.06
0.032
4.9316
72.95
74.34
0.7892
2.
Climb
0.3237
0.07
0.032
5.7535
72.9536
70.8
0.644
3.
Cruise
0.721
0.02
0.018
1.64
41.036
80
1.61
4.
Turning
0.4146
0.059
0.032
4.849
72.95
76.44
0.8252
5.
Landing
0.4434
0.05
0.03
4.10
68.39
73.9
0.894
7.6 REFERENCES
[1] http://www.pilotfriend.com/training/flight_training/fxd_wing/props.htm
[2] RAYMER D., Aircraft DesignA Conceptual Approach 2nd ed., AIAA Education Series,AIAA
Publications, 1992
[3] http://www.hobbylobby.com/propellers_357_ctg.htm
[4] http://www.eflightwiki.com/eflightwiki/index.php?title=Slow_flyer
[5] GARNER W.B., Model Airplane Propellers, March 2009
64
8.1 INTRODUCTION
The drag polar calculated in Report 3 was based on historical data and airfoil data. From the
subsequent reports, exact data such as reference area and volume of the various components of the
aircraft, thrust to weight ratio, wing loading, and third weight estimate were calculated. Based on
these calculations (new data), we can now recalculate a more accurate drag polar for the aircraft
and check whether the earlier calculated wing loading and thrust to weight ratio suffice for the
aircraft.
8.2 LIFT
This section of the report presents the methods and calculations to estimate liftcurve slope and max
lift along with angle of attack for max lift, for RC model airplane.
8.2.1 Introduction
The uncambered wing has no lift at zero angle of attack. Maximum lift is obtained at the stall angle
of attack, beyond which the lift rapidly decreases. When a wing is stalled, most of the flow over the
top has separated. The slope of the lift curve is essentially linear except near the stall angle, allowing
the lift coefficient below stall to be calculated simply as the lift curve slope times the angle of attack.
At the stall, the lift curve becomes nonlinear. The effect of Mach number on the lift curve slope is
shown in Figure 8.1. The maximum Mach number for maximum velocity of the aircraft is 0.083.
65
8.2.2 Calculation of CL
When the air flows over the wing, there are pockets of air where the local Mach number may be
greater than 0.071. This value will be much less than 1.0. Thus, it can be safely assumed that the
Mach number always remains subsonic. The subsonic lift curve slope empirical formula is as given in
[1] as:
Here ? = 1 ? ,1?
?/
`
?u _Q
%
%
` ()(8.2.1)
airfoil is thickest. 1 can be approximated as about 0.95 for all Mach Numbers [1]. @+23*+ is the
exposed wing planform area, i.e. the wing reference area less the part of the wing covered by the
fuselage. F is the fuselage lift factor that accounts for the fact that the fuselage diameter d creates
some lift due to the spillover of the lift from the wing. F as given in [1] is:
= 1.07(1 + K)? (8.2.2)
For the estimation of the value of
, the following values are taken for our aircraft:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
A= 5.35
Flight Mach number=0.083. Thus, ? = 0.993
1=0.95 [1]
/ = 0
@+23*+ = 600900 mm2
@'+b = 627600 mm2
@ke, K=1832 mm
^Nk]N nk, =100 mm
= 1.19
2M x 5.35
2 + u4 +
600900
_
` (1.19)
.U m.U 627600
m.
= 4.824
66
3
(Q + 1)(hR^
)
Where C1 is a constant based on the taper ratio and is the angle at the leading edge.
(8.2.3)
Figure 8.2 Taper ratio correction for low aspect ratio wings [1]
For C1=0 and
=0 J 3. For our aircraft A= 5.35 > 3.
For high aspect ratio wings,
= i l +
The leading edge sharpness parameter has been used to develop methods for the construction of
the lift curve up to stall for wings.
67
Figure 8.4 Subsonic maximum lift of high aspect ratio wings [1]
From [1] for NACA 4 digit airfoil Y= 26 t/c. For the chosen airfoil NACA 2310, Y= 26 x 0.1 =2.6
Figure 8.5 Mach number correction for subsonic maximum lift of high aspect ratio wings [1]
68
=
+ m
+
The first two terms represent the angle of attack if the lift curve slope were linear all the way up to
stall. The second term is approximated by the airfoil zerolift angle. The third term is a correction for
the nonlinear effects of vortex flow.
Figure 8.6 Angle of attack increment for subsonic maximum lift of high aspect ratio wings [1]
69
1.3203 180
2 + 0.8 = 14.483
4.824
M
In absence of a reliable estimate of equivalent skinfriction coefficient for RC model airplanes, the
component buildup method [1] to estimate the subsonic parasite drag has been chosen. For each
component of the aircraft a flatplate skinfriction drag coefficient (Cf), component formfactor (FF)
and interference factor (Q) has been estimated. The total component drag is determined by
multiplying the wetted area of component estimated in Chapter 6 [2], Cf, FF and Q.
The airplane total parasite drag is then determined by adding all individual component drag values
along with miscellaneous drag which accounts for any other drag which has not been accounted in
the component drag; such as, base drag, leakage & protuberance drag, landing gear drag etc. The
airplane parasite drag is then divided by the planform area (S) of the wing to get the airplane
parasite drag coefficient (CD0).
Operating Reynolds number is close to 0.5 million and the surface finish may not be of high
quality, therefore flow over the components can be assumed to be turbulent at all times [1].
In absence of historical data for surface roughness of RC model airplanes, it is assumed that
the model will be painted with smooth paint of skin roughness (k) 2.08x105 ft [1].
Max design cruise altitude is 50 m, hence Sea Level (SL) conditions can be assumed for the
calculations.
SL Density ()= 1.15 kg/m3
SL Viscosity at () = 1.983x105 Nsec/m2
Speed of sound (a) = 349 m/s at 30C SL
(R]Qm
0.455
0.144? )m.
)?. (1 +
Since, max design speed for RC model airplane is 25 m/s, which corresponds to max Mach number of
M = v/a = 0.071, which is small compared to sonic speed. Therefore, neglecting the term (0.144 M2)
which will be of negligibly small order compared to unity, the equation for friction coefficient can be
rewritten as only a function of Reynolds number:
b = (3.
m.
.
)
70
(8.3.1)
where,
= min
Q.mU
, 38.21 "
(8.3.2)
Here, appropriate characteristics length (l) has been taken for airplane components. Such as, mean
aerodynamic chord for wing and empennage and overall length for fuselage.
Fuselage form factor has been estimated using; [squareside fuselage has a form factor 40% higher
[1]
, therefore a multiplier of 1.4 has been used]
m
= 1.4 1 + b + mm"
(8.3.3)
where,
=
()
= slenderness ratio
(8.3.4)
For Wing and tails (horizontal as well vertical tails) following equation has been used with
appropriate thickness to chord ratio; [(x/c)m = 0.3, for low speed airfoils] [1]
/
(8.3.5)
71
Table 8.1 RC Model Airplane (W0 = 1.98 kg) Component Geometric Data
Airplane Components
Fuselage
(Square Crosssection)
Wing
(Rectangular planform)
Horizontal Tail
(Rectangular Planform)
Vertical Tail
(Swept Planform)
Parameter, unit
Length (L) , mm
Max Crosssection Area, mm2
Wetted Area, mm2
Span, mm
Chord = MAC, mm
Wetted Area, mm2
Planform Area, mm2
Span, mm
Chord = MAC, mm
Wetted Area, mm2
Span, mm
Root Chord/Tip Chord/MAC, all in mm
Sweep at Max Thickness (max), deg
Wetted Area, mm2
Values
1174
6400
319328
1832
343
1219299
627600
685
201.5
280057
295
288 / 118 / 215
19.9
121507
)Q b ) ) @+/ )
where,
b = Component skin friction coefficient,
)
+ )*&
Table 8.3 below shows the tabulated values of CD0 against the airplane speed and the corresponding
Mach number.
Table 8.3 Parasite Drag Coefficients for RC Model Airplane Speed Range
v (m/s)
73
CD0
v (m/s)
CD0
0.1 0.000287
0.03285
10.0 0.028653
0.01831
0.2 0.000573
0.02876
12.0 0.034384
0.01810
0.4 0.001146
0.02566
14.0 0.040115
0.01794
0.6 0.001719
0.02419
16.0 0.045845
0.01780
0.8 0.002292
0.02328
18.0 0.051576
0.01769
1.0 0.002865
0.02264
20.0 0.057307
0.01759
2.0 0.005731
0.02094
22.0 0.063037
0.01751
4.0 0.011461
0.01961
24.0 0.068768
0.01743
6.0 0.017192
0.01898
8.0 0.022923
0.01859
25.0 0.071633
0.01740
Figure 8.7 shows the plot of parasite drag vs. Mach number. To capture the trend of high parasite
drag variation at low airplane speed values, closer data points have been taken. This plot also shows
that for low subsonic speeds there is an asymptotic lower limit to the parasite drag.
For A=5.35, e= 0. 89
Now,
74
(8.4.1)
K=
+
(8.4.2)
K =0.067
(8.5.1)
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
CD
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
2
1.5
1
0.5
0.5
1.5
CL
75
Thus,
<
1
_ `
= x 1.15 x10? x 1.3203
@ */ 2
<
_ `
= 75.92 a/I?
@ */
<
_ `
= 7.74 \]/I?
@ */
From Report 4 [4] Ground roll distance (Sg) = 28.905 m, j=1.15, N=3, 8' =0.4
<
_ `
= 30.95 a/I?
@ ,),.
<
_ `
= 3.155 \]/I?
@ ,),.
= p
\
< 1
= 45 #&'()*+ ?
@
2
< 1
= x 1.15 x20? x 0.5138 = 118.18 a/I?
2
@
<
_ `
= 12.047 \]/I?
@ &'()*+
1
= \
?
3
Thus,
= p
77
3 0.01759
= 0.890
0.067
< 1
= 45 #3)/+' ?
2
@
< 1
= 1.15 20? 0.89 = 204.70 a/I?
@
2
<
_ `
= 20.866 \]/I?
@ 3)/+'
Mission Segment
1.
Stall
7.740
2.
Landing
3.155
3.
Cruise
12.047
4.
Loiter
20.866
The least wing loading is chosen from the above values as the design wing loading. Thus,
<
_ ` = 3.155 \]/I?
@
The wing loading has been fixed after calculating it from the segments independent of the thrust to
weight ratio. This value of wing loading will now be used to calculate the thrusttoweight ratio for
the segments where the thrusttoweight ratio is involved.
8.8.1. ThrusttoWeight Ratio for TakeOff Conditions
78
1.21 <@
]45
O<
O<
m.
m.
m.
1.21 <@
]45
@z
O<
m.
= 0.066
V=0.7 X 1.1 Vstall=0.7 X 1.1 X 10= 7.7 m/s and prop=0.6 from Report 4
Engine shaft brake power,
=
O<
m.
x < x#5 x ]
12'32
16.45 <
Thus,
1
= \
?
3
3 x 0.01759
= p
= 0.89
0.067
Now,
79
#/
#/
2 < 1
=p
45 @
2 x 3.155 x 9.81
=p
= 7.78 I/^
1.15 x 0.89
Q/?
12'32
2
\ <
=
p
<
45 3 @
1.155
(:P )
upon rearranging,
Q/?
12'32
2
\ <
= ( ) + p
<
45 3 @
1.155
(:P )
= \ ?
Thus,
u
:
_ `
=_ `
=
P
+ \
Thus,
4 \
12'32
1.155
= ( ) + #/
Q
<
We get,
12'32
O
_ `
=
< / #/
<
O
0.60 x 71.84
_ `
=
< / 7.78 1.980 9.81
80
O
_ `
= 0.2852
< /
8.8.3. ThrusttoWeight calculation for Vmax
O
1
2\ <
= 45 # ?
+
< 2
< @ 45 # ? @
O
1
0.01759
2 0.067 x 3.155 x 9.81
= x 1.15 x25?
+
< 2
3.155 x 9.81
1.15 x25?
O
_ `
= 0.2112
<
!"
< #
12'32
O
1
e?
<
= 45 #/(', ?
+Q
_ `
?
< 2
< @
45 #/(', MJ @
?
O
0.01759
4
_ `
= 0.5 x 1.15 x11.5? x
+
x 3.155 x 9.81
< /(',
3.155 x 9.81 0.5 x 1.15 x11.5? x M x 5.35
Now,
O
_ `
= 0.140
< /(',
=
81
!"
/(',
< #/(',
12'32
= 52.24 <
Mission Segment
Takeoff
Climb
Vmax
Turning
Power
16.45 W
71.84 W
170.93 W
52.24 W
For a propellerdriven airplane, power to weight ratio is more relevant than the thrusttoweight
ratio [5].
The maximum power for which the aircraft has to be designed is 170.93W.
= 170.93 <
1.21 <@
@z =
]45
O<
m.
Thus,
<
_ `
@
Now,
82
O
_ `
<
<
_ `
@
O
_ `
<
12'32
<#5
0.6 x 170.93
= 0.686
1.980 x 9.81 x 7.7
<
_ `
@
= 32.81 \]/I?
<
_ `
@
> 3.155
12'32
2
\ <
= ( ) + p
<
45 3 @
1.155
Q
On rearranging,
?
<
45 3 12'32
1
1
p
_ `
=
_
( ) `
<
@ /
2
\
4 \ 1.155
2
0.067
1.980 x 9.81
@ /
4x 0.01759 x 0.067 1.155
<
= 870.5 a/I?
_ `
@ /
<
_ `
= 88.73 \]/I?
@ /
<
_ `
> 3.155
@ /
O
0.6 x 170.93
_ `
=
= 0.2112
< 1.980 x 9.81 x 25
Now,
O
1
2\ <
= 45 # ?
+
< 2
< @ 45 # ? @
83
2\
< ?
O
<
1
_
_ ` + 45 # ?
? @ ` _< `
2
45 #
@
< ?
<
0.00016 _ ` 0.2112 _ ` + 6.3573 = 0
@
@
<
_ `
= 34.77 a/I?
@
<
= 3.545 \]/I?
_ `
@
<
> 3.155
_ `
@
( ! ) { u( ! )? 4e? KP
<
( ) =
?,
^
12'32
O
_ `
=
< /(', <#/(',
O
_ `
= 0.459
< /(',
Thus,
<
_ ` = 3.378 > 3.155
^
Table 8.6 shows the summary of the power requirements estimated for different mission segments
of the design mission.
Table 8.6 Summary of power requirements for different segments
S.No
1.
2.
84
Mission Segment
Take off
Climb
Recalculated Value
16.45 W
71.84 W
3.
4.
Vmax
Turning
87.20 W
38.00 W
170.93 W
52.24 W
8.12 CONCLUSION
The wing loading remains the same as calculated in Chapter 4 at 3.155 kg/m2. But the power
requirement has escalated from 87.20 W to 170.93 W.
The batteries selected in Chapter 2 for second weight estimate provide a power greater than 170.93
W. Thus, the power plant selected is adequate even with the change in the power requirements.
8.13 REFERENCES
[1] RAYMER D., Aircraft DesignA Conceptual Approach 2nd ed., AIAA Education Series, AIAA
Publications, 1992
[2] ROSKAM J., Airplane Aerodynamics and Performance, DAR corporation,1997.
[3] ANDERSON J.D., Aircraft Performance and Design, WCB/McGraw Hill, 1999
85
9.1 INTRODUCTION
The centre of gravity (CG) of an aircraft is the point at which the aircraft would balance if it were
possible to suspend it at that point. It is the theoretical point at which the weight of the aircraft is
assumed to be concentrated. The centre of gravity of the aircraft is important from the perspective
of stability. Its location is of utmost importance for the longitudinal stability analysis.
118mm
235mm
Z
295mm
342.5mm
288mm
80mm
228.6mm
x
201.5mm
1174mm
86
228.6mm
Y
80mm
235mm
1174mm
X
343mm
1832.4mm
651mm
201.5mm
288mm
685mm
9.2.1 Fuselage
Fuselages cross section is 8080 mm2 and straight length 1174 mm.
Thus from the geometry,
CG from nose tip XCG = 1174/2 mm
XCG, F = 587 mm
CG from base
ZCG = 80/2 mm
ZCG, F = 40 mm
87
CG, F
X
80mm
40mm
587mm
1174mm
Figure9.3. CG location of fuselage
9.2.2 Wing
Wing CG for one side is given as 40% chord from leading edge of the wing at 40% of semispan [1].
This yaxis CG distance is for one wing, but when we consider both wings in totality, the CG lies on yaxis due to symmetry.
Thus,
YCG, W= 0 mm
Also, xaxis CG distance is from the leading edge, which is 235 mm aft from the tip of nose of the
fuselage [2].
XCG, W = 235 + 0.4 343 = 372.2 mm
The wing CG location from the base is taken the same as that of the fuselage.
ZCG, W = 40 mm
Z
235mm
372.2mm
X
342.5mm
CG, W
80mm
40mm
88
D
S
CG
BP
Croot
MAC
Ct
Figure 9.5 Schematic of the important geometric points for tail CG calculation [2]
where,
MAC = (2/3) Croot (1++2)/(1+) [2]
D = (b/6)[(1+2)(1+)] [3]
using figure 9.5 notation
Wing sweep (S) =[B(Croot +2Ctip)]/{3(Croot +Ctip)}[3]
Wing Taper ratio () = Ctip /Croot
From Chapter 5
Wing Span (b) = 1832mm
Root chord Croot =201.5 mm
Tip chord Ctip =201.5 mm
Horizontal tail span (b)= 685 mm
Taper ratio ()=201.5/201.5
=1
MAC= (2/3)201.5[(1+1+12)/(1+1)]
MAC =201.5 mm
Also,
89
D ={(685/2)/6}[1+21)(1+1)]
D = 342.5 mm
For calculation of (B) = Croot Ctip
B =201.5201.5
B= 0 mm
Thus,
Wing sweep (S) =[0(201.5+2201.5)]/{3(201.5 +201.5)}
S =0 mm
Centre of Gravity from leading edge ,
XCG = BP + S
where ,
BP = Balance point (25% of MAC) [3]
BP = 0.25201.5
BP = 50.38 mm
XCG = 53.38+ 0
XCG = 53.38 mm (from Root chord leading edge)
Thus, Centre of Gravity from fuselage nose tip,
XCG = 1174201.5+ 53.38 mm
XCG = 1020.88 mm
90
1020.88mm
80mm
40mm
210mm
where ,
BP = Balance point (25% of MAC) [3]
BP = 0.25214.84
BP= 53.71 mm
XCG = BP+S= 53.71 + 73.14
XCG = 126.85 mm (from Root chord leading edge)
And Centre of Gravity along Z axis,
ZCG = D = 125.94 mm
Thus, Centre of Gravity from fuselage nose tip
XCG = 1174288+ 126.85 mm
XCG = 1012.85 mm
And Centre of Gravity from fuselage base,
ZCG = 80+125.94 mm
ZCG = 205.94 mm
118mm
295mm
1012.85mm
Z
288mm
205.94mm
92
9.2.5 Propeller
The CG of the propeller is the CG of the propeller as we have taken a two blade propeller. Thus, the
CG of the propeller taken is
Thus, Centre of Gravity from fuselage nose tip
XCG = 20 mm
And Centre of Gravity from fuselage base,
ZCG = 40 mm
Centre of Gravity along Y axis,
YCG = 0 mm
9.2.6. Motor
From the 3D view presented in [5]
Centre of Gravity from fuselage nose tip
XCG = 100 mm
And Centre of Gravity from fuselage base,
ZCG = 30 mm
Centre of Gravity along Y axis,
YCG = 0 mm
9.2.7. Battery
From the 3D view presented in [5]
Centre of Gravity from fuselage nose tip
XCG = 300 mm
And Centre of Gravity from fuselage base,
ZCG = 30 mm
Centre of Gravity along Y axis,
YCG = 0 mm
93
9.2.8 Payload
From the 3D view presented in [5]
Centre of Gravity from fuselage nose tip
XCG = 400 mm
and Centre of Gravity from fuselage base,
ZCG = 40 mm
Centre of Gravity along Y axis,
YCG = 0 mm
S. No
94
Aircraft Components
CG location
from fuselage
nose tip XCG
CG location
from fuselage
base ZCG
CG location
along Y axis
YCG
(in mm)
(in mm)
(in mm)
Mass of the
components
(in grams)
1.
Wing
372.2
40
373.6
2.
Fuselage
587
40
386.04
3.
Horizontal tail
1020.88
40
194.2
4.
Vertical tail
1012.85
205.94
135.9
5.
Propeller
20
40
25
6.
Motor
100
30
198
7.
Battery
300
30
235
8.
Payload
400
40
150
For the CG location of the landing gear, an initial estimate of the CG of the aircraft is necessary. Thus,
using the method of weighted weights, the CG is calculated using the following formulae:
CG from fuselage nose tip,
X
Thus
Thus,
X = 501.47 mm
Z = 50.73 mm
Y = 0 mm
95
In general, the design and positioning of the landing gear are determined by the unique
characteristics associated with each aircraft, i.e., geometry, weight, and mission requirements. Given
the weight and cg range of the aircraft, suitable configurations are identified and reviewed to
determine how well they match the airframe structure, flotation, and operational requirements.
96
Therefore,
j = 1832
m.Qm
(9.4.1)
Conditions at Touchdown
The minimum allowable offset between the aftmost cg and the main gear assembly mounting
locations is given by [4];
. + b(*+.+ tan
where,
zCGfuselage= 50.73 mm, zdistance from fuselage centreline of the estimated CG of fuselage.
Using geometry data;
l h + 50.730.2126
(9.4.2)
Sideways Turnover Angle
Forces acting sideways on the airplane in crosswind landing condition or a high speed turn during
taxiing could cause the aircraft to turnover on its side. It is thus desirable to keep the turnover angle
() as small as possible.
The angle is determined using the expression and is maximum allowable upto 63[6];
. + b(*+.+
jke =
, ^ne
And,
K
K
jke =
=
2( + , ) 2j
Using geometry data we get;
m.U
t = l + l
Q.U
7 /
(9.4.3)
(9.4.4)
To solve (9.4.1) to (9.4.4) with 5 unknowns we need to make an initial guess and then try to satisfy
all the equations, with reasonable values of unknowns. From [5], it is known that the gear length for
RC flyer aircrafts in approximately 2 kg weight category is 5 in. = 127 mm for track length of 15 in.
= 381 mm.
Taking initial guess as, hg = 127 mm;
?Q?
m.Qm
(1832 j)
?
97
We get,
j = 1832
?Qmm
m.Qm
= 408 II
K=u
m.?m /
Q{m.?m
= 170 II
The above calculated values decide the arrangement of the landing gear.
Thus,
Therefore, the methods given in the conventional aircraft design literature may not give a correct
estimate for RC model airplane.
For RC airplanes, available data from [6] suggests the weight of one offtheshelf landing gear at
around 25 gm.
Assuming factor of safety is 1.2 to prevent weight underestimation due to unaccounted component
or aircraft weight increase.
Therefore,
<. = 25 1.2 3 = 90 ]
98
?m
= 397.5 II
&. = 0 II
Centre of gravity in zaxis from fuselage base;
&. = 0.5 . = 50 II
X
Thus
Z
Thus,
99
9.6 CONCLUSION
From the calculations, we get
X = 496.233 mm
Y = 0 mm
Z = 50.696 mm
9.7 REFERENCES
[1] ROSKAM J., Airplane Design Part V Component Weight Estimation, DARCorporation, 1999
[2] RAYMER D., Aircraft DesignA Conceptual Approach 2nd ed., AIAA Education Series, AIAA
Publications, 1992
[3] http://www.geistware.com/rcmodeling/cg_super_calc.htm
[4] Currey N. S., Aircraft Landing Gear Design: Principles and Practices, AIAA Education
Series,1999
[5] www.RCuniverse.com
[6] www.petenplanes.com.au
100
10.1 INTRODUCTION
Stability plays a key role in the ability to maintain control. The opposite of stability is
maneuverability. If an aircraft had more stability, it would have less maneuverability. In this case,
there would be no way to change the flight path. A desirable middle ground must be designed,
depending on the type of aircraft.
Positive stability means that when the aircraft is displaced it tends to return to the original attitude.
Neutral stability would result in the attitude remaining constant after displacement, neither
returning nor continuing to displace. Negative stability would result in the attitude continuing to
displace or diverge.
101
cg= Xcg/c
cg= 496.233/343mm
From [1], the location of neutral point from fuselage nose tip is:
,2 =
1 %
All lengths are expressed in terms of fraction of wing mean aerodynamic chord length.
Where,
Cmfus
102
,2
= Xnp/c= Neutral point location from fuselage nose tip
& = Xacw/c= Position of aerodynamic center of wing from fuselage nose tip
& = Xach/c = Position of aerodynamic center of tail from nose tip
CL
=
Slope of lift coefficient with angle of attack of the wing
=
Moment coefficient of the fuselage
CLh
=
Gradient of coefficient of lift with angle of attack of the tail
@
=
Span area of horizontal tail
@!
=
Wing span area
From Raymer[1]
Cmfus
!
%
per degree
where
Kf = Empirical pitching moment factor
Wf = Maximum width of fuselage
103
Lf =Length of fuselage
C =Mean aerodynamic chord of wing
Sw = Wing surface srea
From Chapter 5
Wf = 80 mm
Lf = 1174 mm
Sw = 627600 mm2
C= 343 mm
Kf is calculated as follows:
Position of 1/4th root chord in terms
terms of % fuselage length = ((343/4 + 235)/1174)100
235)/1174)
= 27.32%
m.mmm QQ
UU?mm
104
In nondimensional form;
= _
This can be rewritten as,
@
&
` _ `
_
`_
`
@
= 1 %
&
(10.6.1)
The terms used in the equation above have been defined and estimated in the following subsections.
10.6.1 Dynamic Pressure Ratio ( )
The term 1 represents the ratio of dynamic pressure at horizontal tails to freestream dynamic
pressure.
The typical value of the dynamic pressure ratio is 0.90 [1].
Therefore,
1 = 0.9
This term represents the area ratio of horizontal tails to the wing in top view.
Since, Sh = horizontal tail planform area = 138027.5 m2
And, Sw = wing planform area =627600 m2
Therefore,
105
@ 138027.5
=
= 0.22
@
627600
2 + u4 +
2MJ
,
1
+
"
@+2
l ()
@'+b
where,
Sexp = HT reference area less the part covered by fuselage = (685  80) x 201.5 = 121907.5 mm2
Sref = HT reference area = 685 x 201.5 = 138027.5 mm2
2M 3.4 1.37
121907.5
_
` = 4.237 NTTknke
138027.5
U. ?
2 + u4 + "
m.
The horizontal tail angle of attack (AoA) derivative with respect to the wing AoA is given by [1];
=1
where, the downwash derivative has been empirically determined using [2];
m. Q.Q
= 4.44 L L L hR^& "
where, KA, K and KH are factors representing wing aspect ratio, wing taper ratio and HT location
respectively.
Here,
& = 0, wing quarter chord sweep for rectangular wing
Q
Qm{U
lH = distance parallel to wing root chord between wing MAC quarter point to the quarter chord point
of MAC of HT [3]= 1174 201.5 235
UU
?mQ.
+
= 702.125 mm
L =
Using these values,
7
?
u
7
= 1.093
)
10.6.5 NonDimensional Aerodynamic Center xlocation (
Typically for most subsonic high aspect ratio lifting surfaces, the aerodynamic center is located at
quarter chord point of MAC [1].
Therefore,
& =
where,
&
h
Therefore,
& =
?mQ.
1022.875
= 2.982
343
= 1022.875
The effect of propulsive unit on longitudinal stability and trim are usually difficult to estimate. For
propeller driven aircrafts, the effect of power on longitudinal stability consists of two parts;

Direct effect caused by forces developed by the propulsion unit. This depends on the vertical
separation of the thrust line from the line passing through center of gravity and parallel to
thrust line. If this separation is small, the effect on pitching moment due to direct effect can
be neglected [1].
Indirect effect caused by propeller slipstream passing over the wing and tail surfaces. The
effect of changes in local lift and drag forces due to this on pitching moment is usually small
and hence neglected [2].
The direct effect also includes normal force acting on propulsion unit, which for propeller airplane is
destabilizing and for pusher airplane is stabilizing in nature. From literature [1] [2], it is common to
neglect the propeller force term in normal direction to determine poweroff stability.
Then, the power effects are accounted for using a static margin allowance based on test data of
similar airplanes. Typically these poweron effects reduce the static margin by 4~10% for propeller
airplanes [1].
Therefore, we assume the poweron reduction in static margin of 5%.
The handling characteristics of an airplane in longitudinal flight are also determined by the static
margin. Static margin is defined as the distance between the center of gravity and the neutral point
of the aircraft.
Thus,
Static Margin = ,2 cg
C = C (,2 cg)
Thus For positive static margin, pitching moment coefficient is negative, so the aircraft is stable.
Static Margin= 1.111 1.447=0.336
Reduction in Static Margin due to power plant= 5% of 0.336=0.0168
Thus, Static Margin= 0.319
108
Thus, the aircraft is unstable. To get a stable configuration we change the location of the wing by
190mm i.e. we move the wing from 235mm from nose tip to 425mm from nose tip. Due to this
movement, the CG of the aircraft also changes. The new CG is:
CGnew= 537.7 mm
cg = (537.2)/343
Thus,
=1.566
Because of the change in the location of the wing, the values of the following parameters are
recalculated:
10.10.2 (Cmfus)new:
Position of 1/4th root chord in terms of % fuselage length = ((343/4 + 425)/1174)100 = 43.5%
From fig 10.2,
Kf = 0.017
Thus,
(Cmfus)new =0.033
( )new=0.468
10.10.3 (
and
(Cmh)new =1.181
109
,2 = 1.598
And
cg = (501.78)/343
Thus,
cg =1.463
Because of no change in the location of the wing, the values of the parameters and neutral point
have not changed:
Thus,
And
Since
110
(static margin)=0.128
= x
118mm
342.5mm
288mm
228.6mm
80mm
201.5m
1174mm
111
=
&. & + + + 1
+
2
( 2 )
@ &.
@
O
& &. +
@
@ /
The moment due to propeller is very small as compared to other terms, and hence can be neglected.
As we are not using jet engine, the last term in above equation can be neglected.
The coefficient of pitching moment about aerodynamic centre of wing having NACA2310 airfoil by
using design foil software is,
= 0.043
=
&. & + + + 1
@
&.
@
&
here,
= elevator deflection,
= ratio of dynamic pressure at the tail and the free stream dynamic pressure.
112
The angles of attack are measured with respectto zero lift angle.
Then corresponding equations are given by [1]
= ( + n 3 )
= ( + n 3 )
here,
3
= zero lift angle of attack for wing,
3
= zero lift angle of attack for horizontal tail,
= effect of downwash.
Now, the equation for change in zero lift angle due to a plain flap is given by[1]
1
b
3
= i l
b
where,
@b22+
= 0.9 \b i
l
cos
[Q]
b
b
@'+b
and
= = 4.237 NT Tknke
As explained by, Raymer, theoretical lift increment for small flap deflections can be obtained from:
113
Therefore
=
(10.12.1)
= 1.15
Using equation,
Q
= .?U 1.15 b
(10.12.2)
= 0.271b =3
where,
Q
= 0.42
= 0.42
Thus
= 4.237 ( + 0 0.42 +0.271b )
=2.457 + 1.15b
(10.12.3)
= ( + n ) + 1
@
@
= 0.3996 0.2804
 0.043
(10.12.4)
for
delta
=2
for
delta =2
for
for
delta = delta =4
6

for
for
delta = delta =8
10
for
delta =12
0.043
0.0542
0.01335
0.017461
0.0480
0.0593
0.034922
0.0531
0.0643
0.052383
0.0581
0.0694
0.069844
0.0632
0.0745
0.0069
0.02429
8
0.01923
6
0.01417
4
0.00911
2
0.00405
0.087306
0.0683
0.0795
0.01196
0.00101
0.104767
0.0733
0.0846
0.01702
0.00607
0.122228
0.0784
0.0897
0.02208
0.01114
0.139689
0.083
0.0947
0.02715
0.0162
0.15715
0.0885
0.0998
0.03221
0.02126
10
0.174611
0.0936
0.1048
0.03727
0.02632
11
0.192072
0.0986
0.1099
0.00298
0.00804
0.01311
0.01817
0.02323
0.02829
0.03335
0.03842
0.04348
0.04854
0.0536
0.00828
8
0.00322
6
0.00184
0.02078
0.02584
0.03091
0.03597
0.04103
0.04609
0.05115
0.05622
0.06128
0.06634
0.0714
0.00208
0.03173
0.03679
0.04185
0.04692
0.05198
0.05704
0.0621
0.04233
0.03138
12
0.209533
0.1037
0.1150
0.04739
0.03645
13
0.226994
0.1088
0.1200
0.05866
0.06373
0.05246
0.04151
alpha
in deg
alpha in
radian
115
0.06716
0.07223
0.07729
0.08235
0.08741
0.09247
0.09754
0.07646
0.08153
0.08659
0.00929
0.01435
0.01941
0.02447
0.02953
0.0346
0.03966
0.04472
0.04978
0.05484
0.05991
0.06497
0.07003
0.07509
0.04
0.02
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
Cm,cg
0.02
delta =0
delta=2
delta=2
0.04
delta=4
0.06
delta=6
delta=8
0.08
delta=10
0.1
delta=12
0.12
0.14
Figure10.4:Trim curve
10.13 CONCLUSION
1.Modified 3D shows the new CG location of aircraft is 501.78mm and wing location 425mm from
fuselage nose tip.
2.The stability Analysis is done and positions of Neutral Point and centre of gravity in terms of
fraction of wing chord are found to be 1.598 and 1.463 respectively, from the nose tip.
3.Static Margin is found to be 0.128 i.e 12.8%, which is well within stability range(515%).
4.The slope of CMcg vesus alpha as shown in plots above is found out to be negative which indicates
that the aircraft is stable
5. Since the
at zero angle of attack is negative for elevator deflection delta at zero, thus the
initialtail setting angle will be set as 8.
10.14 REFERENCES
[1] RAYMER D., Aircraft DesignA Conceptual Approach 2nd ed., AIAA Education Series,1992
[2] PAMADI B. N., Performance, Stability, Dynamics and Control of Airplanes, AIAA Education Series,
2004
116
The flatplate skin friction coefficients (Cf) have been estimated while keeping following points in
consideration;

Operating Reynolds number is close to 0.5 million and the surface finish may not be of high
quality, therefore flow over the components can be assumed to be turbulent at all times [1].
In absence of historical data for surface roughness of RC model airplanes, it is assumed that
the model will be painted with smooth paint of skin roughness (k) 2.08x105 ft [1].
Max design cruise altitude is 50 m, hence Sea Level (SL) conditions can be assumed for the
calculations.
Density ()= 1.15 kg/m3
Viscosity () = 1.983x105 Nsec/m2
Speed of sound (a) = 349 m/s at 30C
0.455
(R]Qm )?. (1 + 0.144? )m.
Since, max design speed for RC model airplane is 25 m/s, which corresponds to max Mach number of
M = v/a = 0.071, which is small compared to sonic speed. Therefore, neglecting the term (0.144 M2)
which is negligibly small order compared to unity, the equation for friction coefficient can be
rewritten as only a function of Reynolds number:
b = (3.
m.
.
)
117
where
= min
Q.mU
, 38.21 "
Here, appropriate characteristics length (l) has been taken for airplane components.Mean
aerodynamic chord for wing and empennage and overall length for fuselage.
11.3.1 Fuselage
Fuselage form factor has been estimated using; [squareside fuselage has a form factor 40% higher
[1]
, therefore a multiplier of 1.4 has been used]
m
= 1.4 1 + b + mm"
where
==
()
= slenderness ratio
Landing gear for the RC model airplane has been chosen to be nonretractable tricycle type as this
configuration is most stable during ground run. Being nonretractable the drag of the three landing
gears namely, two main landing gear and one nose landing gear contribute to drag throughout the
flight envelope.
The regime of operation for our aircraft is low subsonic.
118
The landing gear drag estimation has been done using procedure outlined in [2]. Some of the data
has been reproduced in Figures 11.1 and 11.2.
119
@b'3,/
@
The value 0.62 corresponds to reference area defined as landing gear frontal area @b'3,/ , which
primarily consists of wheel frontal area, as the other connecting rod and attachment areas are
negligible in the case of RC model airplanes. The reference has been converted to the airplane
reference area (S).
From historical data of RC airplanes landing gear data [3], the tire size for small scale airplanes
(weight category 612 pounds) used is 2.5 in (63 mm) for main wheels as well as nose wheel. The
standard tire width for tire of 2.5 in (63 mm) diameter is 0.4 in (10 mm) [3].
120
Thus,
Table 11.1 summarizes the geometric data of airplane components used for the estimation of drag
values. Wing and empennage airfoils have t/c of 0.1.
Table 11.1 RC Model Airplane (W0 = 1.98 kg) Component Geometric Data
Airplane Components
Fuselage
(Square Crosssection)
Wing
(Rectangular planform)
Horizontal Tail
(Rectangular Planform)
Vertical Tail
(Swept Planform)
121
Parameter, unit
Length (L) , mm
Max Crosssection Area, mm2
Wetted Area, mm2
Span, mm
Chord = MAC, mm
Wetted Area, mm2
Planform Area, mm2
Span, mm
Chord = MAC, mm
Wetted Area, mm2
Values
1174
6400
319328
1832
343
1219299
627600
685
201.5
280057
Span, mm
Root Chord/Tip Chord/MAC, all in mm
Sweep at Max Thickness (max), deg
Wetted Area, mm2
295
288 / 118 / 215
19.9
121507
Using equations stated in sections 11.2 and 11.3the parasite drag estimation has been done for
velocity range from 1 to 25 m/s (Vmax). Table 11.2 below shows a set of calculation done for design
cruise speed of 20 m/s.
The parasite drag is thus calculates as:
=
)Q b ) ) @+/ )
where,
b = Component skin friction coefficient,
)
+ )*& + .+'
122
Similar calculations as shown in Table 11.2 are carried out for different velocities. Table 11.3 below
shows the tabulated values of CD0 against the airplane speed and the corresponding Mach number.
Table 11.3 Parasite Drag Coefficients for RC Model Airplane Speed Range
v (m/s)
CD0
v (m/s)
CD0
0.1 0.000287
0.04075
10.0 0.028653
0.02403
0.2 0.000573
0.03605
12.0 0.034384
0.02379
0.4 0.001146
0.03248
14.0 0.040115
0.02360
0.6 0.001719
0.03080
16.0 0.045845
0.02344
0.8 0.002292
0.02975
18.0 0.051576
0.02331
1.0 0.002865
0.02901
20.0 0.057307
0.02298
2.0 0.005731
0.02705
22.0 0.063037
0.02290
4.0 0.011461
0.02553
24.0 0.068768
0.02285
6.0 0.017192
0.02480
25.0 0.071633
0.02280
8.0 0.022923
0.02435
Figure 11.3 shows the plot of parasite drag vs. Mach number. To capture the trend of high parasite
drag variation at low airplane speed values, closer data points have been taken. This plot also shows
that for low subsonic speeds there is an asymptotic lower limit to the parasite drag.
123
11.8 CONCLUSION
The parasite drag calculated using the component buildup method is 0.02320. Thus the modified
drag polar is:
CD= 0.02320+0.067CL2
11.9 REFERENCES
[1] RAYMER D., Aircraft DesignA Conceptual Approach 2nd ed., AIAA Education Series,1992
[2] ROSKAM J., Airplane Design PART VI Preliminary Calculation of Aerodynamic, Thrust and Power
Characteristics, RAEC (Roskam Aviation And Engineering Corporation), 1987.
[3] www.hobbylinc.com
124
The final performance analysis of the aircraft is now carried out. This analysis includes the use of the
improved drag polar, the aerodynamic properties of the wing and airfoil and the selected power
plant. The analysis is carried out for different mission segments.
< 1
= 45 #*/ ?
@
2
<
_ `
= 0.5 x 1.15 x10? x 1.3203
@ */
125
<
= 75.92 a/I? = 7.738 \]/I?
_ `
@ */
From Chapter 5,
Total Weight (W0)= 1.98 kg
Aspect Ratio (AR) = 5.35
Wing Span (b)
= 1832 mm
= 343 mm
= 0.6276 m2
= 0.02320+0.067CL2
12.3.1 CD and CL
For cruising conditions we know that L=W. For cruise conditions, it is required to maximise the range
and hence (L/D) for propeller aircraft, to calculate the wing loading.
0.02320
= p = p
\
0.067
= 0.3463
= + = 2 x 0.02320
= 0.0464
1
< = 45 #" #$ ?
@
2
2W
2 x 1.98 x 9.81
#" #$ = p
=p
5 C
S
1.15 x 0.3463 x 0.6276
#" #$ = 12.467 I/^
126
Also,
O" #$ =
1
O" #$ = 45 #" #$ ? @
2
1
x 1.15 x 12.467? x 0.0464 x 0.6276 = 2.603 a
2
#&'()*+ = 2#*/
#&'()*+ = 2 x 10 = 20 I/^
2<
5 #&'()*+ ? @
2 x 1.98 x 9.81
= 0.1346
1.15 x 20? x 0.6276
< 1
= 45 #&'()*+ ?
@
2
<
= 0.5 x 1.15 x 20? x 0.1346
_ `
@ &'()*+
!
%"
&'()*+
12.3.5 CD
From drag polar,
CD=0.02320+0.067CL2
Thus,
CD=0.02320+ 0.067 x 0.13462
CD=0.0244
1
O&'()*+ = P = 45 #&'()*+ ? @
2
1
O&'()*+ = x 1.15 x20? x0.0244 x0.6276
2
12.3.7 Power for minimum drag
127
O&'()*+ = 3.524 a
3
3 x 0.02320
= p
=p
\
0.067
= 1.019
2W
2 x1.98 x 9.81
=p
#" &'($ = p
5 C
S
1.15 x 1.019 x 0.6276
#" &'($ = 5.978 m/s
1
O" 23+' = P = 45 #" 23+' ? @
2
1
O" 23+' = x 1.15 x 5.978? x 0.0928 x 0.6276
2
O" 23+' = 1.197 a
12.4.1 CL and CD
As shown in section 12.3.8, for minimum power conditions,
128
= 1.019
= 0.0928
12.4.2 Vclimb
T=D+ W sin
Now,
Thus,
1
P = 45 #&)7 ? @
2
1
P = x 1.15 x 7.212? x 0.0928 x0.6276 = 1.742 a
2
T= D+ Wsin10
Tclimb= 5.115 N
G=sin=
{
G= 0.1736
129
where,
Q
Q. .Q
?
.QQ
0.1736"
Q. .Q
? m.m
"
?.?
0.1736" u
<
_ `
= 33.476 a/I? = 3.413 \]/I?
@ &)7
e=
= Bank angle
Assuming a level bank angle of 45o
12.5.2 CL and CD
(4 x 0.067 x 0.0232)
:
= sec
<
L = Wsec = 1.414<
=
2 x 1.414<
5 #/(', ? @
=
From drag polar,
1
O/(', = P/(', = 45 #/(', ? @
2
1
O/(', = x 1.15 x11.5? x 0.0454 x 0.6276 = 2.166 a
2
/(', = O/(', #/(',
<
_ `
=
@ /(',
where,
Q
12.6 LANDING
131
?.Q
<
_ `
= 120.98 a/I? = 12.33 \]/I?
@ /(',
=
=
#b ?
](e 1)
(1.23x10)?
9.81x0.2
=77.11 m
b = (1 hR^6 )
[Q]
b = 77.11(1 hR^33 )
b = 0.106 I
Assuming hob= 1 m
Approach distance Sa,
@ = i
37 b
l
jke6
1 0.106
` = 17.06 I
@ = _
jke3m
@b = ^ne6
2 < 1
o ? (< @)
@. = oap
+
45 @
]45
8'
!
1.15? % "
2 < 1
p
28.905 = 1.15x3
+
1.15 @ 1.3203 1.15 9.81 1.3203 0.4
<
<
28.905 = 3.9596p + 0.2219 _ `
@
@
132
Solving the above quadratic equation and taking the lower root we get,
<
_ `
= 30.95 a/I? = 3.155 \]/I?
@ ,),.
12.7. TAKEOFF
=
=
6.96(#*/ )?
]
6.96 x(10)?
= 70.95 I
9.81
637 = hR^ {Q _1
Thus,
37
`
1
` = 9.633
70.95
@ = ^ne637
S=Sg + Sa
Sg= S Sa=38.13 m
12.7.5 Takeoff Wing Loading
@. =
133
1.21 <@
]45
O<
< =
@
< =
@
Q?.m
<@
1.21
12.7.6 VTO
The takeoff velocity is given by:
= O #
= 12.409 x 8.05
= 99.89 <
k=
k=
O
I
12.409
1.98
k = 6.267 I/^ ?
12.8 LOITER
For maximum endurance and hence loiter of a propeller aircraft is obtained when the power is
maximised. Maximum power condition is achieved when (L3/2/D) ratio is maximised.
12.8.1 CL
Thus,
134
1
= \
?
3
3 x 0.02320
= p
= 1.019
0.067
12.8.2 Loiter wing loading
< 1
= 45 #3)/+' ?
@
2
< 1
= x 1.15 x20? x 1.019 = 234.42 a/I?
@
2
<
_ `
= 23.9 \]/I?
@ 3)/+'
Table 12.1 below summarizes the values of wing loading calculated in the above sections
Table 12.1 Wing loading for different segments
S. No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Segment
Stall
Cruise
Climb
Turn
Landing
Takeoff
Loiter
W/S (kg/m2)
7.723
3.165
3.413
12.33
3.155
30.567
23.9
Thus, the wing loading selected is the minimum from the table above
<
= 3.155 \]/I?
@
12.10 THRUSTTOWEIGHT
The wing loading selected above is used for the thrust to weight calculations of the different
segments.
135
12.10.1 Cruise
The thrusttoweight ratio is given by:
O
1
_ `
=
< &'()*+ (:P )&'()*+
(:P )&'()*+ = 7.463
Thus,
O
_ `
= 0.134
< &'()*+
12.10.2 Climb
For climb, the thrusttoweight ratio as given in [3] is given by:
<@
O
=+
+
<
<@ MJ
<@
O
=+
+
<
<@ MJ
O
29.92 x 0.0232
3.155 x 9.81
= 0.1732 +
+
<
3.155 x 9.81
x 29.92 x 5.35
O
= 0.257
_ `
< &)7
12.10.3 Turn
The thrusttoweight is calculates from:
e? <@
O
=
+
< <
MJ
@
O
76.04 x 0.0232 1.414? x 3.155 x 9.81
=
+
<
3.155 x 9.81
x 76.04 x 5.35
O
_ `
= 0.105
< /(',
136
12.10.4 TakeOff
12.10.5 Vmax
For this condition T=D
O
_ `
<
12.409
= 0.639
1.98 x 9.81
O
1
2\ <
= 45 # ?
+
< 2
< @ 45 # ? @
O
1
0.0232
2 x 0.067 x 3.155 x 9.81
= x 1.15 x 25?
+
< 2
3.155 x 9.81
1.15 x 25?
Thus,
O
_ `
= 0.275
<
Thus,
O
= _ `
< #
<
= 133.61 <
S.No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The thrust to weight ratio is chosen as the maximum of the values tabulated.
137
O
= 0.639
<
However, the aircraft will seldom be made to reach Vmax. It will usually travel at cruise speed of 20
m/s. So power adequacy for 99.89W is sufficient.
12.12.1 Introduction
Flight regime of any aircraft includes all permissible combinations of speeds, altitudes, and
configurations. This regime is shaped by aerodynamics, propulsion, structure, and dynamics of
aircraft. The borders of this flight regime are called flight envelope or manoeuvring envelope. Pilots
are always trained and warned through flight instruction manual not to fly out of flight envelope,
since the aircraft is not stable, or not controllable or not structurally strong enough outside the
boundaries of flight envelope. A mishap or crash is expected, if an aircraft is flown outside flight
envelope.
Figure 12.1 shows a typical Vn diagram for a general aviation aircraft [4].
138
The curve between O and A represents the aerodynamic limit on load factor imposed by CLmax. The
region above the curve OA is stall region. Horizontal line AB represents the limit load factor. On the
right hand side of diagram, line BC represents the maximum diving speed. The bottom part of the
diagram, given by curve OD and horizontal line DC corresponds to negative absolute angle of attack,
that is negative lift and hence the negative load factor.
where,
n= load factor
L = lift of the aircraft
W = weight of the aircraft
:
<
1.467
1.98kg
0.6276mm2
5.35
1832mm
1.15kg/m
nlimitpos=2.1 + !Qmmmm
where,
?mmm
nlimitpos=2.1 + .UQmmmm
=4.5
140
So stalling velocity,
VS=9.898m/s
ns= 1
12.12.6 Manoeuvring point A
141
45 # ? @
:
?
e=
=
<
<
Substituting the values we get,
e=
For curve AB
. = e)23* = 3
For curve BC
For curve CD
# = #
e = e))/,+. = 1
For curve OD
e = # ?
where C is a constant. This C can be determined by using a known point on the curve i.e. point D.
At point D n=1 and V=9.898.
Thus,
C=0.102
From the value of this constant the CLmax for negative angle of attack can be calculated as
=
142
? 45 @
<
The right side of the Vn diagram describes about the high speed limits of the aircraft. Undesirable
phenomenon such as wind gust, aileron reversal etc. will lead to structural failure of the aircraft. The
speed limit is given by the red line. Under no circumstances, should this velocity be exceeded. During
diving, the weight and the thrust vector are along the same direction and maximum thrust and
acceleration is obtained. However, this is undesirable for smaller aircrafts and the maximum velocity
is constrained by the power available.
12.12.11 Conclusion
The Vn diagram is unique for each aircraft. The important parameters for flight envelope diagram
for our aircraft are:
1. Positive limit load factor, nlimitpos=3.0
2. Negative limit load factor, nlimitneg=1.0
3. Stalling speed VS= 9.898 m/s
4. Manoeuvring speed V*= 17.14 m/s
143
12.13 REFERENCES
[1] ANDERSON J.D., Aircraft Performance and Design, WCB/McGraw Hill, 1999
[2] http://adamone.rchomepage.com/calc_motor.htm
[3] RAYMER D., Aircraft DesignA Conceptual Approach 2nd ed., AIAA Education Series,AIAA,
1992
[4] SADRAEY M.,Aircraft Performance Analysis,VDM Verlag Dr. Mller, 2009
144
13.1 INTRODUCTION
The design mission of our aircraft is to undertake the surveillance in forest areas to track the wildlife
movements and study their habitual patterns. For this purpose, the literature survey was done and
statistical dataset of RC model aircrafts currently in service was generated for initial weight
estimation. Also, we decided the payload for the aircraft to be 150 gm, based on market survey of
available surveillance grade camera and related systems.
Using initial weight estimate and statistical data of RC aircraft models we carried out various
conceptual design steps, i.e. initial sizing, refinement in weight estimate, and estimation of flight
performance, envelope and stability characteristics.
The RC model aircraft configuration was finalized. Following subsections would show the details of
finalized configuration
145
(v) Fuselage
(a) Overall length of the fuselage: 1174mm
(b) Maximum width: 80mm
(c) Maximum height: 80mm
(d) No of longerons: 04
(e) No of Frames: 16
146
147
148