Oklahoma State University Aerospace Capstone

1. Oklahoma State UniversityAerospace Capstone Orange Team Final Presentation “Shamu: A Whale of a Plane” April 16, 2001

2. Orange Team Presentation Overview • Team Architecture and Group Responsibilities • Technical Group Reports • Aerodynamics Group • Propulsion Group • Structures Group • Financial Overview • Highlight Video • Questions Orange Team

3. Orange Team Architecture Orange Team

4. Technical Group Responsibilities • Aerodynamics Group • Design of the aircraft • Airfoil Selection • Wing and Tail Sizing • Fuselage Configuration • Control Surface Sizing Orange Team

5. Technical Group Responsibilities • Aerodynamics Group (con’t) • Integration of Propulsion Needs • Speed Controller, Motor, and Battery cooling • Adaptation to Structural Requirements • Wing carry-through structure, tail mounting, and control linkages • Construction Drawings Orange Team

6. Technical Group Responsibilities • Propulsion Group • Testing • Power, Capacity, and Thrust from past motors and batteries • Selection and Sizing • Motor, Propeller, Batteries, and Gear Box • System Performance • Theoretical Flight Profile with Aerodynamics Group Optimization • Develop Sortie Strategy from Prototype Flight Tests Orange Team

7. Technical Group Responsibilities • Structures Group • Structural Analysis and Design • Major Components are Wing, Fuselage, Tail, and Landing Gear • Construction Techniques and Materials • Component Placement • Group Responsible for Aircraft Construction Orange Team

8. Orange TeamAerodynamics Group Tiffany Boehm – Lead Luke Bell Charles O’Neill Greg Schulke

9. Aerodynamics Group • Preliminary Design Considerations • Optimization • Conceptual sketches were drawn by entire team • Additional sketches from underclassmen Orange Team

10. Aerodynamics Group • Optimization • Blends the contest rules and scoring details with aerodynamic and physical principles. • Produces the best scoring mission profile. • Also defines some aircraft information such as wing area and the amount of lift needed. Orange Team

11. Output: Optimized Input: Guess Values Iterate Takeoff Geometry Cruise Propulsion Score Aerodynamics Group Optimization Program Logic Orange Team

12. Aerodynamics Group Orange Team

13. Aerodynamics Group • Preliminary Design Considerations • Evaluation of conceptual design • Selection of aircraft configuration • Further design decisions • Payload configuration exploration Orange Team

14. Aerodynamics Group • Five main configurations were considered in detail. • Conventional design chosen using decision matrix. Orange Team

15. Aerodynamics Group • Further design decisions for configuration • Wing placement • Tail configuration Orange Team

16. Aerodynamics Group • Payload configuration • Speed of payload exchange • Structural considerations • Weight Orange Team

17. Aerodynamics Group • Detail Design Considerations • Main airfoil selection • Stability and control development • Drag analysis and reduction • Further development of the optimization program Orange Team

18. Aerodynamics Group • Airfoil Selection • Wing span limited by contest rules. • Wing area and needed lift performance found using the optimization program • Polar plots used to find an airfoil with the desired lift and drag performance • Eppler 423 airfoil was chosen Orange Team

19. Aerodynamics Group • Stability and Control Issues • Weight and balance • Sizing of vertical and horizontal tail surfaces • Trim analysis • Aileron sizing • Polyhedral analysis Orange Team

20. Aerodynamics Group • Drag Analysis and Reduction • Identify main sources of drag • Design refinements for reduction of drag • Post-production modifications for further reduction of drag Orange Team

21. Aerodynamics Group Drag Breakdown Orange Team

22. Aerodynamics Group • Steps taken to reduce drag • Improve surface smoothness of entire aircraft • Smooth, rounded transitions between surfaces • Tapered surfaces for the fore and aft assemblies • Fillets between the wing and fuselage surfaces • Fillets between the tail and fuselage surfaces • Wheel pants Orange Team

23. Aerodynamics Group Drag Coefficients Orange Team

24. Aerodynamics Group • Optimization Program refinements • Aerodynamic Additions • Inclusions of drag analysis • Propulsion Additions • Experimental values integrated into program • Flight testing data used to further refine the program Orange Team

25. Aerodynamics Group • Final Design Summary • Conventional aircraft configuration • Low wing • Polyhedral wing • Cylindrical fuselage Orange Team

26. Propulsion Possepro·pul·sion - (pr -p l sh n) n. The process of driving or propelling. A driving or propelling force. Amanda Ciskowski

27. Propulsion Posse Team Members Binaya Thapa – Lead Blake Cook Millay Brians

28. Propulsion Overview • Literature Survey • Restrictions • Motor Selection • Battery Selection • Propeller Selection Orange Team

29. Contest Restrictions • Motor • Restricted to Only Two Companies • Maximum Amperage - 40 Amps • Propeller Driven Brushed Electric Motor • Unmodified and “Over-the-Counter” • Battery • Nickel-Cadmium • Maximum Weight - Five Pounds • “Over-the-Counter” Orange Team

30. Motor Selection • Power Output – 1150 Watts • AstroFlight Motors • 640 • 660 • 690 Orange Team

31. Motor Efficiency versus Current Orange Team

32. Motor Figure of Merits Orange Team

33. Battery Selection • Application • Capacity per Mass • Weight Orange Team

34. Battery Statistics Orange Team

35. Battery Figure of Merits Orange Team

36. Propeller Selection • Types of Propellers • APC • Wood • Carbon Fiber • Epoxy Composite • Pitch to Diameter Ratio • Theoretical/Experimental Analysis • Wind Tunnel Testing Orange Team

37. Final Propulsion System • AstroFlight – 661 Motor • Gear Box Ratio – 2.71 • 37 Cells of RC-2400 Batteries • 22x20 Bolly Propeller Orange Team

38. Structures Group Michael Ayres – Team Lead Jim Meiseman Voon-Seng Chea Chir Siang Pea Naoki Hosoda Loh Yuh Jogendran Pulendran Cheng Shan Gan

39. Structures Overview • Fuselage • Wing • Tail Section • Landing Gear • Speed Loader Orange Team

40. Fuselage Structure Options • Longerons • Reinforced Skin • Stringers • Keelson Orange Team

41. Fuselage Figures of Merit • Weight • Bending Strength • Connection Interface • Construction Complexity Orange Team

42. Wing Structure Options • Tube Spar • C-Channel Spar • End Grain Balsa Spar • Hybrid Spar Orange Team

43. Wing Figures of Merit • Weight • Bending Strength • Connection Interface • Construction Complexity Orange Team

44. Landing Gear Types • Conventional Bow • Single Stroke Strut • Two-Stroke Strut Orange Team

45. Landing Gear Figures of Merit • Weight • Drag • Ground Steerability • Dependability • Manufacturability Orange Team

46. Final Design Materials, carrythrough structure, and construction methods Fuselage - Foam/Carbon Fiber Sandwich - Rotocut Tooling - Balsa Sandwich Wing Carrythrough Orange Team

47. Final Design Cont’d Wing and Tail Section - Foam/Carbon Fiber Sandwich - Feathercut Tooling and Formica Templates - Landing Gear Carrythrough Landing Gear - Multiple Layers of Carbon Fiber Speed Loader - Custom Sized Duffle Bag Orange Team

48. Financial Overview Amanda Ciskowski- Chief Engineer

49. Financial Overview • Funding • Corporate and private sponsorship • Material Donations • Expense Categories • Mechanical and Electrical systems • Consumable materials Orange Team

50. Expense Breakdown Orange Team