1 / 40

Single Line Tethered Glider

Single Line Tethered Glider. Sub-System Level Design Review. Team P14462. Kyle Ball Matthew Douglas William Charlock. Jon Erbelding Paul Grossi Sajid Subhani. Team Introduction. Agenda. Project Description Review Engineering Requirements Review Functional Decomposition Review

alma
Download Presentation

Single Line Tethered Glider

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Single Line Tethered Glider Sub-System Level Design Review Team P14462 Kyle Ball Matthew Douglas William Charlock Jon Erbelding Paul Grossi Sajid Subhani

  2. Team Introduction

  3. Agenda • Project Description Review • Engineering Requirements Review • Functional Decomposition Review • Top 3 Concepts from Last Review • Concept Feasibility • Glider Analysis and Feasibility • Base Station Analysis and Feasibility • Project Planning • Work Breakdown Structure

  4. Project Description Review • Goal: Design, build, and test a tethered, small-scale, human-controlled glider. • Critical Project Objectives: • Maintain maximum tension on the tether • Sustaining horizontal and vertical flight paths • Measure and record tether tension and position • Understand the influential parameters for sustained, tethered, unpowered flight Glider Tether Base Station Operator w/ controller

  5. Engineering Requirements

  6. Functional Decomposition

  7. Review of Top 3 System Concepts IMU with Single Axis Load Cell 3 Single Axis Load Cell 2 Potentiometers with Single Axis Load Cell

  8. Glider Analysis

  9. Choosing the Glider Bixler v1.1 EPO Foam Phoenix 2000 EPO Foam Wing span: 2 [m] Chord length: 0.3 [m] Mass: 0.98 [kg] Front mounted propeller Reinforced • Wing span: 1.4 [m] • Chord length: 0.2 [m] • Mass: 0.65 [kg] • Middle mounted propeller • Only EPO Foam

  10. Choosing the Glider The smaller Bixler glider creates less tension for a larger operating range Able to operate with an affordable load cell

  11. Flight Orientation

  12. Flight Orientation

  13. Flight Analysis Wind Speed: ~ 11 mph

  14. Flight Analysis Wind Speed: ~ 22 mph

  15. Flight Analysis Wind Speed: ~ 44 mph

  16. Qualitative DOE • Slower wind speed: lower tension • Larger flight path radius: lower tension • Beta angle peaks: ~ 94-95° • Tension peaks: ~ 20 [m] tether length • Tension must be less than 5000 [N] (1100 lbs)

  17. Quantitative DOE • Choosing flight configuration • Inputs • Maximum allowable tension • Observed wind speed • Outputs • Beta angle • Tether length • Flight path radius

  18. Bridle and Tether Setup Use a tension of 3000 lbs as an overestimate. Maximum allowable stress for Bixler glider: 30 MPa Bridle attached at two points on the fuselage causes structural failure at the wing root with 180 MPa

  19. Proposed Tether and Bridle Design

  20. Ideal Bridle Location Analysis Optimum tether location: 0.51 m from root. Optimum tether angle: 54 deg from airplane

  21. Wing Stress Analysis

  22. Wing Stress Analysis • Maximum stress: 15 MPa

  23. Fuselage Stress Analysis

  24. Tether and Bridle Configuration

  25. Base Station Analysis and Feasibility

  26. 2 Potentiometers and Single-Axis Load Cell Concept 1

  27. Vertical Rotation

  28. Static Analysis

  29. Dynamic Analysis

  30. Dynamic Analysis Continued

  31. Horizontal Rotation

  32. Static Analysis

  33. 3 Single-Axis Load Cells Concept 2

  34. CAD Model • Created 3-D model of the system in SolidWorks • Works well when the ball joints are kept in tension as seen in Fig 1. • Ball joints fail when they are put into compression as seen in Fig 2. Fig. 2 Fig. 1

  35. Base Station Equipment Phidgets 3140_0 – S Type Load Cell Bourns 3540S-1-103L Potentiometer

  36. Initial Base Station Budget Comparison

  37. Project Planning

  38. Project Planning

  39. Work Breakdown Structure (10-12) • Paul: • Jon: • Kyle: • Matt: • Saj: • Bill:

  40. Questions?

More Related