UAV to be operatonal on Planet Mars .

© All Rights Reserved

Als DOC, PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

19 Aufrufe

UAV to be operatonal on Planet Mars .

© All Rights Reserved

Als DOC, PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

- Spacecraft Propulsion Systems
- wecs
- Hybrid Aircraft
- Airfield Models - Step-By-Step Radio Control Model Aircraft Design
- Mae 331 Lecture 5
- 20-Final Report.pdf
- Aerodynamic Optimization of a Morphing Airfoil Using
- design Aircraft Structure 1
- Mechanics of Fluids r05220302
- Lift and Drag Report - PRINT
- Rocket Propulsion Google Search
- Aircraft Maintenance
- Akif LabReport CpDistributionOfAerofoil 4
- smac_ja_10
- Landing of an airplane.pdf
- C.9.1047
- Art23
- Pereira_2014_J._Phys.%3A_Conf._Ser._555_012082
- CFD prob
- Www.eng.Cu.edu.Eg Users Mkhalil PDFs Exp1

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 39

ODYSSEUS TEAM

CORNELL UNIVERSITY

ADVISOR

PROFESSOR MICHEL Y. LOUGE

TEAM LEADER

ALEXANDER CHEFF HALTERMAN

DATE

APRIL 1, 2004

THE TEAM:

Team Members:

Alicia Billington

Emmanuel Franjul

Jian Gong

Alexander Halterman

(MEng

2004)

Yen-Khai Lee

Jeremy Nersasian

2

2004)

Cem Ozkaynak

Jing Pei

Mikiko Ujihara

arb351

BEE

(2006)

ef35

MAE

(2005)

jg253

ECE

(2004)

ach22

MAE

yl245

jbn5

ECE

MAE

(2004)

(MEng

co37

jp292

mu23

ECE

MAE

MAE

(2005)

(2004)

(2004)

Advisor:

Professor Michel Louge

myl3

arb35@cornell.edu)

2

Ceased doing work after December 2003 due to January 2004 graduation

1

Abstract

As space exploration progresses, Mars gains more focus as the next

frontier in human exploration.

set foot on Mars, a wealth of information about Martian conditions will

need to be provided by satellites, unmanned vehicles and a myriad of

other data collection instruments.

design an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) for flight in the lower regions of

the Martian atmosphere.

The data

any Mars landing mission.

This paper focuses on the aerodynamics, propulsion, structures and

electrical systems of an unmanned aerial vehicle for flight on Mars. The

Martian environment, as well as the mass sensitive nature of current

space exploration, present a set of conditions by which an aircraft must be

designed. Such a design must optimize mass, volume, flight time, power,

and instrumentation in order to create an aircraft that can be sent to Mars

with existing spacecraft while satisfying its exploratory goals once it

reaches Mars. A UAV design for Mars must incorporate the aerodynamic

properties for sustained flight in a low density atmosphere, propulsion in

an atmosphere lacking sufficient oxygen for combustion, structural

integrity with minimal mass and electrical controls for unmanned flight.

Our UAV design overcomes these daunting constraints and provides a

robust platform for reconnaissance of Mars.

The final UAV design consists of a 10.8 kg aircraft with fuselage

length of 2.1 meters, maximum fuselage diameter of 0.25 meters, and a

wingspan of 2.078 meters. For propulsion we have chosen a single 2.27-

The

propeller

motor

as

well

as

the

topographical

and

control

batteries.

Flight control and navigation is accomplished through feedback from onboard sensors that detect acceleration, pitch and roll.

This design

provides a flight time of 2.3 hours at a cruising speed and altitude of 130

m/s and 500 meters respectively.

technological feasibility in order to

identify critical paths and achieve our

stated mission objectives. For instance,

much of the fuselage design relied on the

availability of a light-weight electrical

engine to provide thrust needed to stay

aloft in the low-pressure environment.

As such, several interdependencies were

stated early on and constantly revised as

we progressed.

Once the systems-level picture

was developed, each sub-team developed

its own set of trade-studies and

constraints.

Aerodynamics compared

many airfoil and wing designs using

Matlab and Excel. Propulsion compared

the feasibility of propellers, chemical

rockets, and jet engines given the

atmospheric

constraints

on

Mars.

Structures required light-weight but

durable fuselage designs.

Electrical

evaluated the capabilities of various

electrical

components

and

communication

network

designs.

Through a series of presentations to

Professor Michel Louge that focused on

our conceptual, preliminary, and final

design, we narrowed down the initial

trade-studies to a single UAV design

optimized for the Martian environment.

Our design process focuses only

on the technical aspects of flight on

Mars, from the time the UAV is deployed

through its expected life-cycle. Other

aspects of the mission, such as launch

costs and procedures, Earth-to-Mars

transit routes, aero braking techniques

upon reaching Mars, and atmospheric

deployment

feasibilities

were

not

considered in our design. Additionally,

cost, environmental impact, political

motivation and human safety were not

prevalent issues for us; however,

technological and mission feasibility

were carefully evaluated throughout the

design process. Our final design only

employs technologies that are currently

available or on the horizon while

acknowledging the many aerodynamic,

structural, propulsion, and electrical

challenges

of

deploying

a

fullyautonomous UAV on Mars for long

periods of time.

Introduction

Mars

is

indisputably

the

centerpiece of current space exploration

with both the scientific communitys

space exploration efforts and the general

publics interest focused on recent

investigative missions to the Red Planet.

In the spirit of human exploration the

Odysseus

Team

is

designing

an

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle to fly on Mars

as part of the Revolutionary Vehicles:

Concepts

and

Systems

University

Student Competition for 2004 sponsored

by NASA.

A UAV serves as a

reconnaissance platform for future

manned missions to Mars. The aircraft

will carry topographical and imaging

instrumentation to produce valuable data

regarding the Martian environment.

The design of a UAV must

optimize mass, volume, flight time,

power, and instrumentation in order to

create an aircraft that can be sent to

Mars with existing spacecraft while

satisfying its exploratory goals once it

reaches Mars. Such a design for Mars

must

incorporate

the

aerodynamic

properties for sustained flight in a low

density atmosphere, propulsion in an

atmosphere lacking sufficient oxygen for

combustion, structural integrity with

minimal mass and electrical controls for

unmanned flight.

Our UAV design

overcomes these daunting constraints

and provides a robust platform for

reconnaissance of Mars.

General Design Methodology:

The design process began with

the high-level abstract evaluation of the

various objectives and constraints.

Members of the team met twice a week

to develop the mission profile, such as

the scientific motivations behind a highresolution topographical map of the

Martian surface and atmospheric profile,

both of which are not currently possible

using existing satellites or landers.

Following the mission profile, we

consolidated the various engineering

aspects aerodynamics, structures,

propulsion, electrical systems into a

systems-level hierarchy of the conceptual

UAV design. Each level of the hierarchy

up the Martian atmosphere. This lower

value, along with the lower ambient

temperature, causes a lower speed of

sound, approximately 75% of that on

Earth. This means that speeds need to

be further limited to avoid sonic

conditions.

Other considerations on Mars

include the rampant dust storms that can

spring up unexpectedly and make flight

very difficult. These dust storms are

seasonal, allowing a wise launch and

flight time to reliably eliminate this

potentially devastating threat.

artian Atmosphere and Environment:

Designing

an

aerial

vehicle

requires knowledge of the environmental

conditions the craft will be flying in. One

must

know temperature,

pressure,

density and viscosity as functions of

surface conditions and altitude. We have

equations published by NASA that give

acceptable and reasonable fits for

atmospheric data.

The equations are

valid below 7000 Meters, which is above

our cruise altitude, in an effort to

capitalize on the largest density possible,

these equations work well.

T T0 .000998 * h

(0)

P P0 e h

(0)

Aerodynamics Design

Introduction

As stated previously, the design of

an aerial vehicle for Mars is a tricky

process due to the planets harsh

environmental conditions. Normally one

begins an aircraft design process by

defining take-off and landing scenarios,

as well as approach to cruise altitude,

but the fact that this vehicle will be

launched

from

orbit

makes

this

unnecessary.

Our first step is to determine the

wing loading necessary for the most

efficient flight in cruise. Wing loading is

the force per unit area on the wing

during steady state flight conditions,

which is important to determine for two

reasons. First, it fixes the area of the

wing.

Knowing the wing loading

simplifies the minimum drag analysis by

tying

the

wingspan

and

mean

aerodynamic chord (M.A.C.) together.

Optimization then becomes a question of

choosing the correct aspect ratio and

taper ratio. The second reason involves

the fuel efficiency; aircraft designed with

combustion

powered

engines

are

sensitive

to

atmospheric

changes;

therefore flight at the correct altitude

becomes important. Thrust specific fuel

consumption (TSFC), a relationship

temperature

and

pressure

profiles

respectively based on surface values.

Where is a constant (9e-5m-1) and h is

altitude in meters. From temperature

and pressure we extrapolate data for

density and speed of sound using known

values and laws. The ideal gas law ( 0 )

gives us density as a function of

temperature, pressure and the gas

constant R, which is 192.1 on Mars.

Equation ( 0 ) solves for viscosity as a

function of temperature. Speed of sound,

a, is found using equation ( 0 ) and

known values such as the ratio of specific

heats, and temperature.

T pR

408.17

10

10

T

120

36.592T 1.5

a sonic

RT

(0)

(0)

(0)

because that is its number for the air on

Earth. is 1.289 on Mars due to the

ultimately a function of air density and

thus altitude is the determining factor

for fuel efficiency. TSFC sets an altitude

for efficient cruise flight, from which a

wing loading can be chosen to attain

cruise conditions at the desired altitude.

By choosing a specific wing loading the

designer can fix the wing area for a craft

with a target weight.

Our design did not have the

luxury of using thrust specific fuel

consumption to fix wing area.

Our

aircraft will be propeller driven and run

off electrical energy. Since our energy

source has no dependence on pressure

or density, we can not set an optimum

cruise altitude. So we begin the design

process without a specified wing area.

With this area we would have been able

to

find

appropriate

airfoils,

find

maximum CL/CD values and proceed to

optimize the aspect ratio dependant on

wing weight and induced drag from wing

end conditions. Without it, wing area

becomes another parameter we need to

optimize.

Next we begin our search for

suitable airfoils.

Since the Martian

atmosphere

is

approximately

one

hundredth the density of Earths and the

craft is small in comparison to

commercial aircraft, Reynolds numbers

will be very low. Traditionally, planes fly

well into the turbulent boundary layer

regime, with a Reynolds number on an

order of 106. With the conditions we are

given, Reynolds number values will be

between 40,000 and 80,000, with 80,000

being an extreme value that is unlikely.

Dealing with such low Reynolds

numbers poses a problem; boundary

layers are largely laminar, which are

notorious for flow separation due to low

inertial forces.

A craft flying in a

laminar regime must utilize an airfoil

designed specifically for low Reynolds

flows.

Traditional airfoil shapes are

designed for turbulent conditions and

will

not

suffice

in

the

Martian

atmosphere. On the advice of Professor

David Caughey of Cornell University, we

considered research done by Professor

Michael Selig of the University of Illinois

at Urbana-Champaign. Professor Selig

with low Reynolds airfoils and has a

wealth of data available, including lift

and drag coefficients at various angles of

attack, as well as coordinates that can be

used to numerically generate airfoils.

With his data, we proceed with an airfoil

design.

We use Matlab and Excel to

search

through

roughly

1500

of

Professor Seligs airfoils to find those

most suitable for our applications.

Rough calculations show that for

velocities limited to Mach 0.6 and

Reynolds numbers between 40,000 and

65,000, lift coefficients are best chosen

to be 0.3-0.6. This is a relatively low

value, but reasonable for this particular

application. With low Reynolds numbers,

due to the need for a large chord and a

small wing area, a lift coefficient that is

too high would tend to limit aspect

ratios.

Induced

drag

becomes

overwhelming in this situation, causing

inefficient flight.

With a rough value for the lift

coefficient, we use Matlab to inspect

different airfoils for high lift-to-drag

ratios in the correct regime. Fifteen

airfoils are selected that have good

characteristics

around

the

aforementioned CL values.

Finding a

high ratio of CL/CD for 2D data does not

guarantee a good airfoil. Rather,

Reynolds number, maximum thicknessto-chord ratio and actual lift coefficient

are

also

important.

Since

the

relationships are complicated and hard

to judge by inspection we input the

potential airfoils into Excel solver to find

the optimum geometry and minimum

drag for each airfoil.

This completes the initial wing

design. All that remains is to select the

proper sweep angle that approximates

an elliptical lift distribution. This can be

done after the geometry is largely set,

then optimized a second time to come up

with the most efficient wing possible.

Design Assumptions:

process, we need to make certain

assumptions to determine the optimal

wing structure. These assumptions are

made to account for the fact that we are

not in possession of accurate data for

every scope of our design process. If this

design is to be finalized for physical

flight on Mars, accurate weather data

and atmospheric gradients need to be

obtained to verify or refute our current

calculations. This kind of data collection

inaccurate. Efforts for backing up this

assumption are outlined later.

Finally we assume that the wing

weight estimation we use is accurate.

Equation ( 0 ), later in the paper, uses a

series of constants, as well as geometric

and dynamic conditions, to make an

estimate

for

wing

weight

given

conditions.

We use this data in

optimizations to limit span. The values

Airfoil

Airfoil

the structures team obtain using the

software Pro-Engineer and a suitable

material. This appears to be a valid

assumption.

therefore

we

assume

that

our

atmospheric representation is correct.

We have a list of equations, described in

the previous Martian Atmosphere and

Environment section of the report, that

provide a rough model of the Martian

atmosphere.

We also assume the Selig airfoil

data to be correct for all of the airfoils he

tested. His tests were done in a 3 foot

wind tunnel using a rectangular wing

with a 33.375 inch span and a 12 inch

chord. These dimensions suggest Seligs

decision to minimize 3D aerodynamic

effects and that the data collected was

analogous to that of a 2D airfoil. The

fact that the span of the airfoil was so

large in comparison to the tunnel

strongly supports this theory. If this was

not the case, blockage effects would be a

We begin the wing design by

finding a lift coefficient.

Since the

airfoils we are dealing with are for

laminar flow, the drag data is very

erratic, making it nearly impossible to

find a valid curve that fits the data.

Although the lift curve slopes from the

data are very close to linear, the fact that

drag is so far off makes curve fitting to

find

continuous

points

virtually

impossible.

Generally speaking, drag

data from airfoils will follow a parabolic

curve (see Error: Reference source not

This allows you to fit a second order

polynomial to the data, and find values of

drag at continuous points on the curve.

Error: Reference source not found shows

an example of drag data from one of the

Selig airfoils we are considering. It can

be seen that in low Reynolds airfoils

laminar bubbles and possibly hysteresis

in the switching from laminar to

turbulent boundary layer conditions

result in erratic data. A parabolic curve

of the form

that specific data point is unlikely.

Instead, we consider a range of lift

coefficient values dependant on Reynolds

number. As Reynolds number increases,

C D C D0 kC L2 , where k is an

fit to the drag data in Error: Reference

source not found. Using this parabolic fit

and the easily obtained lift curve slope,

we can find CL and CD values for any

angle of attack, given a wing planform

and an aspect ratio.

Since the data does not yield a

valid curve fit, we are forced to use the

discrete values that are provided with

the Selig data. The best option for the

laminar regime is to find a wing that is

suitable for our purpose and test it for

numerous angles of attack and use the

data acquired. This is a time consuming

process and is unfeasible given the time

and resources available, so our choice is

to use discrete data in place of more

expansive experimental data.

With discrete data we cannot

determine an exact lift coefficient, as the

Given Re

with all other variables being held

constant, velocity increases and results

in a lower lift coefficient needed for the

same net lift. The opposite is also true; a

low Reynolds number has a lower

velocity,

requiring

a

higher

lift

coefficient. For the high end values of

Reynolds number, around 65,000, a CL

value of around 0.35 is optimal. At the

other extreme, for the low Reynolds

number case, a value of approximately

0.55 is optimal.

These optimized CL

values are determined using an Excel

spreadsheet

to

generate

feasible

planforms for a given Reynolds number.

With constraints set by the user and a

specific value for Reynolds number, the

solver generates optimal planforms for

that condition. Angle of attack is one of

the constraints, so an optimal value for

CL is found for each airfoil and entered

Reynolds number.

Since drag is related to velocity

and we desire a low value for drag, a low

Reynolds number will yield a lower drag.

A CL of 0.55 is set as the design lift

Airfoil Analysis

coefficient

with

a

corresponding

Reynolds number of 40,000. However,

this estimation does not take into

account base drag of different airfoils,

which play a small part in the overall

drag. Further work shows that this CL

value is optimal.

comparison to drag optimization, and

thus is not included as one of the

constraints.

Computational analysis:

Computational analysis makes up

a large percentage of the work involved

in obtaining a sound model for the airfoil

characteristics.

Sorting through 650

airfoils is a manageable task with Matlab

analyzing each airfoil and linking it to an

Excel spreadsheet. The initial stages

involve writing code to take the data and

put it in a user friendly form. The design

of a graphical user interface (GUI),

shown in Error: Reference source not

found further eases the process of airfoil

selection. The user can browse various

airfoils based on target Reynolds number

and vary plots of data until desirable

curves are found.

Saving the layout

allows us to return to configurations at a

later point for further review.

This

allows for simultaneous generation of

several acceptable planforms for various

airfoils.

The Target Re field allows the

user to search for the airfoils closest to

the desired Reynolds number. The fields

that follow are outputted data relevant to

the current airfoil. This is useful for

visualizing the current wing design to

verify that the geometry is acceptable on

aesthetic and packaging standpoints.

Buttons allow the user to browse various

angles of attack and cycle through

different Reynolds number airfoils with

ease. The user is also able to select

between graphs of CD vs. CL, CL vs. , CD

vs. and CD/CL vs. depending on the

desired lift and drag characteristics of an

airfoil.

Excel parameterizes the planform

layouts and reduces the design problem

to four variables with given geometric

constraints: wing span, root chord, tip

chord and sweep angle. (See Error:

Reference source not found) Since the

initial optimization objective is to find

the lowest possible drag for reasonable

geometric constraints, overall wing

Airfoil Selection:

Using the Matlab GUI with the

Selig data we can narrow down the 650

airfoils to 9. This is done by selecting

airfoils that have high CL/CD values at the

design lift coefficient of 0.55 and a

Reynolds number between 40,000 and

65,000. As Reynolds number increases,

the CL/CD values required for a feasible

airfoil increase due to the need for a

lower aspect ratio and the resulting

increase in induced drag. This results in

fewer airfoils that meet our goal as the

Reynolds numbers increase.

With secondary optimization of

the nine airfoils selected, six have

favorable characteristics. Only one of

these surpasses the others in both low

drag and low weight (see Error:

Reference source not found).

Airfoil

gm15 makes possible a planform of low

weight, short wing span and low drag.

Note that sweep value refers to the

sweep angle added in addition to the

sweep induced from the taper ratio. The

actual leading edge sweep angle will be

higher than this value.

Based

on

the

geometric

properties for our selected airfoil, our

calculations yield an aspect ratio of 8.22

and a wing platform area of 0.525 m 2.

The aspect ratio is defined as b2/S; for a

given wing area, S, a large aspect ratio

means a large span.

From a drag

standpoint, a large AR, between 7 and

10, is a well designed wing. However, a

large span means larger bending

moments in the wing structure, due to

lift loads acting farther from the root of

the wing, resulting in additional weight

needed to withstand the increase in

bending moment; something discussed in

the Structures section.

Taper ratio is the ratio of tip

chord to root chord, in our case 0.2. A

wing with a low taper ratio, referred to

as a highly tapered wing, tends to have

portion of the wing, as the downwash

pattern changes, toward an elliptical lift

distribution. Low taper ratio also results

in larger chords and wing thickness

inboard where the bending moments are

the largest, moving the lift in towards

the craft, reducing the aerodynamic

bending moments. Both of these effects

are favorable for wing structural weight.

However, low taper ratio wings have a

tendency to stall at the tip, which is

prevented with wing twist.

With the final structural and

electrical weights we find that a slight

increase in wing area, to produce more

lift, is required for cruise flight. We

decided that we will keep the span

constant and obtain the additional

required platform area by increasing the

taper ratio. The final taper ratio is 0.35,

which leads to a platform area of 0.6 m 2,

a new AR of 7.2 and an increased safety

factor of greater than 1.2

Geometric twist is the equivalent

of taking a straight wing, and applying a

moment about its axis, causing the tip of

the wing to be at a different angle than

the root of the wing, in our case,

negative three degrees. A positive value

of twist refers to an increase in angle of

attack along the span of the wing. A

negative

twist

value,

known

as

washout, greatly increases the stability

of the craft by causing stall to occur at

the root of the wing before occurring at

the wing tip. When this happens, control

can still be maintained due to the

moment that can be generated from the

tips of the wings to control the rolling

motion of the craft.

for 6 wings

the wing in the middle of the fuselage.

Mean aerodynamic chord ( c ,

M.A.C.)

is

a

parameter,

directly

associated with the Reynolds number (

Vc / ).

Equation ( 0 ) shows the

M.A.C. as a function of the taper ratio ( )

and the exposed root chord (CR).

M . A.C .

A wing tip can prevent high

pressure air beneath the wing to escape

around the tip of the wing to the low

pressure region above, resulting in a loss

of lift at the tip of the wing, which is

highly undesirable. Four different wing

tip designs are considered: rounded,

sharp, winglets and unswept. A smoothrounded tip is precisely what we want to

avoid. It easily permits air to flow around

the tip and reduces lift at the tip. A sharp

edge makes it more difficult for the air to

flow around the tip, because the flow

often separates at these edges. A winglet

or endplate blocks the flow from the

bottom to the top of the wing. This offers

the greatest benefit to low aspect ratio

wings whose wing tip vortex is strong, by

increasing the effective wingspan, which

further decreases induced drag.

Our

concern with using a winglet is the

additional wetted area, which will create

a larger parasite drag nullifying any

reduction in induced drag. An unswept

wing tip curves upward to increase the

effective wing. We are using this design

since it is similar to adding a winglet,

without an increase in total wetted area.

C R (1

) 0.307 ( 0 )

3

1

centerline of the aircraft is 0.436 meters.

This distance is dependent upon the taper

ratio and the wing span. Aerodynamic

center is the point on the aircraft where

the airfoil pitching moment is constant

with a change in angle of attack.

It

determines where to position the wing,

and is important in stability calculations.

In subsonic flow, the aerodynamic center

is typically located at the quarter-chord

point on the mean aerodynamic chord

line, which is found to be 0.0768 meters

from the leading edge of the wing.

From equations historically used in

aircraft design, such as Equation ( 0 ), we

conclude that the aerodynamic center will

be located 0.703 meters from the nose of

the UAV.

(0)

Wing

Weight

and

Structural

Considerations:

With any extraterrestrial mission

weight is a top priority. Our mission is no

different.

Generally, wing weight

selection is an iterative process between a

structures team and an aerodynamics

team.

Due to time constraints, we

approximate the wing weight with

equation ( 0 ), a formula based on

historical data used by many aircraft

manufacturers as an initial wing weight.

The formula is a relationship between,

dynamic pressure, q, aspect ratio, AR,

The wings vertical placement with

respect to the fuselage can be at three

locations: atop, below or through the

middle of the fuselage.

A high wing

design is used primarily for cargo planes,

allowing the fuselage to be placed closer

to the ground. However, the passing of

the wing box over the fuselage will

increase the parasite and pressure drag

due to the increase in frontal area. This

increase in frontal area is also present in

a low wing design, which is used by

virtually all commercial transport aircraft

due to the advantages in landing stowage.

Since we are not concerned about

landing, we have no need for a low wing

design. The advantage to a mid-wing

design is that it gives the UAV more

maneuverability while having a lower

frontal area than the high or the low wing

design. Due to the advantages associated

(a)

(b)

total aircraft weight, Wdg, thickness-tochord ratio, t/c, load factor, n, taper ratio,

, wing area, Sw, sweep angle, , and a

multitude of constants, C1 through C14,

that have been obtained using years of

data for three classes of aircraft: fighter,

transport and general aviation. Using the

general aviation constants and the

planned weight of the craft, 10 Kg, a

circular reference of wing area, lift force,

total craft weight and wing weight is

created in Excel. Turning on the iteration

command in Excel causes the values to

converge to a steady state solution for

weight analysis, solving with ease a

process otherwise overly complicated by

hand.

... C9

C10

cos

C11

C12

f

C13

q W

C8

(0)

C14

fw

the tail is similar to the wing, in that we

want an airfoil with high lift-to-drag

ratios.

Since tails are small wings

themselves, we look at the final low

Reynolds number airfoils from the wing

selection process. The main purpose of

tails is not to generate lift, but to provide

stability and control. For this reason,

airfoils used for tails typically have little

to no chamber to them. Since our wing

airfoil has high camber, the chosen wing

airfoil, gm15, is not applicable for the tail.

Based on lift and drag data, as well as

amount of camber, we limit our choices to

four airfoils: SD 7003, S6063, S7012, and

RG14, all of which have only slight

camber to them. Plotting the CL/CD vs.

angle of attack () data for all four, we

find the tail desired angle of attack to be

between 3 and 5 degrees. By comparing

the values of CL/CD at 3 degrees for each

candidate, it is apparent that SD7003 is

the best airfoil at the value we need for

angle of attack.

Tails act as small wings; their

purpose is to provide trim, stability and

control to the craft.

Trim is the

generation of the proper lift force to

balance pitching moment about the

center of gravity. Stability and control

are the tails ability to restore the aircraft

from a perturbation in pitch, yaw, and

roll, which is discussed in detail in the

section of stability and control.

There are a variety of possible afttail arrangements. Our design focus is on

reducing parasite drag. We can thus

narrow our search to four possible tail

configurations based primarily on the

wetted area of each tail configuration:

conventional, V-tail, inverted V and Y-tail.

Conventional tails, used on over

70% of all aircraft, have the typical

vertical and horizontal tail seen on most

commercial airliners.

It provides

adequate stability and control at a

reasonably light weight. With the V-tail,

as the name suggests, the vertical and

horizontal tail components are combined

in an attempt to reduce the wetted area.

The horizontal and vertical forces, on the

V-tail, are the resultant of their respective

projections from the two angled surfaces.

In order to provide the proper

movement, the rudder and elevator on a

V-tail

are

combined

to

create

ruddervators. The problem with a V-tail

is the production of a rolling moment in

opposition to the desired direction of

turn,

known

as

adverse

roll-yaw

coupling. This produces a spiraling

tendency when the UAV is making a turn.

The inverted V-tail avoids this problem; it

instead produces a desirable proverse

roll-yaw coupling.

The Y-tail is similar to the V-tail,

with a reduced dihedral angle and a third

surface mounted vertically beneath the V,

giving the UAV more yaw control. A drag

penalty involved with adding another

control surface causes the Y-tail design,

like the conventional design, to not fit our

design goals of minimizing drag. Using

an inverted V-tail gives us the low drag

required with greater stability than the

standard V-tail.

Stability and control is an integral

part of designing an aircraft. It is vital

that the aircraft is stable and able to

handle

moments,

from

various

disturbances, while maintaining control.

An aircraft possesses three degrees of

freedom, pitch, roll, and yaw, and has two

types of stability, static and dynamic. A

system is statically stable if forces and

moments acting on a body, as a result of a

disturbance, initially act to return the

body towards its equilibrium position. A

system is dynamically stable if it

eventually returns to and maintains its

equilibrium position over a period of time.

For our case, our top concern is

longitudinal static stability, involving the

pitching moments about the center of

gravity. Though, as with any aircraft,

lateral-directional static stability and

control involving yaw/roll moments are

also important.

The steps to design a stable

aircraft are as follows:

1) Make an assumption for the

location of the center of gravity

with respect to the nose of the

aircraft

the placement/sizing of the tail

3) Determine the moment about the

center of gravity due to the wing,

fuselage, tail, and payload

4) If

the

moment

coefficient,

calculated in equation ( 0 ), at zero

lift (Cm L=0) is positive and the

slope of the moment coefficient

versus angle of attack (dCM/d) is

negative,

the

aircraft

is

longitudinally and statically stable

5) Reiterate the process if necessary

6) Determine the static margin

CM

M cg

1

2

V 2 Sc

seen in Error: Reference source not

found. According to our calculations the

center of gravity will be 0.85 meters aft of

the nose of the UAV. Moment calculations

yield a moment coefficient value of -0.153

(negative moment being in the clockwise

direction.)

In order to satisfy the first stability

criteria, a CM,cg greater than zero, the tail

must be large enough to balance the

clockwise moment produced by the

payload and lift forces. According to our

calculations the tail moment coefficient

must be larger than 0.194. The moment

coefficient is defined as Vhat(it+eo), where

Vh is the tail volume coefficient, at is the

lift curve slope of the tail airfoil (~ 0.1), it

is the tail setting angle (~3 by standard

convention), and eo is the downwash

angle, which can be neglected.

(0)

coefficient about the center of gravity,

where M is the moment contribution

about the center of gravity, is the

density of the atmosphere, V is the cruise

speed, S is the wing platform area and c

is

the

mean

aerodynamic

chord,

dependent on taper ratio.

We use equation ( 0 ) to determine

the moment coefficient about the center

of gravity at zero lift; recall that this value

must be positive for the aircraft to be

stable. The first term on the right hand

side of the equation is the moment

contribution from the wing and the

fuselage, about the center of gravity. The

second term is the moment contribution

from the tail. CM(payload) is the moment

induced by the payload. The moment

coefficient about the center of gravity

from the wing and fuselage, CM,CGwb, is

approximated as the sum of the moment

contribution of the wing body about the

aerodynamic center and the moment

generated by the lift force from the wing,

M cgw M acw LW cos w ( hc hacw ) . Drag

terms are not included in the calculation

of wing and fuselage moment coefficient,

as they are negligible compared to the

other terms. Solving equation ( 0 ) gives

us a value of 0.041 for CM,CGwb.

M ,cg

L 0

Vh

lt St

cw S w

(0)

proportional to lt , the distance of the tail

from the center of gravity, St ,the platform

area of the tail, cw , the M.A.C. of the wing

and Sw , the wing platform area.

Equation ( 0 )shows that the further away

the tail is from the center of gravity, the

smaller the area of the tail needs to be.

We want to make the tail large enough to

give us adequate stability, but not as to

further increase the parasite drag.

To

optimize both parameters, we set the tail

platform area, St, to be 0.15 square

meters and the tail moment arm, Lt, to be

1 meter.

Solving for tail moment

coefficient yields a value of 0.25, which

more than compensates for the moment

coefficient from wing, fuselage and the

payload.

dCm

d

h hacwb Vh t / 1

d

d

(0)

satisfied, we can solve equation ( 0 ) for

the second criteria, negative dCM/d

Where and tare the lift curve slopes of

the wing and the tail respectively, the

quantity (h - hacwb) is the distance between

the center of gravity and the aerodynamic

To

determine

the

moment

coefficient from the payload, we establish

a series of point loads to approximate the

the downwash angle with respect to the

angle

of

attack

for

the

wing,

approximately 0.45. dCM/d satisfies the

second stability criteria with a value -0.03

With both of the criteria satisfied

the UAV is longitudinally and statically

stable. The neutral point is a fixed point

on the UAV behind the center of gravity

where dCM/d is equal to zero, and must

be aft of the center of gravity in order to

achieve longitudinal stability.

Setting

dCM/d to zero and solving for h gives the

location of the neutral point at 1.06

meters from the nose of the craft. The

static margin, the difference between the

neutral point and the center of gravity, is

0.217m.

This parameter is directly

related to the stability of the UAV, the

larger the static margin, the greater the

pitching moment must be to cause a

change in the pitching angle. However,

too large a static margin may cause the

flight controller to go unstable due to

unacceptably high reaction latency. On

the other hand, too low of a static margin

will yield an aircraft that is inherently

unstable in regards to pitching motion,

and will require very fast control

response to maintain steady state cruise

conditions. Our static margin is between

these two extremes, allowing stability

without an over-active controller.

In

many

ways,

the

lateraldirectional

analysis

resembles

the

longitudinal analysis. Lateral-directional

stability is the tendency of the UAV to

return to a wing-level attitude after being

displaced from a level attitude by roll or

yaw moments, from such things as

turbulent air.

There are two primary

factors for lateral-directional stability:

wing dihedral angle and wing sweepback

angle. Dihedral angle is the angle at

which the wings are slanted upwards

from the root to the tip; its main purpose

is to correct roll moments. The stabilizing

effect of dihedral occurs when an aircraft

sideslips slightly as one wing is forced

down in turbulent air or during a turn.

0m

0.25

0.65

0.75

0.85

angle of attack between the higher and

the lower wing. The increased angle of

attack on the lower wing produces an

increase in lift which helps the wing

return to its level position.

Research

leads us to a dihedral angle of 3.5

degrees.

Sweepback is the angle between

the line formed from the front of the wing

and the line perpendicular to the

centerline, in the plain of the aircraft.

The effect of sweepback in producing

lateral stability is similar to that dihedral

angle.

A yaw moment increases the

sweepback angle in one wing panel and

decreases it for the other side of the

aircraft. The change in sweep alters the

effective dynamic pressure normal to the

quarter-chord line of the wing panel,

increasing the lift on one side of the wing,

lowering it on the other side, and

producing a restoring moment. Historical

trends in wing sweep back give us a

sweep angle of 5 degrees.

Tail Geometry

1.60

cg

1.17kg Lidar

Controls

4.2kg

Battery

0.61kg

Camera

1.8kg

Motor

5 Vehicle

Figure 5: Payload Point Mass Layout for Aerial

1.75

2.1

m

0.6kg

0.43kg

drive shaft Propeller

the tail, St based on stability constraints,

it is important that we obtain the tail

geometry. Determining the aspect ratio is

crucial; having a large aspect ratio

corresponds to a small chord, which

further leads to an unusually low

Reynolds number.

Likewise, a small

aspect ratio will lead to a substantial

increase in induced drag. After much

consideration we decided on an aspect

ratio of 4. Using a taper ratio similar to

that of the wing, 0.35, we determined the

length of the tail root and tip chord.

Similar to that of the wing, the tail mean

aerodynamic chord ( ct ) is a function of

the root chord and the taper ratio. Based

the ct value, we determined the tail

Reynolds number, which is approximately

30,000. This value is in fact only half of

the optimum Reynolds number suggested

for

our

selected

airfoil

(SD7003).

However, because the tail angle of attack

will be small, boundary layer separation

would almost be nonexistent. Therefore it

is ok for the operating Reynolds to be

smaller than the optimal value.

indicating the minimum speed that will

keep the UAV aloft. When an aircraft flies

below the stall speed, flow around the

airfoil begins to separate; as a result, a

rapid loss in lift will be experienced. At

that point, if the velocity is not increased

beyond the stall speed, the aircraft will

lose altitude and thus lose control.

Equation ( 0 ) determines the stall speed

where W is the aircraft weight, is the

fluid density, S is the wing platform area

and CLmax is the maximum lift coefficient

of our airfoil, obtained from the graph of

CL vs. angle of attack. Our aircraft has a

stall speed of 83.4 m/s; we must fly above

this speed in order to maintain adequate

lift.

Since our main goal is to map as

much terrain as possible, it is necessary

to maximize the range. To do so, we must

fly at the speed where lift to drag ratio is

greatest, given in equation ( 0 ) where CDP

is the parasite drag coefficient and AR is

the aspect ratio of the wing.

2W

SCl MAX

(0)

2W

S C DP AR e

(0)

Vstall

Control

The primary aerodynamic controls

available are ailerons, elevators, and

rudders. Because we are incorporating a

V-tail design, the functions of elevators

and rudders will be combined into one.

Ailerons are the primary roll-control

device, which operate by increasing lift on

one wing and reducing it on another.

They range from 50 to 90 percent of the

wingspan and 20 percent of the wing

chord length.

Since the aircraft is

unmanned,

a

suitable,

redundant

controller must be designed to stabilize

and maneuver the aircraft. Furthermore,

being a 6 degree of freedom system, a

soundly

designed

multi-input/multioutput, or MIMO controller to be used is

required for an aircraft. The designing of

such controllers are currently beyond our

expertise.

V L / Dmax

130 m/s (Mach number of 0.56). If the

cruising speed is set to be greater than

this value, then there will be a substantial

increase in drag. Values deviating from

this velocity will result in a loss of range.

Turning Performance

Maneuverability

plays

an

important role in the design of an aircraft.

Unlike combat planes that perform sharp

turns, our UAV only needs to be able to

slowly turn to avoid physical obstacles

that it may encounter.

A crucial

parameter in trying to figure out the

turning performance of the aircraft is the

load factor, n, defined as the ratio of liftto-weight. In our case, n is approximately

equal to 1.095. The wing bank angle,

defined as cos-1(1/n), is approximately 24

degrees. Ailerons control the wing bank

angle by equal and opposite deflection of

Cruise Performance

The stall speed is determined

directly by wing loading and the

maximum lift coefficient. Stall speed is a

one down; thus increasing lift on one side

and decreases lift on the other side of the

aircraft, inducing a roll moment about the

centerline. A rolling moment banks the

airplane and tilts the lift vector to one

side. The horizontal component of the lift

vector accelerates the aircraft laterally,

thereby curving the flight path. Equation

( 0 ) solves for the minimum radius of

turn, R.

V2

g n2 1

assumption with appropriate calculations.

While the Selig airfoils are normalized by

Reynolds number, Martian conditions vary

greatly from those in Professor Seligs

wind tunnel.

The first step to CFD is creating a

mesh containing the airfoil in a large

space with boundary conditions to

simulate the Martian environment for our

airfoil. This is done, using GAMBIT, from

grid points outlining the 2D airfoil

(0)

factor, n, we obtain a value of 10.5 km for

our turn radius. The UAV is not capable of

performing a sharp turns; this is not a

problem as we will have adequate

warning for any turns that need to be

made and the controller can take into

account minimum turn radius. Equation (

0

)

describes

the

turning

rate

(degrees/time) for the UAV, how large

your turn is, in degrees, per unit time.

d g n ^ 2 1

dt

V

(0)

Figure 7:

CL vs. for CFD (Green) and

Selig (Red)data

It is stated in the aerodynamic

assumptions section that Professor Seligs

data for his numerous airfoils are correct.

Using Fluent, a computational fluid

obtained from Professor Seligs database

and resizing it for our chord length.

Once FLUENT reads the mesh we

specify the atmospheric and flying

conditions. In this case the closest to

Martian atmosphere that can be used is

an environment of carbon dioxide. In

FLUENT we set the fluid properties to the

values from Error: Reference source not

found in the section on atmospheric data

and a gravitational constant of 3.72 m/s2,

roughly 4/10ths the magnitude of gravity

on earth. Boundary conditions are set

that specify the pressure far from the

airfoil and the velocity in terms of x-y

components and Mach number. The x-y

components allow us to vary the angle of

attack without the need of creating a new

mesh for each angle of attack we want to

test

Figure 7:

FLUENT Pressure Gradient

Around Airfoil

(Red =

High Pressure

Blue = Low

Pressure)

Figure 6

properties

set

we

determine

the

appropriate method to use to perform

calculations. Since we are flying in with a

low Reynolds number we use a laminar

boundary regime.

To verify our assumption about the

Selig data it is necessary to run

simulations at several angles of attack.

With a chart of this data we can compare

the CFD data with that from Selig and

find that, while they do not lie directly on

top of each other, they both yield an

acceptable coefficient of lift for an angle

of attack between two and three. The

CFD data gives slightly higher CL values

than the Selig data. Since we are backing

up an assumption based on experimental

data, not determining values, this

inconsistency is acceptable. If this error

were on the side of lower lift we would

have to do more calculations to make sure

there is no problem. As this is not the

case, it stands that our assumption

regarding the validity of the Selig data is

acceptable.

Propulsion Design

Introduction

Low atmospheric density and the

lack

of

appreciable

amounts

of

atmospheric

oxygen

complicate

the

propulsion for a Mars airplane. These

constraints lead to the consideration of

propulsion

options

that

are

more

restrictive than those of Earth.

The analysis carried out in the

propulsion section of this report is based

on an airplane that is not landing intact

on the surface of Mars once flight is

completed; if an airplane is intended to

land or take-off from Martian soil, a new

set of design specifications need to be

considered.

Propulsion Selection

Since the use of a combustion

engine is not feasible due to the lack of

oxygen, our choices for the propulsion

subsystem are limited. There are two

methods to propulsion we consider for

Martian aerial flight: chemical propulsion

and propeller driven propulsion by an

energy source.

The use of monopropellant rocket

thrusters enables combustion without the

need for atmospheric oxygen, by carrying

chemical

compounds

that

burn

spontaneously when ignited. It provides

the UAV with uniform thrust; however,

once ignited, the process cannot be

stopped until the fuel runs out.

Bipropellant thrusters, on the

other hand, carry fuel and oxidizer

separately. They are more practical in

this case since the thruster can be turned

on or off in order to maintain cruise speed

at V(L/dmax).

Bipropellant thrusters,

however, tend to be more complicated to

design.

The thrusters found for our

design

constrains

are

capable

of

generating anywhere from 5 to 20 N of

thrust and have a specific impulse, Isp, in

the range of 300 to 350 seconds. Isp, a

key performance parameter for rockets, is

defined as the thrust that can be obtained

with a propellant weight flow of 1 unit per

second. Modern large scale rockets, like

the one found on the Shuttle, can achieve

a maximum Isp of around 450 s.

The second approach to propulsion

on-board battery, nuclear device or an offboard energy source, such as solar

energy, to power a propeller.

Solar

powered airplanes must have a large

projected area to collect sufficient solar

power and are inefficient when the solar

intensity is low, as it is on Mars.

Solid

rocket

propulsion

is

inherently simple; yet, as mentioned

before, there is no way to control the

thrust once ignited.

Bipropellant

thrusters run the risk of explosion due to

low atmospheric temperature on Mars.

Our calculations also indicate that for the

same weight, a battery driven propeller

would yield a much greater range than for

a bipropellant thruster, so we select

propeller as our form of propulsion

.

Propeller Design Overview

From past Mars aircraft concepts

and high altitude, low speed Earth

aircraft, propellers have been the

preferred choice. Our choices for

powering an electric motor are: batteries,

fuel cells and solar cells (see discussion

on solar cells in the Electrical section.)

As a result of the lower speed of sound on

Mars, due to low temperatures, and

density about one-hundredth that of

Earths, our effort focuses on generating

the necessary amount of thrust, as well as

keeping the tip speed of the propeller

below supersonic conditions. If the tip

Mach number reaches 0.85, there will be

a large drop in the propeller efficiency

due to the flow separation and formation

of shockwaves.

keep the UAV at a constant cruising

speed.

C D C DP C DI C DC

0)

drag on the aircraft, where CDp is the

parasite drag coefficient (also known as

skin friction drag coefficient,) CDi is the

induced drag coefficient and CDc is the

drag due to compressibility.

CDc

becomes significant when the craft

approaches sonic condition. However,

because the UAV will operates at subsonic

speed, CDc is be neglected.

C DP ,wing

C f k swet

4

(0)

the wing is solved in equation ( 0 ), where

Cf and k are roughness constants based

on the wing Reynolds number and Swet is

the total wetted area for the wing.

Similarly, we are able to determine the

parasite drag coefficient for the tail and

the fuselage. Assuming that the wing,

fuselage and tail contribute to 95% of the

total skin friction drag, the overall

parasite drag coefficient is determined to

be 0.02225.

2

C DI

CL

0.016

Ae

(0)

the induced drag coefficient, where CL is

the wing lift coefficient, A the wing aspect

ratio, and e the Oswalt efficiency factor.

Combining the parasite and induced drag

coefficients

gives

an

overall

drag

coefficient of 0.0394.

Thus we can determine total drag

force experienced by the aircraft, from

equation ( 0 ), to be 3.14 N.

Propeller Placement

Examining the advantages and

disadvantages of propeller placement

along the fuselage places the propeller at

the rear of the fuselage.

The main

advantage in using a pusher is in the

aircrafts capability to fly in undisturbed

air. With a tractor propeller, the aircraft

flies in the turbulence from the propeller

wake, which could lead to additional drag.

V 2 S 3.14 N

2

D CD

(0)

With the thrust required for level

flight known, we specify the amount of

power the motor needs to produce in

order for the propeller to generate that

Drag Calculations

The UAV will be operating at

steady, level flight, where all the forces

will be in equilibrium, meaning that

much thrust.

investigated

as

ways

to

improve

propulsion,

the

aforementioned

roll

moment is beyond our current level of

expertise.

(

0)

We

determine

the

engine

brake

horsepower, Pengine, where T is the thrust

required to maintain level flight, V is the

flight velocity and is the efficiency of the

propeller. Since the UAV will be cruising

at V(L/Dmax) the flight velocity is 130 m/s

(see aerodynamic section for more

details.) For a propeller efficiency of 95%,

The engine will produce a power of 430 W

or 0.58 HP.

Although calm flight conditions are

assumed, it is highly likely that there will

be significant wind gust that will increase

the drag value. Taking this factor into

account, we impose a safety factor of 1.2.

The propeller must therefore be capable

of generating 3.77 N of thrust if

necessary to maintain leveled flight; this

corresponds to a maximum engine power

of 490 W or 0.675 HP.

(0)

Propeller Efficiency

As noted earlier, in the section it is

essential that we keep the tip speed of the

propeller under M = 0.85 or 195 m/s.

The helical speed, the tip velocity on a

moving aircraft, is the sum of the rotating

speed at the tip of the propeller and the

freestream

velocity,

calculated

in

Equation ( 0 )

Vtip V freestream

tip helical

Vtip nD

(0)

(0)

calculated in Equation ( 0 ),where n is the

rotation speed in revolutions per second

and D is the diameter of the propeller.

With a helical tip speed of 195 m/s, we

obtain propeller rotation speed of 20

revolutions per second, or 1200RPM.

The overall propeller efficiency is

expressed in terms of the advance ratio

v/nD, thrust coefficient CT, and power

coefficient CP in equation ( 0 )), where CT

and CP are defined in equations ( 0 ) and

( 0 ). The resulting propeller efficiency of

approximately 93% is very close to the

95% value we assumed initially in

calculating power.

Propeller Diameter

Using Equation ( 0 ), we determine

the diameter of the propeller from the

brake horsepower of the engine. Note,

this diameter is equivalent to the length

of our wing span; as the propeller rotates

an induced roll moment is generated. We

further explore the possibility of using

counter-rotating blades. Counter-rotating

blades have mainly two advantages: they

are more efficient at high Mach numbers

than a single propeller configuration and

they allow a smaller diameter blade,

allowing them to spin at higher RPM

without a loss in aerodynamic efficiency.

By having counter-rotating blades, our

propeller diameter will be decreased

considerably while maintaining the same

efficiency. However, the extra blades will

increase the weight compared to the use

of a single propeller. In addition, the use

of propfans, which feature 8 to 10 wide,

short blades of sweptback planform are

considered for blade configurations. If a

propfan blade configuration can be

utilized, being powered by an electric

engine,

opposed

to

the

standard

turboprop engine, it would be an option

worth considering.

Although counterrotating blades and propfans were

CT

CP

10

v CT

n * D CP

T

0.0188

n 2 D 4

P

0.056

n 3 D 5

(0)

(0)

(0)

Propeller Pitch

The pitch is the theoretical

distance the propeller will advance along

the axis of rotation in one complete

revolution.

There are two types of

propellers: fixed pitch and variable

(controllable) pitch.

In a fixed-pitch propeller, the pitch

is set by the manufacturer and cannot be

changed by the pilot. There are two types

of fixed pitch propellers: the climb

propeller and the cruise propeller. The

climb propeller has a lower pitch, which

therefore leads to less drag. This results

in the capability of higher RPM and more

horsepower being developed by the

engine; such will increase performance

during takeoffs and climbs but decrease

performance during cruising flight. On

the other hand, the cruise propeller has a

higher pitch and therefore more drag

which results in lower RPM and less

horsepower capability.

Performance

during takeoff and climb is therefore

decreased; yet, efficiency during cruising

flight is increased.

Contrary to the fixed pitch, a

variable pitch propeller permits the pilot

to select a pitch that will result in the

most

efficient

performance

for

a

particular flight condition. Since we are

solely

dealing

with

cruise

flight

conditions, we select the fixed pitch

cruise propeller for its simplicity and

performance.

The optimum airfoil thickness will

be around 15 to 18 percent near the root,

progressively thinning to 10 percent at

the tip.

Propeller blades are in fact wings

themselves,

producing

a

resultant

aerodynamic force that may be resolved

into a force pointing along the axis of the

airplane. Thus, similar to the airfoil for

our wings, the blades should have a high

aspect ratio in order to minimize drag. An

elliptical-based shape blade with a

rounded

tip

would

yield

optimal

performance.

As the propeller spins, each

section of the blade will be traveling at

different speeds. A small twist in the

propeller blade must be incorporated to

ensure that each section advances

forward at the same rate which stops the

propeller from bending.

Designing propeller blades takes a

great amount of expertise and years of

experience. Since it is beyond our level of

expertise, we will not determine the exact

pitch, shape, twist, and airfoils for the

propeller.

Propulsion Summary

As previously mentioned, the

power consumed by the propulsion

system will be 430 W/hr. The 4.2 kg of

battery that is carried onboard will

generate a total of 1050 W, which allows

the UAV to stay aloft for approximately

2.3 hours. At a cruising speed of 130 m/s,

this corresponds to a range of 1076 km.

In propeller design, deciding the

number of blades to incorporate is

essential.

An

optimization

among

efficiency, thrust and weight shows that a

three-bladed propeller is preferred. Not

only is it capable of producing more

thrust than would a two-bladed propeller,

it is also lighter and more efficient than

using a four-blade propeller.

The tip section of the propeller

revolves faster than the root section;

therefore, the Reynolds number along the

propeller changes as the radius increases.

As a result, one would have to select a

different airfoil for each section of the

propeller blade.

Structural Design

Introduction

In structural aspects, the objective

is to design and verify the safety, stability,

and reliability of the unmanned aerial

vehicle. Both the wing and fuselage will

be hollow in order to minimize weight and

11

mission. The structure must also be able

to withstand outside forces as well as its

own weight.

following parameters are of importance:

Low

density,

ranging

from

approximately 1300 kg/m3 to 1700

kg/m3

approximately 1.0 x 105 Pa-m1/2

capable of:

a) Supporting instrumentation

weight

b) Resisting forces of lift, 44.0

N

c) Resisting forces of drag,

3.20 N

d) Resisting forces of gravity

Usage temperature between -80oC

and 40oC

Easily

molded,

shaped,

and

machined

Structural Design/Fabrication

Two procedures are considered in

designing the structural body of the

unmanned aerial vehicle.

The first

process consists of making a skeleton

with trusses and placing coatings of outer

layers on top of this system to form the

external shell. The second option is to

make a mold out of Styrofoam or a similar

solid foam material in the exact shape of

the aircraft and then coating the outer

layers of skin on top of the mold. After

the layers are set, the inner mold is

removed and only the thin shell remains,

but shaped in the form of the aircraft.

The option implemented in this

project is the latter process of coating a

mold. This is primarily due to weight

considerations. Although trusses increase

the weight of the aircraft, a few trusses

will be used for support. The trusses will

serve solely for structural purposes, and

not to form the shape as do the trusses in

the first process.

The coating of the aircraft will

consist of three layers: a base layer, a

middle body layer, and a surface finish.

The materials chosen for the first two

layers must have a low density to optimize

weight, but must also be structurally

sound. In addition, the materials must be

capable of withstanding the extreme

temperatures in the Martian environment,

which reach on average -63C on the

surface.

The material picked for the

bottom layer is 0.1mm aluminum. The

body layer will be 0.5mm carbon fiber,

and the outer layer will be polished

aluminum.

identify carbon fiber to be optimal; its

material characteristics are shown in

Table 1:

Property

Value

Density (kg/m3)

1500

Fracture

Toughness 5.7

(Pa-m1/2)

Tensile Strength (MPa) 13.9

Youngs Modulus (GPa) 71

Hardness-Vickers (HV) 42

Temperature, min (C)

Temperature, max (C)

-273

2002

Wing: Stress Analysis

It is crucial that the structure of

the UAV be strong enough to withstand

aerodynamic forces while in flight. We

therefore perform stress analysis on the

wing to verify its capability of flying in

Mars. The overall wing dimensions are

known based on calculations from

aerodynamics; the thickness of the hollow

wing is dependent upon the yielding of

carbon fiber. The wing is approximated

as a cantilever beam with its airfoil

modeled as a rectangular cross-section,

as seen in Figure 2.

Wing

in designing the wing of the aircraft.

First, the wing is treated as a cantilever

beam and second, as being hollow. The

following sections will explain further

analyses on the wing.

Wing: Material Considerations

12

the aluminum will not yield. Results are

depicted on table 7.

Wing: Buckling

After determining that the wing

will not yield, it is important to confirm

that the wing will not buckle.

Pcr, critical load, is found at the tip

of the wing, where buckling is most likely.

The load that the UAV will experience due

to lift and gravitational force of each

material is approximately 26 N, well

under the critical load of 1613 kN. Thus,

the wing will not buckle.

The thickness at the center of

gravity, y, is also highly approximated

Pcr

2 EI

1.613e6 N

L2

(0)

2-dimensional trapezoidal figure. From

our trapezoidal face, we can find a linear

relationship of thickness, y, to position

along the length of wing, x.

y@root y@tip

l total wing

component of the center of gravity, we

can find the thickness at this point, y.

Values can be found in table 7.

Varying

wing

thickness

corresponds to varying values of mass

and

therefore,

varying

values

of

gravitational force. Because the aircraft

is lightweight, the force of gravity is

nearly negligible. This force of gravity

and 44 N force due to lift provide the

moment used to determine bending

stress. The moment of inertia for the

approximated rectangular cross-section is

determined at the center of gravity.

Fuselage

Once we have established the dimensions

of the wing, we must now consider the

design of the fuselage. The shape of the

fuselage will be one similar to sailplane

design, for weight minimization and

aerodynamic purposes.

Carbon

Fiber

Aluminum

Density(kg/m )

Center of Gravity

(m)

Thickness (m)

Base

(root/tip)

(m)

Height (root/tip)

(m)

Length (m)

Y (m)

1500

2700

0.4342

0.4342

I (m4)

Total

(m3)

1.781e -6

1.781e-6

2.469e-4

2.469e-4

( 03 )

1

Force, weight (N)

I I outer I inner

bh 3 b 2t h 2t

Force, lift

12

Table 2: COG thickness and Aluminum Stress Analysis

Mass (kg)

0.3704

1.370

22.0

0.6667

2.467

22.0

can calculate the bending stress.

Moment (Nm)

Stress (Pa)

8.957

8.347e5

8.481

7.903e5

My

0.8347 MPa

I

Material

3

Volume

0.0005

0.42

2

0.03

7

1.039

0.0135

0.15

2

0.01

29

0.0001

0.42

0.152

2

0.03

0.0129

7

1.039

0.0135

Fuselage Interior

In order to accommodate the

various instruments required in this

mission, the interior of the fuselage will

consist of three floors. These floors will

be

made

of

honeycomb

sandwich

structure (Figure 3).

Among the

advantages of using honeycomb are

lightweight, high crush strength and

stiffness, structural integrity and high

fatigue resistance.

(0)

carbon fiber is known to be 300MPa, we

can conclude that a wing of 0.5mm

thickness will not yield.

Performing similar calculations for

the inner aluminum core layer, we

calculate a bending stress of 0.7903MPa.

In comparison to its yield strength of

13

flying at, heat losses due to conduction

and convection would be significant.

Therefore, we want to incorporate a highabsorptance and low-emitting metallic

surface. This would allow the UAV to trap

as much heat from radiation as possible

while emitting relatively a little amount.

The

optimal

fuselage

equilibrium

temperature would be obtained by

varying values of and through the

following heat balance equation:

The honeycomb structure material

will be made of aluminum, due to its

smooth and thin cell walls, in addition to

the high strength-to-weight and stiffnessto-weight ratio.

Particular instruments must be

laid out in specific locations within the

fuselage; for example, the LIDAR will be

placed on the base floor. For the LIDAR

to serve its purpose, this part of the

fuselage base will have glass material as a

window. The shaft and motor will be

further back, towards the tail end of the

fuselage; the batteries would therefore be

on the top and mid floor.

4

( 0)

consists of the heat that is escaping the

system. The term As/cTeq4 is the heat

loss due to radiation.

Qconduction and

Qconvection are heat losses due to conduction

and convection, respectively. A s/c is the

total surface area of the UAV. is the

Stefan-Boltzman

constant

(5.67x10-8

2 4

W/m K ).

The right hand side of the

equation is the sum of the heat being

absorbed by the system. The term AsJs is

the heat addition from solar flux of the

sun. ApJa is the heat addition due to

planetary albedo.

ApF12Jp is the heat

addition from planetary radiation. Finally

Qinternal is the internal heat generated by

the various instruments. {As and Ap are

the projected areas of the UAV in the

directions of the sun and the planet

respectively.

Js is the solar radiation

intensity on Mars (590 W/m2). Ja is the

albedo contribution to the total radiation

input to the UAV, which is defined as the

product of Js, a (average Mars albedo,

0.15), and visibility factor F, which is

dependent on the altitude of flight and the

bearing angle.}

We can model heat loss due to

conduction

as

a

1

-dimensional

conduction problem.

(Note: all the equipments will be

placed inside the fuselage; therefore we

are solely concerned about designing a

thermal control system for the fuselage

only)

The main purpose of having a

thermal control system is to maintain

batteries and instruments at their optimal

operating temperature. There are two

basic approaches to the design of a

spacecrafts thermal control system

passive and active.

Passive control

operates by using appropriate materials

and surface finishes so that the fuselage

temperature remains within acceptable

range of temperatures. The latter uses

mechanical or thermoelectric devices.

For instance, the UAV would consist

essentially of a central thermal transfer

bus, a fluid loop transporting the heat

from the radiator to the individual

components.

We choose a passive

thermal control system because it is more

reliable and easier to design than an

active one.

The ideal operating temperature

range

for

our

instruments

is

approximately 270-290 K. Due to the

extremely low temperature on Mars and

14

via

conduction can be expressed in equation (

0).

qx

Tatm Teq

1

L1

L2

[( ) (

)(

)]

hA

KalA

KcfA

( 0) are in terms of and Teq and Teq, we

can select metallic surface finishes with

reasonably and low values that would

give us comfortable temperature for the

instruments to be operating at.

The

following is the list of the materials that

we

considered

along

with

their

properties:

(0)

temperature (230 K) at our cruise

altitude, h is the convective heat transfer

coefficient, A is the surface area of entire

fuselage, L1 is the thickness of the

aluminum (0.1mm), L2 is the thickness of

the layer of carbon fiber (0.5mm), and K

is the thermal conductivity of aluminum

and carbon fiber respectively.

After

plugging in values for all the variables,

the equation is reduced down to 1.4(230Teq).

Next, we model heat losses due to

convection by the fuselage as fluid

flowing pass a flat plate. The total heat

transfer via convection is defined in

equation ( 0).

Q hATatm Teq

MATERIAL

Polished Aluminum

Surface

Polished Stainless

Steel

Polished Copper

Grafoil

Vapor-blasted

Stainless Steel

Gold/Kapton/Aluminu

m

Gold-plate on

Aluminum

Nu L 0.664 Re

Pr

1/ 3

Nu L K

L

Equilibrium

a/e Temperatur

e (K)

265

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

261

Grafoil, and Gold/Kapton/Aluminum of

Table 3 are found to be well under 265K

and therefore not applicable. Thus, based

on the values and given equilibrium

temperatures, in Table 3, our chosen

external thermal layer will be one of

polished Aluminum surface.

Fuselage: Material Selection

The fuselage itself is modeled as a

pressure vessel. The entire structure is

assumed to be sealed off when it is built;

therefore, it would contain Earths

atmospheric

pressure

(100

kPa).

However, the ambient pressure on Mars is

so low (700 Pa) that there would be

significant pressure drop between the

pressure inside the fuselage respect to

the atmospheric pressure. Because air in

a high pressure region tends to move to

that of a lower region, there would be a

tremendous force expanding outwards.

The function of a pressure vessel is to

essentially contain pressure P. The main

objective is to do so while minimizing

weight. A constraint involving this would

be that the pressure vessel must leak

before it breaks. This ensures that if a

(0)

The

Reynolds

number

is

approximated to be 280,000. The Prandtl

number is somewhere around 0.76. As

expressed in equation ( 0), h is simply a

function

of

the

Nusselt

number,

conduction coefficient k of the ambient,

and L the length of the flat plate.

h

(0)

convective heat transfer coefficient, A as

the surface area of the fuselage, T atm, Teq

as the atmospheric and equilibrium

fuselage temperature, respectively.

In

order to obtain the convective heat

transfer coefficient h, we use the Nusselt

correlation of equation ( 0) for flow over a

flat plate.

1/ 2

(0)

15

pressure gradually and thus safely.

Based on these objectives and

constraints, it is essential that we

determine

the

appropriate

material

indices, which would help us assess the

optimal materials. We can idealize the

pressure vessel as a thin-walled cylinder

with an average radius R and thickness t.

The wall thickness is chosen so that at a

certain pressure difference, the stress is

less than the yield strength of y of the

material. The stress should also be less

than the fracture stress, at which point a

crack would propagate in the vessel. It is

however, notable that there would be no

worry of crack propagation if the stress is

kept under the yield stressthis ensures

stable deformation. Such is expressed in

equations

( 0 ) - ( 0 ).

K

ac C 1C

y

aircraft, weight is crucial. For minimizing

weight, we must further find a material in

which the material index M4 is maximized.

M1

K1C

y

(0)

have been found, a material selection

chart is referred to. Figure 5 is one of

fracture toughness (K1c) versus elastic

limit (y). The diagonal line corresponds

to M2, expressing the constraint that the

vessel must leak before it breaks.

(0)

will maximize tolerable crack size.

M1

K1C

y

(0)

Elastic Limit

caused by a crack can be detected if the

crack is just the size to penetrate the

inner and outer surface while maintaining

vessel stability. We must note that the

wall thickness is such that it will not

yield. Thus, a maximum value of the

material

index

M2

indicates

safe

containment of maximum pressure.

M4

M4 is expressed in Figure 6

strong, light materials lie near the top of

the figure.

(0)

keep in mind that minimizing wall

thickness is an important objective. Since

small values of wall thickness indicate

high numbers of yield stress, we try to

maximize yield stress for our material.

Thus, another material selection criterion

would be to maximize index M3.

M3 y

Materials

Based on these material indices,

carbon fiber is chosen for the fuselage

structure.

(0)

16

considerably, to around 0.43kg. Thus, the

motor must be designed to fit into a tube

with a diameter of approximately 0.09m.

Propeller Shaft

A cylindrical shaft in the tail end of

the fuselage interior will connect the

propeller and the motor. Conventionally,

the shaft is 1/20 of the fuselage diameter.

We will perform calculations of torsion to

determine the minimum size that is

required of a shaft of carbon fiber.

The total torque created by the

propeller is approximately 5330 Nm; this

is calculated by the force generated by

the propeller, taking all three blades into

account. Using the Tresca yield criterion,

where max=y/2, we use equation ( 0) for

maximum shear stress to find an optimum

shaft radius.

max

Material/

Section

Surfac

e Area

(m2)

Thickne

ss (m)

Densi

ty

(kg/m

3

)

Total

Mass

(kg)

Carbon Fiber

Fuselage

0.827

0.0005

1500

0.6203

Wing

1.200

variable

1500

0.6000

Tail

0.125

0.0005

1500

0.0938

Shaft

n/a

n/a

1500

0.4300

Propeller

n/a

n/a

1500

0.6000

Aluminum

c3

2

(0)

Fuselage

0.827

0.0001

2700

0.2233

Wing

1.200

variable

2700

0.3600

Tail

0.125

0.0001

2700

0.0338

Polished Aluminum

in a shaft diameter of approximately

0.0712m. Performing weight calculations

based on density, we find that using the

given diameter, the shaft will weigh 6kg

this exceeds our initial weight constraint.

We further continue our shaft analysis by

making the shaft hollow.

Fuselage

0.827

0.0001

n/a

Wing

1.200

0.0001

n/a

Tail

0.125

0.0001

n/a

Negligi

ble

Negligi

ble

Negligi

ble

0.0007

2500

0.0151

Fuselage

0.009

Honeycomb floor

0.1000

TOTA

L

2.9761

C2

C1

Keeping the structure stable and

lightweight is crucial for the UAV. Overall

structural weight is based on the surface

area and material thicknesses. The UAV

can be divided into three sections, being

the tail, wing, and fuselage.

Each of

these three sections will have three layers

of materialthe external thermal layer

and inner aluminum core layer each being

0.1mm thick, and the structural carbon

fiber layer being 0.5mm thick. Because

the polished aluminum is merely a surface

finish, the total mass is considered

negligible. Weight is therefore calculated

as the product of the surface area, the

thickness, and the density of the material.

A small area of glass fiber, to

accommodate the LIDAR instrument at

the base of the fuselage, is noted.

Including the shaft and propeller as part

The equation for maximum shear stress is

now illustrated in equations ( 0)-( 0).

max

J

Tc 2

J

4

4

c2 c1

2

(0)

(0)

Performing

calculations,

we

achieve a shaft radius of approximately

0.03m. For a safety factor of 2, this will

increase to approximately 0.0815m. The

mass is still too large, at around 1.73 kg.

It is therefore necessary to decrease the

length of the shaft to around 0.25m, in

17

structure of 2.97kg. Note Table 4 for

specific weights.

3.

Materials

Structures Conclusion

For our given structure, bending

moment and buckling analysis is done on

the wing, in addition to pressure vessel

analysis on the fuselage.

We can

therefore verify that our structure is both

stable and soundthe wing will not yield

nor buckle and the fuselage will not break

given our dimensions. Our total structure

weight achieved is approximately 3 kg.

Introduction:

The electrical and systems subteam concentrates on mapping the

topography

of Mars given

weight

parameters set by the structural subteam.

An electrical system needs to

power and control the plane, as well as

gather topographical data and flight

information. Listing flight-critical sensors

and data-gathering equipment is the first

step in the design process. We compile a

chart of mass and power consumption

based on initial trade studies, then

consider instrument networks to provide

data storage and distribution capabilities.

Once a general idea of equipment and

power supply forms, we reduce mass in

light of flight time optimization by using

lighter and more energy efficient sensors

along with more advanced energy

sources.

The

overall

mass

for

the

instruments is 7.80 kg with an energy

consumption of 459 watt-hours.

4.

Manufacturer &

Functio Power

Product Name

n

Aeroflex RadHard

MCU

0.48 W

UT80CRH196KDS

Aeroflex ACT5108

Motor

0.2 W

RadHard Motor Driver

Cognex MVS-8100D

Video

3W

Digital Frame Grabber

DSP Arch. DSP24 24-bit

Comm

2.48 W

HP Digital Signal

Processor

Aeroflex UT28F256 LV

Memory

1.5 W

PROM

SEAKR NV-CPCI NonMemory

3W

Volatile, Solid-State

FLASH

transit and on Mars.

5. All wiring will be shielded to

prevent

electromagnetic

interference

and

to

reduce

transmission losses.

6. The mean-time-to-failure (MTF) of

all instruments is much greater

than the expected duration of the

mission, which includes transit

time and time spent on Mars.

Constraints:

The following constraints are

imposed on the design of the UAV based

on current technologies and design

methodologies:

Assumptions:

The following assumptions are

made in the design of the UAV electrical

systems:

1.

2.

NASA. This will enable direct lineof-sight communication with the

UAV at all times.

All instruments are customizable

for

the

UAV

and

Martian

environment. Electronics will be

radiation-hardened

to

ensure

adequate

performance

during

the UAV is greater than 0C.

There are no directional magnetic

fields present to adversely affect

navigation.

18

1.

2.

3.

must be less than 8 kg to

accommodate the aerodynamic

and structural constraints listed

earlier.

The

data

rate

used

for

communications is limited to 480

MB/hr based on a two-antenna

design and UHF frequencies.

The oxygen-deficient atmosphere

prevents the efficient use of fuelcells as a potential power source

Instrument Selection:

Error: Reference source not found

lists the UAV instruments and their

respective mass, power consumption,

operating temperatures, and physical

dimensions.

The following sections discuss the

trade-offs and specifications for each

instrument. Important sections such as

power management, communication, and

navigation are considered in more detail

followed by a high-level block diagram of

the system.

Table 5: Micro-controller

Instrumentation

Microcontroller Unit and Memory:

19

comprise the main micro-controller unit.

All circuit components are radiationhardened to at least 300 Krads during the

fabrication, design, and layout processes

to ensure they perform as expected after

a three to six month transit period and

during the two hour mission on Mars.

Electronic circuits are exposed to

approximately 1.75 Krads[Si]/year in

space when shielded with 50 mils of

aluminum, with a slightly higher number

(10 krads[Si]) during solar storms.

Therefore,

the

radiation-hardened

components are capable of withstanding

several years of exposure without sideeffects.

However,

radiation-hardening

requires larger layout footprints and more

conservative transistor designs, resulting

in slower switching speeds and larger

areas compared to commercial designs.

The trade-offs are improved durability in

harsh-environments and lower power

consumption due to lower transistor

densities - both of which are critical

factors in the UAV design.

The UT80 MCU is a 16-bit

microcontroller designed to run on 20

MHz clock and industry-standard MCS-96

RTR

architecture,

which

ensures

compatibility of out-sourced software

design. The 1 KB of internal SRAM is

insufficient for all sensor and image data;

therefore, the UT28F256 PROM and

SEAKR FLASH external memory are

added

to

augment

data-storage

capabilities. The UT28F256 external LV

PROM adds an additional 256 KB of nonvolatile memory, which is used to

primarily

store

the

temperature,

pressure, acceleration, and gyroscope

sensor data using a sample rate of once

per second. The SEAKR NV-CPCI FLASH

chip allows for 1 GB of non-volatile

Sensor Type

ADXL150/105

Quantit

y

3/3

Total Bits

Mbps and 3 W of power dissipation. The

FLASH chip will be primarily used to

store high-resolution images and LIDAR

data. Table 12 lists the properties and

memory bits required for each sensor and

camera type. Extra bits are required for

the Endevo pressure sensors to provide

the required 8.62 mV/psi sensitivity.

Similarly, due to the aerodynamic

precision required once in flight, at least

10-bits of resolution is needed for the

gyroscope and accelerometer data in

order to resolve the analog output.

Given the memory requirements

listed in table 12 below, the Aeroflex

UT28F256 LV PROM can store over

twelve thousand data sets given a sample

rate of once per second and 22 bytes per

set. This allows for over two hours of

storage time, which is adequate given the

current mission specifications.

The

SEAKR FLASH chip is also able to store

hundreds of images at any one time. In

order to ensure a timely and accurate

transfer of data to orbiting satellites, a

first-in-first-out (FIFO) queue structure

will be implemented in memory where old

data will be transmitted first. Software

programs, such as navigation algorithms

and communications protocol will be

stored on the internal SRAM to allow for

faster data-transfer rates to the MCU

registers.

LIDAR and Camera:

The LIDAR unit, provided by

General Atomics, includes a frequencydoubled Nd:YAG pulse laser, dual

microchannel

plate

CCD

detector,

scanning

mirror,

and

light-weight

collection lens required for numerous

high-resolution images.

The unit is

located in the nose of the UAV. In order

to provide maximum coverage of the

landscape, the scanning mirror, powered

by a low-power DC motor, provides a fast

horizontal scanning motion at several

thousand points per scan. Based on the

method developed by Lathrop et al., the

CCD detector gathers all of the reflected

laser intensity per scan. A horizontal

resolution of much better than two meters

is possible with this unit, which is a

significant improvement over the LIDAR

60 bits @ 10-bits

each

ADXRS150/300

3/3

60 bits @ 10-bits

each

Endevo 32394

2

24-bits @ 12-bits

each

Motorola

1

8-bits @ 8-bits

MPXV5004G6U

each

ADT7317

2

20 bits @ 10-bits

each

20

ThermalTab RTD

1

10-bits @ 10-bits

each

Total

18

182 bits (22

Table 6: Memory allocation bytes)

and data storage for distributed sensor package

by General Atomics provides a resolution

of 320x320 pixels at 4 bits/pixel and a

total of 50 kB/scan.

The Cognex CDC-100 HiRes CCD

provides 1280x1024 resolution at 8

bits/pixel of color with no compression,

which requires a total of 1.25 MB/photo.

The CCD interfaces with the Cognex

MVS-8100D listed in Table 5.

hundreds of nanometer wavelengths for

lasers implies that the energies cannot be

precisely targeted from the orbit.

We attempt using fuel cells in the

third alternative.

The fuel cell is an

aspiring future technology that generates

a very high energy per mass value.

However,

all

existing

fuel

cell

technologies require the use of hydrogen

and oxygen for the generation of electric

current.

On the other hand, Mars is

dominated by CO2, nitrogen, and argon.

One solution to the paucity of hydrogen

and

oxygen

is

to

bring

along

pressurized/refrigerated

gas

tanks;

another solution is to produce oxygen via

compressing CO2 in the manner of the

Mars In-situ Propellant Production (MIP).

As for now, the weight and size of

a custom MIP device is not readily

available, nor has it made for rapid

collection of CO2 (only at night and low

temperatures of around 200 K) although

an 8.5 kg, 40cm x 24cm x 25cm device

has already been demonstrated.

A fuel cell system will require the

following components to carry the

necessary hydrogen and oxygen onboard

the UAV:

Power Management:

Initial energy source selections for

the UAV consist of (1) solar cells, (2)

alternative electromagnetic sources, (3)

fuel cells, and/or (4) batteries. The

primary requirement for these energy

sources is to provide adequate energy to

on-board instruments and motor, specified

by a minimum of 460 W for one hour.

Moreover, they must function within

Martian atmosphere; that is, they must

function

despite

various

gas

compositions, temperatures, distances

from the sun, and other factors. They

must also be optimized in light of the ratio

kilowatt-hour (energy) per kilogram.

Trade-off analysis for the various

selections shows that, first, solar cells do

not provide enough required energy for

flight alone or regeneration. This fact is

expressed by a specific area of 263 W for

1 m2 of a solar panel with a Martian

efficiency of 28%, yielding only 73 W/m2.

Note that given a wingspan of around 2 m

x 0.5 m, only 73 W can be achieved from a

full solar cell array. Additionally, since

the energy per mass value is only 32.2

W/kg after Martian considerations, the

extra mass might as well be spent on

batteries

or

fuel

cells

without

regeneration.

The second alternative suggests

implementing a land microwave or laser

electromagnetic targeting source to beam

energy towards the UAV while it is in

flight. The reason for the rejection of this

alternative is simple there is no

guarantee that any form of a land station

will be available for this purpose, while

satellites are too far away to be able to

transmit

and

pinpoint

at

these

wavelengths accurately. The 0.3 cm-30

insulation

Fuel

cell

pressurization

maintenance

(or

even

refrigeration) system

Fuel cell array and delivery

Control system

fills 11 liters at 0C and 1 atm. In order

to reduce the volume of the tank to

reasonable levels, we can try to

pressurize the volume to around 2.2 liters

at 5 atm on a Martian surface pressure of

0.01 atm, which is a very generous

pressurization value. If the temperature

in the fuel tanks can be maintained at

around -100C, via simple insulation and

without extra refrigeration cycles, the

volume can fall to around 1.4 liters for 1

gram, or 0.7143 g/liter or 0.7143 kg/m3.

Given that we have at most 0.008

m3, or a 20cm x 20cm x 20cm, volume

available for a H2 tank, 5.7 mg of H2 is

21

10% of the wingspan and nearly 82% of

the maximum fuselage area. Now

consider that 1 kg of H2 gives 86 MJ of

energy, which means that multiplying 5.7

mg by 86 MJ/kg we will have 491 kJ, or

around 137 Whr, which is still less than

the best batteries (>200 Whr) at the cost

of a much larger volume.

This

result

only

takes

into

consideration the hydrogen tank.

The

oxygen tank adds to another part of the

fuselage, and is usually larger without

liquefaction. Moreover, pressurization

requires an entire system of compressors

with the addition of extra volume. The

same volume concern holds if a

refrigeration system is used.

As the

volume tradeoff shows, fuel cells without

the best pressurization are not optimal for

an aircraft of this size, even if the mass

required for the energy supply is small.

Until the Mars In-situ Propellant

Production can provide immediate oxygen

production, or until the volume can be

drastically reduced by using absorption

material or other Martian gases like

nitrogen, fuel cells for the UAV will have

to hold.

Lithium

ion

Solid

Polymer

Electrolyte (SPE) is the best contender

among these existing technologies.

It

provides the highest energy density,

around 1.5 to 2 times more than the

currently existing Lithium-ion battery

technology. The sample that we have

chosen is under development by Ultralife

since 2001, and is a feasible power source

due to its non-atmospheric requirements.

A

simple

calculation

at

an

allowance of 4.2 kg gives 1050 Whr, while

the volume of the battery is around 400

Wh/liter or 400 kWh/m3; 1050 Whr yields

0.0026 m3 of theoretical battery space, or

around 14cm x 14cm x 14cm of volume.

Compared to fuel cells, the given massvolume tradeoff is extremely reasonable

for our considerations.

Navigation:

The absence of magnetic poles

makes navigation on Mars particularly

difficult without a GPS-like system. Since

the flight of the UAV will be decided upon

in advance and, in general, will be

relatively direct across the surface of

Mars, the UAV can take advantage of its

on-board sensors such as accelerometers

and gyroscopes to detect any deviations

from its path. Such sensors should be

sufficient to ensure that the UAV stays on

course once it has begun its flight path.

However, for the UAV to begin on the

correct flight path our design requires

additional sensors.

The photovoltaic compass (PV or

sun compass), based on InGaP/GaAs/Ge

technologies, can be used in the initial

state of the planes launch to detect the

proper orientation of the plane relative to

the sun. Precise knowledge of the launch

area on Mars will make it possible to

know what the proper angle to the sun

should be and this can be checked by the

PV compass throughout the flight. The

design of the PV compass is based on 26

small rectangular Triple-Junction solar

cells that are arranged in an octagonalcylinder fashion where the inward facing

cells form the walls and bottom of the

cylinder. The top surface is covered by

anti-reflective fused Silica industrialgrade glass that has a low refraction

coefficient relative to the Martian

Batteries:

Batteries are by far the more

convenient

and

readily

available

technology compared to fuel cells, and

require no peripheral equipment at a

much more compact volume. A variety of

battery types are commercially available

and under development, as listed in Table

7 below:

Name

Lead

Acid

NiMH

Li+

NaS

Li+ SPE

kWh/k

g

0.035

0.07

0.15

0.11

0.25

energy/mass ratios

Mass

and

Considerations:

Containment

22

thermal expansion. The glass part of the

PV compass will be exposed to the

Martian atmosphere at the top of the

UAVs fuselage without altering the

laminar flow over the UAV.

Incident

sunlight will enter the PV compass and

strike certain solar cells. Based on the

current produced by each cell we can

determine the angle of the incident

sunlight and thus the angle to the sun.

checking

the

gyroscopes.

and

Communication:

In

order

to

transmit

the

information gathered by the array of

sensors aboard the UAV, we have included

three UHF patch transceiver antennas in

our design. Only two of these antennas

will be operating at any one time, with the

third antenna serving as a back-up. We

estimate the power requirement of two

antennas to be 15 W with a total mass of

0.75 kg for the three antennas.

One

antenna will be one on each wing with the

third on top of the fuselage. The patch

antennas have a flat profile which can

further be reduced by placing them into

indentations in the surface structure.

These particular antennas are

compatible with existing satellite/rover

communications equipment. Rather than

attempt to transmit directly to Earth, we

assumed that the UAV would be operating

in an environment where there would be

multiple opportunities to transmit data to

Mars-orbit satellites. By avoiding direct

transmission to Earth, we save power and

thus weight aboard the UAV. Also, we

reduce the probability of corrupting the

transmitted signal.

If the UAV could

continuously transmit to a satellite, our

communications uplink capability would

be 8 MB/min per antenna. Implementing

this design with only the current satellites

orbiting Mars, the Odyssey and the Global

Surveyor, would permit one 8 minute

window during the flight to transmit all of

our data, which would have to be limited

to 64 MB.

A future satellite communications

infrastructure

around

Mars

would

increase the value of the UAVs mission

by allowing for the transmission of higher

resolution images.

Furthermore, this

network of communications satellites

could serve as the backbone of a

navigational system for this and other

missions to Mars.

With this design, we can detect

26 of incidence across each solar cell

and can determine the angle to the sun

with high precision based off of partially

lit cells.

One shortcoming of the PV

compass, however, is the ambiguity of

direction that remains when the sun is

90 mm

215mm

37 mm

accelerometers

37 mm

37 mm

avoided ahead of time by taking this

problem into consideration when planning

the flight location and time.

Another

complication is that our measurements

are accurate only when the UAV is flying

parallel to the Martian surface.

This

means that measurements made during

ascent/descent or turbulent flight should

be discarded. Fortunately we will ensure

that the PV compass is used only when

the plane is in the proper orientation by

Software:

Software will be written in a

combination of C and Assembly based on

industry-standard

MCS-96

RTR

instruction set architecture.

External

23

state diagrams clocked at 20 MHz and

located on a separate board near the DC

LIDAR

Software

Antenna

Txmitter

DAC

Rxver

ADC

Mechanical

Transducers

Hi-Res

Camera

ADC

Video

MEM

Card

MCU

DSP

DAC

DSP

DAC

Left Wing

DAC

Txmitter

ADC

Rxver

Mechanical

Transducers

Right Wing

ADC

Sensor

Package

Antenna

Solar

Compass

ADC

DAC

DC Motor

Controller

Tail

Controller

Batteries

DC Electric Engine

Propeller

Mechanical

Transducers

eighteen

separate

interrupt

service

routines (ISRs) such as the timer

COMPARE interrupt and UART RXC

interrupt.

A real-time microcontroller

operating system can be used to provide

near-instantaneous responses to external

events.

All software packages will

conform to current IEEE Code of Ethics

and ACM standards.

throughout the UAVs fuselage to provide

maximum coverage. The batteries are

regulated with a separate controller chip

and a series of DC-DC converters to

maintain

the

voltage

and

provide

adequate Vcc for the various components.

Block Diagram:

Figure 9 shows the high-level

block diagram of the electrical systems.

The central microcontroller unit contains

all the components listed in Table 5

24

accelerometers, gyroscopes, and a

photovoltaic

compass.

Microcontrollers and the associated

software will process sensor data to

check for deviations from flight path

and will implement the necessary

corrective flight adjustments.

For

communication between the UAV and

Mars-orbit satellites we have, for

redundantly, chosen three UHF patch

transceiver

antennas

that

can

continuously transmit data produced

by the UAV instrumentation. Finally, a

power supply consisting of multiple

lithium-ion SPE batteries will be

responsible

for

powering

the

instrumentation and propeller motor.

Lightweight batteries are chosen upon

detailed consideration of watt-hours

per kg of all potential power sources

including solar cells.

Due to the constraints of time

and expertise, our UAV design has

excluded discussion of the induced roll

due to a propeller. Furthermore, we

have not specified an exact design for

the contours of propeller itself. These

elements of aircraft design are

extremely complex and exceed the

expertise of the team. Additionally,

power supply imposes limitations on

flight duration. In the future it is

possible that potential power supplies,

which we have also explored, will

improve to a point where they are

feasible for use on an unmanned

Martian aircraft, extending its flight

duration. Despite our omissions, we

our confident that the teams UAV

design is an optimal solution with

existing technologies and will provide

a reliable platform for Martian

exploration.

Conclusion

Throughout the design process,

the Odysseus Team has striven to

maximize the versatility of its UAV

proposal. The team optimizes factors

such as mass, power, speed, and flight

duration to devise an aircraft that will

meet the demands of a Martian

scouting mission. The product of such

systematic and collaborative design

process is a 10.8 kg aircraft that can

fly unaided by a human controller for

2.3 hours at 130 m/s and a cruising

altitude of 500 meters with a

maximum flight range exceeding 1000

km. Equipped with topographical and

imaging instrumentation, such a UAV

will be able to produce the detailed

information necessary for future

manned missions to Mars.

The UAV blueprint outlined in

this paper includes a 2.1-meter long

fuselage, a 0.25-meter maximum

diameter for the fuselage, and a

2.078-meter wingspan. The design of

such

components

takes

into

consideration low atmospheric density

which causes reduced lift and drag.

The dimension of wingspan is the

result of detailed lift and airfoil

analysis. To propel the UAV in an

atmosphere that lacks the necessary

amount of oxygen for combustion we

have chosen a single 2.27-meter

diameter propeller mounted aft of an

inverted V-tail. The decision to use an

inverted V-tail is the result of a

compromise between the higher

control stability but higher drag of a

conventional tail and the lower drag

but lower control stability of a V-tail.

To control the UAV flight path we have

designed a feedback system

25

References

Aeroflex UTMC. (2002, December). UT28F256LV Radiation-Hardened 32Kx8

PROM.

Aeroflex UTMC. (2003, May). UT80CRH196KDS Microcontroller Datasheet.

Aeroflex UTMC. (2003, May). ACT5108 & ACT5109 3-Phase Brushless DC Motor

Drivers.

Aircraft Design & Aeroflightdyanmics Group (ADAG). Aircraft Designed at DPA.

Retrieved February 20, 2004

from http://www.dpa.unina.it/adag/eng/aircraft-design.htm

Anderson, J.D. (2000). Introduction to Flight (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill

Companies, Inc.

Archer, R.D. (1996). Introdution to Aerospace Propulsion. Upper Saddle River, NJ:

Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Artemis Society International. (2001). Artemis Project: Hydrogen-Oxygen Fuel

Cells for Lunar Habitat Energy Storage. Retrieved from

http://www.asi.org/adb/04/03/03/h2power.html

Ashby, M. & Cebon, D. (1996). Case Studies in Materials Selection. Retrieved October 2003 from

http://www.analog.com.

Beer F. & Johnston, R. (2001). Mechanics of Materials (3rd ed). New York, NY:

McGraw-Hill.

Borst, H.V. (1973). Summary of Propeller Design Procedures and Data (Vol. 1).

Springfield, VA: National Technical

Information Service.

Cesarone, R., Hastrup, R., Bell, D., Lyons, D., & Nelson, K.. Architectural Design for

a Mars Communication & Navigation

Orbital Infrastructure, AAS 99-300.

Cognex. (2001). MVS-8100 Datasheet.

Cognex. (2002). CDC Series Digital Machine Vision Cameras..

http://www.cognex.com.

Darooka, D.K. & Jensen D.W. Advanced Space Structure Concepts and Their

Development, AIAA-2001-1257

http://www.ilcdover.com/WebDocs/AdvStct.pdf

DSP Architectures. (2004, January). RHDSP24 Radiation Hardened Scalable DSP

Chip.

EADS Space Transportation. (2003). EADS Space Propulsion. Retrieved October

27, 2003 from

http://cs.space.eads.net/sp/

Edie, D. & Buckley, J. (1993). Carbon-Carbon Materials and Composites. USA:

William Andrew Publishing.

26

EG&G Services Parsons, Inc. (2000, October). Fuel Cell Handbook (5th ed).

Retrieved from

http://www.fuelcells.org/fchandbook.pdf.

Endevco, Inc.. (2003). Silicon MEMS Pressure Sensor, Model 32394.

http://www.endevco.com/

Ezell, E.C., & Ezell, L.N. (1984). On Mars: Exploration of the Red Planet, 19581978. Washington, DC: NASA

Hall, D., Tsai, K.C., Galbraith, D., & Parks, R.W. (1997). Conceptual Design of the

Full-Scale Vehicle Propulsion

System Concept. Airplane for Mars Exploration.

NASA/Ames Research Center, CA: David Hall Consulting.

Hepperle, M. (2004). Aerodynamics for Model Aircraft. Retrieved February 18,

2004 from http://www.mh- aerotools.de/airfoils/index.htm

Hexweb. (2004). Hexweb: Honeycomb Attributes and Properties. Retrieved

February 20, 2004 from

http://www.hexcelcomposites.com/Markets/Products/Honeycomb/Hexweb_attrib/hw_

p11.htm

James, D. (2003). NASA Quest: Atmospheric Flight. Retrieved November 2003 from

http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/aero/planetary/atmospheric/structure.html

Kaplan, D.I. et al. (2000). In-Situ Propellant Production on Mars: The First Flight

Demonstration. Retrieved from

http://powerweb.grc.nasa.gov/pvsee/publications/mars/MIP_LPSC.html

Kroo, I. & Shevell, R.S. (2003). Aircraft Design: Synthesis and Analysis. Stanford,

CA: Desktop Aeronautics, Inc.

Retrieved February 21, 2004 from

http://adg.stanford.edu/aa241/AircraftDesign.html

Lathrop, J., Snider, R., Becraft, W., Doll, D., & Cianciotto, F. UAV and LIDAR Mine

Detection in the Surf Zone: Operational Considerations. General Atomics

Aeronautical Systems, Inc.

Mason, L. (2000). Prototype Solar Panel Development and Testing for a Mercury

Orbiter Spacecraft. AIAA-2000-2881. Cleveland,

OH: NASA Glenn Research

Center.

Morton, O. (1999, December). MarsAir: How to build the first extraterrestrial

airplane. Air & Space Magazine, Vol. 14. Retrieved October 28, 2003 from

http://quest.nasa.gov/aero/planetary/MarsAir.html

Motorola, Inc.. (2004). http://www.motorola.com.

Mueller, T.J. (1985). Low Reynolds Number Vehicles. AGARDograph, No. 288.

Murray, J.E. & Tartabini, P.V. (2001). Development of a Mars Airplane Entry,

Descent, and Flight Trajectory. Retrieved October 2003 from AIAA.

Nice, K. (2003). How Fuel Cells Work. How Stuff Works. Retrieved October 20,

2003 from

http://science.howstuffworks.com/fuel-cell.htm

27

Domicone Printing Services.

Ralph, E.L. & Linder, E.B. (1996, May 13). Advanced Solar Panel Designs. IEEE

Xplore Journal. 25th PVSC. Washington D.C.

Raymer, D.P. (1999). Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach (3rd ed.). Reston, VA:

AIAA Education Series.

SEAKR Engineering, Inc. (2002, October). NV-CPCI Non-Volatile Compact PCI

Memory Card.

Shevell, R.S. (1989). Fundamentals of Flight (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:

Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Stackhouse, D. (1999, January). Conventional vs V-Tails. Charles River Radio

Controllers. Retrieved March 5, 2004 from

http://www.charlesriverrc.org/articles/design/donstackhouse_conventionalvsvtail.ht

m

Stanford Audio Phonic Photographic Infra Red Experiment. (1995, February 22).

Space Environmental Study. Retrieved

from

http://students.cec.wustl.edu/~sapphire/design/log/spacenv.html

Stevens, B.L., & Lewis F.L. (2003). Aircraft Control and Simulation (2nd ed.).

Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Teofilo, V. L., Brown, R., & Cuellar, E.A. (2001). Advanced Lithium Ion Solid Polymer Electrolyte

Battery Development.

United States Department of Energy. (2004, January 15). Energy Savers: Electric

Vehicle Batteries. Retrieved from

http://www.eere.energy.gov/consumerinfo/factsheets/fa1.html.

28

- Spacecraft Propulsion SystemsHochgeladen vonMarcus Skookumchuck Vannini
- wecsHochgeladen vonRajaraman Kannan
- Hybrid AircraftHochgeladen vonsubha_aero
- Airfield Models - Step-By-Step Radio Control Model Aircraft DesignHochgeladen vonGanesh Nandgaonkar
- Mae 331 Lecture 5Hochgeladen vonmrslayerdude
- 20-Final Report.pdfHochgeladen vonAnvesh Ananthula
- Aerodynamic Optimization of a Morphing Airfoil UsingHochgeladen vonSanthosh Mamidala
- design Aircraft Structure 1Hochgeladen vonAbdelsamie Ali
- Mechanics of Fluids r05220302Hochgeladen vonNizam Institute of Engineering and Technology Library
- Lift and Drag Report - PRINTHochgeladen vonJoel Forbes
- Rocket Propulsion Google SearchHochgeladen vonManish Patwari
- Aircraft MaintenanceHochgeladen vonSenthil Kumar
- Akif LabReport CpDistributionOfAerofoil 4Hochgeladen vonDurai Raj Kumar
- smac_ja_10Hochgeladen vonAmir Parvaz
- Landing of an airplane.pdfHochgeladen vonJason Ross
- C.9.1047Hochgeladen vonpete pans
- Art23Hochgeladen vonblueavian
- Pereira_2014_J._Phys.%3A_Conf._Ser._555_012082Hochgeladen vonomar
- CFD probHochgeladen vonPiyush Jagasia
- Www.eng.Cu.edu.Eg Users Mkhalil PDFs Exp1Hochgeladen vonNivesh Agarwal
- 4. How Do Wings Work Part 1Hochgeladen vonVelluto Khod
- IPCSandia.pdfHochgeladen voncelestra
- New Microsoft Office Word DocumentHochgeladen vonBojanapu Manikanta
- Carbonated Drink and Menthol Chewy Dragee Mixture as Alternative Rocket LauncherHochgeladen vonMarlenePanganiban
- Official NASA Communication 90-006Hochgeladen vonNASAdocuments
- 80701675Hochgeladen vonseptia
- Flow Over Immersed BodiesHochgeladen vonTalha Mohsin
- Modeling and Simulation of Liquid Propellant Rocket Engine Transient Performance Using ModelicaHochgeladen vonmichael angelo
- farag2016Hochgeladen vonAgesy Siswari
- Aerodynamics_Design_of_a_Motor_Tricycle.pdfHochgeladen vonHamdi Aslan

- Liquid Rocket Propulsion InstabilitiesHochgeladen vonhindaputra374
- UAV Course SyllabusHochgeladen vonhindaputra374
- CAN SAT BUILDING & ROCKET CONSTRUCTION DetailspptxHochgeladen vonhindaputra374
- Mikoyan MiGHochgeladen vonhindaputra374
- Excel GraphingHochgeladen vonjkeelen
- A Great Chat DiscussionHochgeladen vonhindaputra374
- Code of Federal Regulations for Launch OperatorsHochgeladen vonhindaputra374
- Шведский аналогHochgeladen vonhindaputra374

- Axillary Dissection Versus No Axillary Dissection1Hochgeladen vonsfira_adriana
- EligibilityHochgeladen vonVinod Kumar
- Compendium for LandHochgeladen vonkailasasundaram
- ReidBar Design Guide 2008_RHochgeladen vonToan Pham
- Assignment LSCMHochgeladen vonSuvojit Banerjee
- Thermoacoustic TechnologyHochgeladen vonRitesh
- Landslides Geology LectureHochgeladen vonRehan Hakro
- weale1983Hochgeladen vonAbdelrahman M. Alnweiri
- Excavation & BackfillingHochgeladen vonnidhinboban
- PRS3026 DS8000 High Availability Best Practices Speaker Notes V1R15 20091007Hochgeladen vonCarmelo Escribano Sen
- Cur So ArduinoHochgeladen vonjoselealca
- Jurnal.docxHochgeladen vonAan Nak Borneo
- Meise-AUC2008Hochgeladen vonklomps_jr
- periodontal Ligament Stem Cells the Regeneration FrontHochgeladen vonOana Ilie
- astro1.pdfHochgeladen vonAshokupadhye1955
- Sample NumericalsHochgeladen vonUpkar Chandra
- 46.Tier1.pdfHochgeladen vonbandhuarushi
- Airplane Turn-T ImesHochgeladen voninitiative1972
- SURGE_CONTROL_(OP).pptHochgeladen vonmessallam
- HW7 AnswerHochgeladen vonAriel Wang
- Discomfort GlareHochgeladen vonfmtzvargas
- Olive GREEN –How to Cook FishHochgeladen vonahmet yavas
- Manufacturing AR ARC TCS Helps Cummins MES 0412Hochgeladen vonVignesh Rajaram
- Aptitude Test q.paperHochgeladen vonSarayu Nagarajan
- Urushibara Style AmphetamineHochgeladen vonUmakanthan Kanagaratnam
- Abarth 500 2012 Misc Documents Warranty BookletsHochgeladen vonMusaHamzic
- 39930201 SPD E04 Zoning of Hazardous AreasHochgeladen vonMahdy Maziny
- The Physiology of Mechanical VentilationHochgeladen vonMB
- 8PS2B_May the Force Be With YouHochgeladen vonKameshvra
- 210ts ManualHochgeladen vontreqw