Report 2

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design
Mechanical Design Project I - ENGI 7926 - Report #2

Prepared By: No Time for Crash Talk
(Lucas Groves, Neal Pearcey Osvaldo Cuello, Doug Pratt, Greg Doucet, Himanshu
Ragtah)
Date: July 15, 2016
Prepared for:
Dr. Luc Rolland
&
Memorial University of Newfoundland Engineering
Prepared by:
Lucas G., Neal P., Osvaldo C., Doug P., Greg D., Himanshu R.
201214350, 201232345, 201134079, 200931582, 201104353, 201205887
July 15, 2016
Table of Contents
1
Introduction ............................................................................................. 1
Undercarriage Analysis (Lucas) (3 Page) ............................................. 2

2.1
Front Portion of Undercarriage ....................................................... 2
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
Design Considerations .......................................................................................... 2

Original Concept Deviation ................................................................................... 2
Design Validation .................................................................................................. 3
Possible Design Optimizations ............................................................................. 3
2.2
Rear Portion of Undercarriage........................................................ 4
2.2.1
2.2.2
Design Considerations .......................................................................................... 4

Possible Design Optimizations and Deviations .................................................... 4
Wing Analysis ......................................................................................... 5

3.1
Design Considerations ................................................................... 5
3.2
Wing Dimension Analysis ............................................................... 5
3.3
Airfoil Analysis ................................................................................ 6
3.4
Wing Concept Selection ................................................................. 7
Fuselage Analysis................................................................................... 7
4.1
Distribution of weights .................................................................... 7
4.2
Fuselage Layout ............................................................................. 8
4.3
Drag ............................................................................................... 8
Empennage Analysis ............................................................................ 10

5.1
Stability Calculations .................................................................... 11
Materials Considerations and Manufacturability ............................... 13

6.1
Choice of Materials....................................................................... 13
6.2
Material Testing ............................................................................ 14
6.3
Structural Reinforcement .............................................................. 16
6.4
Manufacturability .......................................................................... 16
6.4.1
Economics and Cost ........................................................................................... 17
Model Airplane Prototype .................................................................... 18
Management Plans and Project Completion ...................................... 18
Conclusions .......................................................................................... 19
10
List of References ............................................................................. 21
Appendix A Wing Calculations ....................................................................... 22

Appendix B Gantt Chart & Description of Deliverables ................................ 23
i|Page
Appendix C DOW SM Foam Insulation Datasheet ......................................... 28

Appendix D Flexural Strength Results for Expanded Polystyrene .............. 30
Appendix E Flexural Strength Results for Extruded Polystyrene ................ 33
Appendix F XLFR5 Data................................................................................... 39
ii | P a g e
Figures
Figure 1 Front Portion of Landing Gear Prototype ............................................. 2
Figure 2 Von Mises Stress for Landing Gear Impact ......................................... 3
Figure 3 Rear Portion of Landing Gear .............................................................. 4
Figure 4 Rear Portion of Landing Gear with Skid Highlighted ............................ 4
Figure 5 E193, E210 and S122 Airfoils. ............................................................. 6
Figure 6 Final Prototype of Airfoil ....................................................................... 7
Figure 7 Layout of Fuselage and Airplane Subsystems ..................................... 8
Figure 8 Different Types of Drag Experienced by an Airplane (Sadraey, 2009) 9
Figure 9 Fuselage Shapes and Potential Profiles (Sadraey, 2009) ................... 9
Figure 10 Twin Tail Type Design ..................................................................... 10
Figure 11 Preliminary FBD ............................................................................... 12
Figure 12 Final FBD of Plane ........................................................................... 12
Figure 13 FloraCraft Foam (left) and DOW Foam (right) ................................. 14
Figure 14 Flexural Test Configuration .............................................................. 14
Figure 15 Expanded Polystyrene Testing Results ........................................... 15
Figure 16 Extruded Polystyrene Testing Results ............................................. 15
Figure 17 Model Plane Prototype .................................................................... 18
Tables
Table 1 Impact Case .......................................................................................... 3
Table 2 Wing Dimension Concepts Chosen for Evaluation ................................ 6
Table 3 Summary of Airfoil Parameters for each Wing Concept ........................ 6
Table 4 Payloads for RC Plane .......................................................................... 7
Table 5 - Specimen Dimensions ......................................................................... 15
Table 6 - Construction Cost Estimate ................................................................. 17
iii | P a g e
1 Introduction
This report outlines the detailed design process of the system and sub-systems for
the aircraft design for team "No Time for Crash Talk". Additionally, material
selection and up-to-date economics is discussed along with the state of the overall
design project. A CAD model prototype is then provided to illustrate the aircraft
sub-systems integration. Any changes to the original design as outlined in the
previous report is also discussed and justified in this report.
The four main sub-systems investigated in this report are the undercarriage,
wings fuselage, and empennage. The report's outline allows each of these major
sub-systems to have its own section with relevant sub-sections. The goal of each
section is to discuss the design process undertaken by the team to determine
major aspects of the design. To do this, engineering analyses, principles,
calculations, and tests were completed to determine major design parameters. The
iterative process of design analysis to determine these parameters is critical for
mission success and seeks to ensure major design criteria such as aerodynamic
performance and structural integrity. Inclusive in each respective section includes
topics such as considerations for particular sub-system design, any deviation from
the original concept, design validation including testing and analyses, and possible
design optimization alternatives.
Following the discussion of the four major sub-systems detailed design
process, material considerations and manufacturability is discussed. This section
includes discussions of the material selection process, manufacturability
considerations, prototype construction planning, and up-to-date economic review.
A model airplane prototype section follows in which a CAD model for the
airplane prototype is illustrated and discussed. This section seeks to give the
reader a better overall understanding of the aircraft design with the integration of
the different parts and systems.
Finally, the report concludes with a management plans and project completion
section which discusses the current state of the project and outlines the future
steps to complete the design.
1|Page

2 Undercarriage Analysis (Lucas) (3 Page)
In the first phase of engineering design, it was decided that the airplanes undercarriage should
be taildragger type, with some form of suspension on the dragging part of the tail dragging
design. This concept has been retained in the second phase of engineering design, however,
the way in which it will actually be manufactured has been further analyzed.
2.1
Front Portion of Undercarriage
2.1.1 Design Considerations

In designing the landing gear structure, a number of considerations were examined. Firstly, the
material needed to be rigid enough to maintain its shape during airplane taxing on the test
runway. Secondly, it needed to be flexible enough to absorb airplane impact forces on landing.
A prototype design for the front portion of the landing gear was decided upon and can be seen
in Figure 1.
Figure 1 Front Portion of Landing Gear Prototype

The support structure will be fabricated such that the members are angled horizontal to the
horizon at 45 to allow for maximum stress absorption. A 2.75 mm hole will be made at the
bottom of the landing gear to allow for the wheels to be connected. In order to connect the
wheels, a plastic or metallic shaft will be inserted through the holes and fastened with the
wheels. The landing gear itself will be fastened to the bottom of the fuselage through a
removable clip mechanism. The project team decided that using adhesive to connect the
landing gear to the fuselage would not provide adequate support, and would not allow for reusability should the landing gear detach.
2.1.2 Original Concept Deviation
Originally, the landing gear was decided to be constructed out of acrylonitrile butadiene
styrene (ABS) through rapid-prototyping. The project team decided previously that rapidprototyping the landing gear parts would allow for significant ease of manufacturing. However,
further testing and examination determined that ABS might not be the appropriate material
choice for the landing gear. ABS is a rigid material which is well known for its excellent impact
resistance, low cost, and stiffness (Ecreativeworks, 2016). The main deciding factor in not
choosing ABS was its rigidity, which the project deemed would provide inappropriate shock
absorption in a landing gear structure. The project team decided instead on sheet aluminum
alloy, for its flexibility and high strength to weight properties.
2|Page

2.1.3 Design Validation
The front portion of the undercarriage should be able to support a large fraction of the
airplanes load. In order to ensure that the design is intrinsically safe, the front portion of the
undercarriage should be able to support a reasonable impact force imparted from the airplane
body. The lab group tested the strength of the landing gear design by imparting it to a
theoretical impact of a drop of 2 m. Table 1 shows the case that was used in impact force
analysis.
Table 1 Impact Case
Total Mass
1.5 kg
Drop Height
2m
Impact Velocity
6.26 m/s
Average Impact Force 294 N
A total mass of 1.5 kg would actually translate to a heavy airplane case. That is, from the
previous report, the weight of the airplane was estimated to be, at a maximum 1.5 kg. Using
this case for impact analysis, the parameters were input into a SolidWorks drop test simulation.
The Von Mises stresses from that simulation can be found in Figure 2
Figure 2 Von Mises Stress for Landing Gear Impact

Examining the Von Mises stress resulting from an impact force, the greatest displacement and
stresses occur lower on the support structure and closer to the wheels. The structure did not
fail in a worst case scenario where a heavier than normal plane drops dead at a height of 2 m
with no damping support from the dragging section, which supports that the landing gear
design is adequate.
2.1.4 Possible Design Optimizations
One possible design optimization for the front portion of the landing gear to make in the final
design would be to support the areas which undergo the highest deflection and stress with an
additional supporting member. Potentially, a spring could connect the two supports at the
highest deflection point to add additional support and shock absorption.
Additionally, the current design assumes that the stock size for the aluminum sheet will
be 1/16 thick. If the aluminum requires additional strength, the stock thickness can be
increased to 3/16 or 1/8. This design change would, however, increase the overall mass of
the landing gear and is undesirable.
3|Page

2.2
Rear Portion of Undercarriage
2.2.1 Design Considerations

In designing the rear portion of the landing gear, the tail dragging part, there were a number of
considerations which went into the prototype design. Firstly, the rear portion should be able to
support the rear of the fuselage such that the tail does not touch the ground. The rear portion
should also provide shock absorption, and therefore should not be entirely rigid. Also, the rear
part of the undercarriage should not be excessively heavy such that it causes unexpected
moments in the plane. A prototype of the read portion of the landing gear can be seen in
Figure 3.
Figure 3 Rear Portion of Landing Gear

The project team opted for a rear undercarriage design which is simple, and as such the
current prototype is nothing more than a U-shaped bracket which will attach to the rear of the
fuselage. Similar to the front portion, this section will be fabricated out of aluminum alloy. In
order to provide shock absorption, zip ties will be rolled up around the bracket to provide a
makeshift skid. The zip ties will be rolled densely such that they touch both the bottom of the
fuselage and the ground. To better understand the design that the project team chose on this
portion of the undercarriage, consider Figure 4, wherein the red loops would be densely
packed zip ties.
Figure 4 Rear Portion of Landing Gear with Skid Highlighted

2.2.2 Possible Design Optimizations and Deviations
One possible design optimization for the rear portion of the landing gear would be the method
of shock absorption which is used. The project team chose zip ties due to their accessibility,
and perceived shock absorption benefits. That is, there are no metrics which exist on the
elastic properties of zip ties. Also, the actual shock absorption benefit from zip ties would vary
with the density in which they are packed on the bracket. Due to the low cost of zip ties, a
different type of shock absorption could be used in the final design if they are deemed
4|Page

ineffective. Some alternatives include thick wire coiled around the bracket, or a wide non-rigid
spring.
Due to the early stages of engineering design, and the lack of final dimensions, the design
of the current rear portion of the landing gear is a rough prototype. As information becomes
further developed and dimensions determined, the actual sizing of the bracket may vary
significantly. Depending on the variation in size and the type of shock absorption used, the
bracket may benefit from being fabricated out of a different material, or out of a thicker sheet
stock.
3
Wing Analysis
3.1 Design Considerations

As described in the projects first report, there are three main design considerations for the
planes wing. The first is ease of manufacturing. It was decided that the wing will have a flat
camber airfoil and a rectangular wing shape to reduce manufacturing difficulty such as tapering
the wings symmetrically on the tips and having to make the wings as two different pieces of
foam. The flat camber airfoil is also a simpler shape to make with a constant chord width. Also,
the flat camber airfoil has the advantage of having minimum sharp corners and thin cross
sections, making it possibly more tolerable of wear and tear from crashes during the testing
phase later this month.
The second and third major design considerations are the lift and drag generated by the
wings. Obviously for our payload design objectives a high lift is essential, and less drag will
increase our planes performance during the competition. The objective of this analysis section
is to choose wing dimensions and coefficients of lift and drag to maximize the planes lift,
minimize added weight and drag from the wing, and keep the design simple and sturdy for
manufacturing and testing.
3.2 Wing Dimension Analysis
The wings dimensions of course have are extremely important for the wings performance as
shown in the following equation:
1
= 2
2
Where FL is the force of lift generated by the plane, S is the wings surface area, V is the
speed of the airflow across the wings surface. The larger area chosen will proportionally
increase the lift. The wings chord length is also important as this will determine the Reynolds
number of the air flow across the wing.
To begin the analysis, twelve different combinations of wing areas and aspect ratios
(ARs) were created and compared for their relative weights, lengths and Reynolds number.
The range of areas were chosen such that the weight did not exceed 300 g, as this would take
too much away from the weight of the payload. The aspect ratio ranges were chosen based on
planes researched in the first report: those optimized for high lift and low speeds. These were
found to be typically 6 14. Of these 12 choices, 4 were selected as the most suitable
dimensions for the plane design. These selections and their parameters are outlined in Error!
Reference source not found.. These four were chosen based on their reasonably sized wing
spans for the material (some concepts generated wings of over 2.5 meters) and by their
relative weights. The min and max Reynold numbers were calculated using the min and max
speeds of the plane determined in the course notes (Course Notes, 2016), and by the chord
5|Page

length of each concept. The Reynolds numbers are important for determining the maximum
coefficients of lift and drag.
Table 2 Wing Dimension Concepts Chosen for Evaluation
Parameters
Area (m^2)
AR
span length b (m)
chord length c (m)
Relative Wing Weight (kg/m)
Reynolds min
Reynolds max
Trial 1
0.095
6
0.754983
0.125831
0.029125
86185.32
258556
Trial 2
Trial 3
Trial 4
0.19
0.3
0.4
6
6
6
1.067708 1.341641 1.549193
0.177951 0.223607 0.258199
0.082377 0.16344 0.251632
121884.5 153155.3 176848.6
365653.4 459466 530545.7
3.3 Airfoil Analysis

As stated, the airfoil will be designed to maximize lift, minimize drag, and be as easy to
manufacture as possible. Three airfoils were selected from the UIUC Airfoil Database as it is
outside the scope of this project to design an airfoil from scratch. The chosen airfoils E193,
E210 and S1223 shown in Figure 5 were chosen based on their high lift and low Reynolds
number design. The airfoils were analyzed using XLFR5 software to determine their lift
coefficients, drag coefficients and optimized angle of attack. These calculations are shown in
detail in Appendix F and the analysis summary is shown in Error! Reference source not
found.. Based on the min and max Reynolds numbers calculated in Error! Reference source
not found., Re = 200,000 was used to find the maximum C L/CD ratio to determine the optimal
angle of attack, then CL and CD were chosen from this angle.
Figure 5 E193, E210 and S122 Airfoils.

Table 3 Summary of Airfoil Parameters for each Wing Concept
Airfoil
alpha (degrees)
C(L/D) max
C(Lift)
C(Drag)
Ac/(chord^2)
(m^2)
Trial
Area (m^2)
b (mm)
c (mm)
e193
Wing Weight (g)
e193
e210
s1223
6
80
1.009
0.013
8
80
1.332
0.017
3
72
1.524
0.022
0.069
0.085
1
0.403
1550
260
0.065
2
0.3015
1340
225
3
0.1908
1060
180
4
0.0975
750
130
220
143
72
27
6|Page

e210
Wing Weight (g)
s1223
Wing Weight (g)
271
176
89
33
207
134
68
25
3.4 Wing Concept Selection

The airfoil selected for the plane was airfoil E210. This was because it offered a much higher
CL/CD ratio than E193. While S122 had the best ratio, it was also much more complex to
manufacture from our material and its thin trailing end was susceptible to damage during
practice take-offs. Thus E210 was chosen as the happy medium.
The true weights of each wing dimension concept were generated using each airfoil and
tabulated in Table 3 Trial 3 and 4 were extremely underweight relative to the 300 g cut-off.
Thus Trial 1 and 2 were the major considerations as more area equates to more lift. The team
decided on Trial 2 mainly due to the their weight differences for the E210 airfoil. The extra
~100 g not only gave more leeway to the design of the other components, it also allows for a
bigger payload. Figure 6.
Figure 6 Final Prototype of Airfoil
Fuselage Analysis
4.1 Distribution of weights

Our team weighed all the internal components that will go into the plane as shown in the table
below. As seen, the battery is the heaviest component, followed by the motor and wheels.
Thus, it is critical that these weights are distributed evenly inside the RC plane to avoid tilting
and stalling issues.
Table 4 Payloads for RC Plane
Item No. Part Description Qty Weight in Grams
1
Remote Receiver
1
17
2
Motor
1
67
3
Servo
2
26
4
propeller
1
11
5
Misc wire and bolt 1
15
7|Page

6
Battery
1
157
7
Wheels
2
50
Total weight=343 g (excluding building materials)
4.2 Fuselage Layout
In order to better demonstrate the fuselage design, a prototype model was created in
SolidWorks. This model can be seen in Figure 7 with all the plane subsystems attached. As
shown we have adjusted the placement so that the center of mass is close to the center of the
plane. The battery which is the heaviest is placed right below the wing in fuselage. The motor
and wheels are placed in the front of the plane to compensate for the battery weight and
weight of the rear part of the plane. Thus after entering all the weights of the internal
components in SolidWorks the project team found the center of mass of the plane. The center
of mass is indicated by a black and white cross circle as shown in the figure.
Figure 7 Layout of Fuselage and Airplane Subsystems

4.3 Drag
An airplane experiences several forms of drag, as shown in Figure 8. The skin friction drag and
form drag are the only forms which have a significant effect on the fuselage. The goal of this
design will be to minimize the drag produced by the fuselage and make it as aerodynamic as
possible.
8|Page
Figure 8 Different Types of Drag Experienced by an Airplane (Sadraey, 2009)

In order to analyze the effect of drag on the fuselage, the following figures will be used to
provide information on the drag coefficients for different shape profiles.
Figure 9 Fuselage Shapes and Potential Profiles (Sadraey, 2009)

The project teams main area of focus when designing the fuselage was its shape. It is critical
that the design is aerodynamic and induces minimal drag. From Figure 9, it can be seen that a
streamlined profile of the fuselage will have a lesser coefficient of drag and hence is a better
choice given this projects application. Thus, the nose of the fuselage was streamlined in the
design. To ensure minimal drag, the equation below was used to determine the drag
coefficient for the fuselage.
= (
) (Sadraey, 2009)
In the above equation, Swet,f is the wetted area of the fuselage and S is the wetted area of the
wing reference area. Next, each variable on the right-hand side of the equation will be solved
to determine the overall coefficient of drag for the fuselage. Firstly, the skin friction coefficient
can be determined using the equation below. This relationship is based on Prandtls theory for
friction in laminar flow, and as such it is inferred that this plane will be acting a laminar flow
regime.
9|Page
Given the low speeds of our RC plane, we can safely assume that flow over the fuselage is
mostly laminar. That is, the Reynolds number should be less than 4000. Assuming that
Reynolds number is 3000 for the internal conditions of the Techniplex as a rough assumption,
the following calculation can be made.
1.327
=
= 0.024
3000
Next, the fuselage length to diameter ratio can be calculated using the following expression.
Assuming L/D is approximately 11 using the prototype model, a value for the length to
diameter ratio can be determined.
60
= 1 + 3 + 0.0025() = 1.07
=
1.327
, =
( )
Similarly, the equation for the friction contribution due to travel speed can be determined using
the expression below. Assuming a Mach number of 0.04, which is a fair assumption given the
inherent low flying speeds, the following calculation can be made.
= 1 0.081.45 = 0.99
Finally, the initial equation can be solved by assuming that S wet,f/S is approximately equal to
0.5.
= (
) = (0.024)(1.07)(0.99)(0.5) = 0.0127
Thus, the project team was able to design the airplane fuselage to a low drag coefficient,
making it more aerodynamic and reducing fuselage drag as a possible constraint.
5 Empennage Analysis
In the previous report, multiple types of empennage were discussed but ultimately the decision
was made to with a twin tail type of empennage; the twin tail design is shown below in Figure
10.
Figure 10 Twin Tail Type Design

Although the empennage section does supply a relatively small amount of lift to the plane, the
main purpose of the empennage section is to provide stability to the plane about all three axes
of rotation. To effectively design the twin tail empennage, all four fins must be properly sized to
10 | P a g e

counteract any moments that would ultimately lead to an unwanted rotation of the plane. To
properly do this, a basic fluid structure analysis of both the tail and wing design must be
completed along with a summation of moments at equilibrium about the planes center of
gravity. These analysis will all lead to the calculation of the required dimensions of the tail
section and even the positions of the tail, motor, and wing.
5.1 Stability Calculations
Before the analysis began, there were several values from the wing section that were required.
Below are all the values from the wing analysis that are to be used during the tail fin analysis.
air = 1.225 kg/m3
CL = 1.332
CD = 0.017
Aw = .3015 m2
Wplane = 6.3765 N
WM = 2.345 N
WTot = W plane + W M = 8.7215 N
Assuming that the lift of the tail is approximately 20% of the lift created by the wings, it can
then be said that during takeoff (where FW Lift of Wing, W P Weight of Plane @ COG, W M
Weight of Motor & Electronics):
1.2 = +
The above equation which is taken from Figure 12 gives FW = 6.435 N &
FT =
0.2FW = 1.9678 N. To be able to complete the analysis an arbitrary velocity must be
determined, for our purpose we will find the minimum velocity required for liftoff and use this to
size the tail section. Therefore, set FW = 6.435 N. To find the minimum velocity required, the lift
equation shown below was considered.
=
Resulting equation:
~ =
1
2
2
2
2(6.435)
=
= 5.115
(1.225)(.3015)(1.332)

The minimum velocity of 5.115 m/s will act as a guide to find a standard cruising velocity (~7
m/s) which will be used during the analysis to find the lift forces caused by the wing and tail
and the a standard cruising velocity. This velocity will be used alongside the required tail lift to
back-calculate the required horizontal tail fin area.
11 | P a g e

To determine the required tail lift, an FBD must be illustrated and a moment summation will be
used to isolate and determine the required position of the wing and tail. The initial FBD is
shown below in Figure 11 Preliminary FBD.
Figure 11 Preliminary FBD

It is important to note that FW and FT act at the aerodynamic center of the wing and tail
respectively (this is of the way across the wing/tail). By considering the FBD in Figure 11
Preliminary FBD, it is obvious that the current orientation of the wings, tail, and motor will
cause a downward pitching moment about the planes center of gravity. To avoid this, the
wings will be moved so that the wings center of pressure (where the lift force of the wings
acts) is further to the front of the plane than the planes center of gravity. The resulting moment
from this move of the wings will cause a clockwise rotation about the center of gravity that will
counteract the downwards pitch caused by the motor and the tail. This change in orientation
requires the completion of a new FBD which is shown below in Figure 12 Final FBD of Plane.
Figure 12 Final FBD of Plane

By isolating FT and finding its value at an arbitrary velocity (7 m/s) and the associated wing and
tail lift forces, it allows for the calculation of the required horizontal fin area by rearranging the
lift force equation that is shown at the top of the page; the result of the rearrangement is shown
below. It should be noted that because the tail fin is a flat plate, the CL that is used for the tail
section is different than that of the wing. For a flat plate, the equation for C L is given below
(Note that an angle of attack of 5=0.0873 rads is used).
= 2 = 0.5485
2
2(1.9678)
=
=
= .1195 2
2
(1.225)(7)2 (0.5485)
12 | P a g e

As the horizontal tail fin is divided into two separate and identical fins, one on either side of the
fuselage. Therefore, the area of one of the horizontal fins is 1/2 A T and as there is two of them,
each vertical air fin has an area of 0.029875 m2. The vertical tail fins will be in the shape of a
right angle triangle with rounded corners and the hypotenuse facing upwards and towards the
front of the plane as to increase their aerodynamics.
LM and LT are already known and now the position of the wings must be established.
Completing a summation of moments about the center of gravity of the plane gives the
following equation:
+ = 0
Isolating LW gives:
+
=
The variables used in the FBD are shown below with their respective values:
Forces
Distances
WM = 2.345 N
LM = 0.1616 m
WPlane = 6.3765 N
LT = 0.5455 m
FW @ 7 m/s = 9.839
FT @ 7 m/s = 1.9678
LW = 0.14762 m
Because of the calculations performed in this section, all parts of the plane are now sized and
their position on the plane is fixed; in other words, the design phase is now complete and the
plane is ready to be built.
6
Materials Considerations and Manufacturability
6.1 Choice of Materials

High-density foam was chosen as the material for the majority of the aircraft including the
wings and fuselage. High-density foam is light and has a high strength considering its weight. It
is also easy to manipulate through cutting, hot-wiring and gluing. There are also numerous
methods of structurally reinforcing the Styrofoam, discussed in a following section.
Two types of Styrofoam were procured for testing to determine the strongest material
for the aircraft. The first type was a sheet of 2 thick white FloraCraft foam (expanded
polystyrene foam) and the second was a sheet of 2 thick blue DOW insulating foam (extruded
polystyrene foam), both of which can be seen in the figure below.
13 | P a g e
Figure 13 FloraCraft Foam (left) and DOW Foam (right)
6.2 Material Testing

To determine the strength of each type of foam, a bending flexural test was performed in the
structural lab of Memorial University. This type of test was chosen because bending failure of
the foam is the most likely form of failure to occur in the event of a crash. If one of the wings
hits the ground first it will be subjected to a large force and will bend in the direction of the
planes motion, possibly failing if the force is sufficiently large. By choosing the material with
the highest flexural strength, the risk of this type of failure is mitigated.
Following a similar procedure as ASTM D790, a specimen of each type of foam was cut
out and placed in the loading apparatus as shown in the figure below. Each specimen was
supported on each end and a force was applied to the center. Then the applied force,
displacement (using a linear variable differential transformer), and time were recorded until the
material yielded. From this, the flexural strength was calculated for each material and
compared.
It is worth noting that an optimal load cell with a capacity of approximately 100-250N
was not available and therefore a load cell with a capacity of 5000N, the lowest available, was
used instead. Although this is not ideal because the noise at such low levels of loading can
decrease the accuracy of the measurements, it was deemed acceptable as a way of
comparing the strength of the two materials.
Figure 14 Flexural Test Configuration
14 | P a g e
Expanded Polystyrene
3.5
Load (kg)
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
10
15
20
25
Time (s)
Figure 15 Expanded Polystyrene Testing Results
Load (kg)
Extruded Polystyrene
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
Time (s)
Figure 16 Extruded Polystyrene Testing Results

The extruded polystyrene reached a maximum load of 7.398kg (72.5N) prior to failure while the
expanded polystyrene reached a maximum load of 3.151kg (30.9N) prior to failure.
Subsequently, the flexural strength of both specimens were calculated by using the following
equation.
3
=
2 2
In this equation, is the flexural stress, P is the applied load, L is the support span distance, b
is the width of the specimen, and d is the depth of the specimen. The following table lists the
relevant parameters for both materials tested.
Table 5 - Specimen Dimensions
L-span (mm)
b-width (mm)
Expanded
Polystyrene
365
50.8
Extruded
Polystyrene
365
50.8
15 | P a g e

d-depth (mm)
47.6
69.85
For the extruded polystyrene, the flexural strength was found to be 0.160 MPa. For the
expanded polystyrene, the flexural strength was found to be 0.147 MPa. The full testing results
could be found in Appendix D and E. From this testing, the DOW insulating foam (extruded
polystyrene) is clearly the superior option and will be used to build the major components of
the aircraft. The manufacturers datasheet for this material from the DOW website can be
found in Appendix C. (ASTM International, 2002)
6.3 Structural Reinforcement
To increase the durability of the aircraft and reduce the chances of severe damage in the event
of a crash, several methods of structural reinforcement were decided upon or are currently
being considered.
Multiple 1cm diameter carbon fiber rods will be inserted lengthwise into the center of
each wing and through the fuselage both to increase the flexural strength of the wings and to
create a stronger bond between the wings and the fuselage. Carbon fiber rods were chosen
due to their extremely high strength to weight ratio. (Callister & Rethwisch, 2012)
Secondly, the wings, fuselage and tail will be covered in ADH super clear tape.
According to the manufacturers website, this tape is lightweight and exhibits remarkable
tensile strength. (ADH Tape, n.d.) This, therefore, will increase these sub-systems overall
strength while adding very little weight. The use of this adhesive will also decrease the
likelihood of the plane breaking apart in the event of a crash. This foam also has a
compressive strength of 207 kPa using the ASTM D1621 testing method as can be seen in the
datasheet in Appendix C.
6.4 Manufacturability
During the detailed designed phase, the team considered manufacturability of sub-systems as
a major basis for design. That is, the team ensured that the chosen designs for undercarriage,
wings, fuselage and tail were manufacturable given limiting constraints such as materials, time,
equipment, and cost. The following discusses the key manufacturing concepts the team have
chosen.
The undercarriage design outlined in this report incorporates the use of aluminum
sheets, zip ties, and wheels. To manufacture this design, the team will acquire strips of
aluminum sheets of approximately 1/16 and utilize the machine shop at Memorial University to
size, cut, and bend the pieces according to the design outlined in this report. Subsequently, the
zipties and wheels will be mounted on the aluminum strips. The wheels will be attached to the
aluminum strip by using lightweight rivets. To mount the undercarriage to the fuselage, the
team will utilize plastic fasteners at multiple locations to ensure rigidness. The use of these
plastic fasteners will also provide the convenience of detaching the undercarriage for
maintenance or repairing purposes.
To manufacture the wing, the team will use the procured foam sheets to mold the
outline of the desired wing shape. To do this, the team will utilize a hot-wire foam cutter and
shape the foam sheet into the desired configuration. The wing design, as outlined in this
report, has a maximum cross-sectional thickness of approximately 1.18 (30mm). The acquired
foam sheet is 2 thick and hence is sufficient for this purpose. Additionally, as previously
mentioned, carbon fiber rods will be installed through the structure of the wing to add structural
support. Similar to the undercarriage design, plastic fasteners will be utilized to attach the
wings onto the fuselage to ensure stability and detachability.
16 | P a g e

The fuselage of the aircraft will house the major components of the aircraft such as the
motor, battery, and payload. This means that the structure of the fuselage must be rigid
enough to support the relatively heavy weight. The design of the fuselage will use thin strips of
the foam sheets, approximately 5mm, to construct the sides. These sheets will be hot-wire cut,
and then glued together. The nose of the fuselage will be constructed similarly. As with the
wing, carbon fiber rods will be installed through the structure to provide rigidity and extra
weight support where required. Mounting adhesives, such as Velcro, will be used to secure the
components inside the fuselage.
Similar to the wing and fuselage, the tail will be manufactured using the foam sheets.
This will be accomplished by hot-wiring different components of the tail design and gluing it
together to make a complete entity. The tail will be mounted to the fuselage by using plastic
fasteners. Carbon fiber rods may also be used to improve structural integrity.
6.4.1 Economics and Cost
Table 6 below provides an estimate of the current construction cost for the aircraft design. This
table includes already procured materials, such as the foams and glue, as well as material that
will be purchased in the near future such as the carbon fiber rods, fasteners, zip ties and
adhesives. The costs for the not yet procured items are based on current market estimates
found on major retailer online stores. Upon procurement, updated figures will be added to the
estimate.
Table 6 - Construction Cost Estimate
Construction Cost Estimate

Item No.
Item
Division 1: Purchases
1
FloraCraft Foam
2
DOW Styrofoam
3
Foam Glue
Division 2: Estimates
1
Carbon Fiber Rod
2
Plastic Fasteners
3
ADH Tape
4
8" Zip Ties
5
30"-5/8" Velcro
Unit
Cost
Total
Cost
2
1
1
$18.29
$37.05
$9.03
Sub-Total
$36.58
$37.05
$9.03
$82.66
4
20
1
15
1
$10.00
$0.07
$2.99
$0.08
$3.52
Sub-Total
$40.00
$1.40
$2.99
$1.18
$3.52
$49.09
TOTAL
$131.75
Qty
As can be seen, the procured items total to date is $82.66. The estimated total for
additional items is $49.09. The current estimate total, hence, equals to $131.75. This current
estimate is well within our budgetary constraint of $500 and hence additional
material/components that may improve our design can be safely considered. It should be
noted that other major components of the aircraft such as the motors, battery, propeller, and
wheels are not included in this cost estimate as this was provided to the team in the supplied
kit. Additionally, manufacturing equipment such as aluminum bending equipment and hot-wire
foam cutters are available to the team at Memorial Universitys machine shop and hence does
17 | P a g e

not require purchase. All labour for construction and manufacturing of parts is to be done by
the team and thus no contractor cost will be incurred.
7 Model Airplane Prototype
A CAD model was developed in SolidWorks which can be considered a close representation of
the plans going into the building phase. As discussed in previous sections, analyses went into
the design of each of the subsystems, which should be reflected in the SolidWorks model. This
model can be considered a visual representation of all the analyses conducted up until this
point. At this point in time, the SolidWorks model should be considered a final design, which
will only be modified if absolutely necessary. The only part of the design which is open to some
minor deviation in the final phase of the project are the actual final dimensions and material
thicknesses.
To better understand exactly how all the subsystems discussed in this report go
together, the CAD model is an excellent tool. It is also useful to have a well-defined model to
help in the manufacturing phase of this design.
Figure 17 Model Plane Prototype

8
Management Plans and Project Completion

At this stage in the design project all aspects of the plane have been analyzed in detail and
specific designs for all main components of the aircraft have been developed in detail. These
components have been combined into a final aircraft sketch showing the design and
dimensions that the aircraft will have. Materials for the main components of the aircraft have
also been selected, procured and tested. In addition, manufacturing techniques and structural
reinforcement have been analyzed.
The next steps in the project are to implement a control system including ailerons on the
wings and possible rudders on the tail of the aircraft. A payload as well as a mechanism to
hold it in place within the aircraft also need to be developed. Subsequently, detailed
engineering drawings will be developed and the process of fabricating the aircraft will begin.
Overall the team is still on track to meet the completion deadline of July 27th. As an
objective, all remaining engineering work involving the control system and payload will be
completed by July 19th. The detailed engineering drawings will be completed at this point as
well. From there, fabrication of the aircraft should be completed by July 23th. This will provide
extra time before the competition to perform any last minute modifications and troubleshooting
that may be required.
18 | P a g e

Weekly group meetings and biweekly meetings with the professor have helped resolve
issues encountered and have kept the project progressing. The detailed list of deliverables and
Gantt chart, both of which can be found in Appendix B, have helped ensure all group members
are clear on their responsibilities and the deadline for each. Additionally, weekly posts in the
groups online workspace by the team leader have proved to be an effective mode of
communication. These weekly posts have helped keep everyone on the same page regarding
priorities and project completion progress, as well times for upcoming meetings. An online chat
group between members of the team has also been useful for discussions, problem solving
and decision making outside of group meetings while keeping all group members involved.
This online chat has also been useful for notifying group members of impromptu meetings that
are periodically required to address urgent issues.
9
Conclusions
The ultimate goal of report number two is to take the preliminary designs that were outlined
in report number 1 and expand and validate them through some means; whether it be through
experimentation or technical theory. Each section that represents a major portion of the
aircraft; the undercarriage; the wing; the fuselage; and the tail; all have their own design
justification but the second report also includes an in depth look at the project management
side of the design. Something that is new in the second report is the section containing the
completed Solidworks model of the plane which offers a look at the complete plane design.
The undercarriage section of the plane was upgraded tremendously since the last report.
Originally, it was proposed that some sort of ABS plastic be used but after careful
consideration and aluminum strap was chosen instead. The A-shape design underwent an
impact test that entailed completing calculations to find the average force from and impact
velocity of 6.26 m/s and then performing a finite element analysis of the a frame in Solidworks.
The test showed that the landing gear is at no risk for failure during landing. The rear section
was also considered and a tightly wound ring of zip-ties will act as a spring damper system
during landing.
The main provider of lift to the system is the wings which had to be appropriately sized and
shaped. The airfoil design was quickly decided upon after a lift/drag analysis was completed
on three different types of airfoil using the XFLR5 software. The evaluation lead to the
selection of the E210 wing which was then appropriately sized by considering the lift to weight
ratios of each. A total span of 0.3015 m2 was ultimately chosen due to optimal lift/weight ratio.
The fuselage layout and shape was then considered on the basis of not only aerodynamics
but also stability when adding weights of electronic components. The components were
arranged in such a manner such that there would be no resultant rolling moment and minimal
pitching moment. Using several different lift and drag equations the overall size and shape of
the fuselage was calculated.
The empennage section remained the same design as was outlined in the last report; a
twin tail, tail dragger empennage. To appropriately size the horizontal fins theoretical
calculations were used. Firstly an assumption was made to give a value of five the tail lift to
wing lift ratio and from that the lift equation provided means to calculate area (using aspect
ratio of wings, 6). As the horizontal fins provide roll stability to the system, a moment
summation about the planes center of gravity was completed and the respective distances of
the wings and tail section to the planes center of gravity were found.
Finally the type of material that the aircraft will be created from was decided upon. Two
separate types of Styrofoam were considered and tested using a flexural test which measured
the strength of each foam. Ultimately the extruded polystyrene was chosen as the best type of
foam due to its superior strength and manufacturability; it will be used to build the plane going
19 | P a g e

forward. The team will also consider structural reinforcement with carbon fiber skewers if the
foam fails during testing.
Finally the entire model was built and assembled in Solidworks and can be seen in Figure
17 Model Plane Prototype. With the design completed and assembled, the model looks to fit
well together and the sizes of the pieces arent extraneously disproportioned relative to one
another. This will act as a great guide when constructing the model.
The construction of the plane is to be completed upon the completion and presentation of
this report as all aspects of the design are completed, analyzed, and justified. The one portion
that is yet to be determined is the control system of the plane, which is scheduled to be
completed by July 19 and the completion date is July 27. This is ideal as it will give a cushion
of time between final design completion and the competition date to allow for troubleshooting
and even further design addition if necessary. The future project deadlines are set, the design
is finalized and justified and all necessary preparations are complete for the construction
phase and final report.
20 | P a g e
10 List of References
ADH Tape. (n.d.). Super Clear Tape. Retrieved from ADH Tape:
http://www.adhtape.com/products/super-clear-tape
ASTM International. (2002). D790 - 02 Standard Test Methods for Flexural
Properties.
Callister, W. D., & Rethwisch, D. G. (2012). Fundamentals of Materials Science
and Engineering: An Integrated Approach. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &
Sons.
Course Notes, E. 7. (2016, May). Memorial University of Newfoundland.
Ecreativeworks. (2016). ABS (Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene). Retrieved from
Plastics International: http://www.plasticsintl.com/abs.htm
Kroo, I. (201). Tail Design and Sizing. Retrieved from Standford AA241 Aircraft
Design: http://adg.stanford.edu/aa241/stability/taildesign.html
Moonan, W. C. (2010). Evaluation of the Aerodynamics of an Aircraft Fuselage
Pod Using Analytical, CFD, and Flight Testing Techniques. Master's Thesis.
University of Tennessee.
Sadraey, M. (2009). Aircraft Performance Analysis. Saarbrucken: VDM Verlag Dr.
Muller.
21 | P a g e
Appendix A Wing Calculations
22 | P a g e
Appendix B Gantt Chart & Description of

Deliverables
23 | P a g e
24 | P a g e
DELIVERABLE NAME
DETAILED AIRCRAFT DESIGN:
UNDERCARRIAGE
MATERIALS SELECTION,
PROCUREMENT, AND TESTING
WINGS
FUSELAGE
TAIL
REPORT #2:
SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION
Based on the decided undercarriage design from report #1, develop a
detailed plan for the undercarriage. Include sketches, dimensions and
materials to be used. Identify any deviations from the undercarriage
design decided upon in report #1.
Select appropriate materials for the construction of the main parts of
the aircraft including wings, fuselage, and materials for structural
reinforcement based on other detailed design sections. Procure
materials and keep records of expenditures. Test materials and select
the most appropriate material based on these tests.
Based on the wing profile decided upon in report 1, perform a wing
analysis in order to select wing dimensions, angle of attack. Use
simulation software to aid in this analysis. Include preliminary lift and
drag calculations as well.
Based on the design in report #1 and in cooperation with other group
members, develop a detailed plan for the fuselage including sketches
and dimensions.
Based on the tail design decided upon in report #1 and in cooperation
with the team member completing the wing section, develop a
detailed plan for the tail section of the aircraft. Include sketches,
dimensions and lift/drag calculations.
Write a report outlining the detailed design stages of the design
process for an RC aircraft.
Summarize entire report in a concise paragraph. This section should
give the reader enough information to understand the main aspects of
25 | P a g e
the report at a high level.

Introduce the reader to the project and what will be discussed in the
INTRODUCTION
report.
Outline the work completed for undercarriage analysis and detailed
design. Also provide an overview of the final undercarriage design.
UNDERCARRIAGE ANALYSIS
Include any sketches, dimensions and calculations that were
completed.
Report on the materials selected and procured. Provide an overview
MATERIALS SELECTION,
of material testing and describe why a particular material was chosen.
PROCUREMENT, AND TESTING
Give an overview on how the aircraft will be reinforced and what
manufacturing techniques will be used in the building phase.
Provide an overview of the wing analysis completed. Include sketches
of the final wing design including dimensions. Describe wing
WINGS ANALYSIS
simulations completed, including any required calculations. Describe
benefits of this size and shape wing over other possibilities.
Provide an overview of the fuselage analysis completed. Include a
FUSELAGE ANALYSIS
sketch of the final fuselage design with dimensions and describe why
this design was chosen.
Give an overview of the tail design decided upon through calibration
with the group member completing the wing design. Include sketches
TAIL ANALYSIS
and dimensions and describe why this design was chosen and why it
works will with the chosen wing design.
Prepare a detailed update on the overall progress of the project up to
MANAGEMENT
PLAN
AND this point. Relate this to the overall project schedule and deadlines
PROJECT
that must be met. Comment on whether project is on track to meet
COMPLETION PROGRESS
these deadlines. This role Includes developing up to date Gantt chart
and completing this list of deliverables.
Tie all detailed design sections into a single airplane sketch with
dimensions through working with the individual team members
MODEL AIRPLANE PROTOTYPE
responsible for each section. Ensure each aircraft component is
26 | P a g e
CONCLUSION
PRESENTATION #2
compatible with the others. Provide comments on this final aircraft

design.
Conclude the report and provide an overview of what has been
completed and the major decisions made.
Create a presentation including all major components of the report #2.
Each team member is responsible for creating slides for the sections
of the report they have written.
27 | P a g e
Appendix C DOW SM Foam Insulation

Datasheet
28 | P a g e
29 | P a g e
Appendix D Flexural Strength Results for

Expanded Polystyrene
30 | P a g e
Load (N)
0.13814
1.34685
1.34685
1.34685
1.34685
1.34685
3.38439
3.38439
3.38439
3.38439
3.38439
4.67599
4.67599
4.67599
4.67599
4.67599
6.54085
6.54085
6.54085
6.54085
6.54085
8.17088
8.17088
8.17088
8.17088
8.17088
9.53845
9.53845
9.53845
9.53845
9.53845
10.22913
10.22913
10.22913
10.22913
10.22913
11.31352
Flexural
Stress (MPa)
0.00066
0.00641
0.00641
0.00641
0.00641
0.00641
0.01610
0.01610
0.01610
0.01610
0.01610
0.02224
0.02224
0.02224
0.02224
0.02224
0.03111
0.03111
0.03111
0.03111
0.03111
0.03887
0.03887
0.03887
0.03887
0.03887
0.04537
0.04537
0.04537
0.04537
0.04537
0.04866
0.04866
0.04866
0.04866
0.04866
0.05382
11.31352
11.31352
11.31352
11.31352
12.69491
12.69491
12.69491
12.69491
12.69491
13.62043
13.62043
13.62043
13.62043
13.62043
14.36637
14.36637
14.36637
14.36637
14.36637
15.17448
15.17448
15.17448
15.17448
15.17448
15.55436
15.55436
15.55436
15.55436
15.55436
16.32102
16.32102
16.32102
16.32102
16.32102
17.19821
17.19821
17.19821
17.19821
17.19821
0.05382
0.05382
0.05382
0.05382
0.06039
0.06039
0.06039
0.06039
0.06039
0.06479
0.06479
0.06479
0.06479
0.06479
0.06834
0.06834
0.06834
0.06834
0.06834
0.07218
0.07218
0.07218
0.07218
0.07218
0.07399
0.07399
0.07399
0.07399
0.07399
0.07763
0.07763
0.07763
0.07763
0.07763
0.08181
0.08181
0.08181
0.08181
0.08181
17.86818
17.86818
17.86818
17.86818
17.86818
18.77989
18.77989
18.77989
18.77989
18.77989
19.40842
19.40842
19.40842
19.40842
19.40842
20.29250
20.29250
20.29250
20.29250
20.29250
20.89341
20.89341
20.89341
20.89341
20.89341
21.99850
21.99850
21.99850
21.99850
21.99850
22.65466
22.65466
22.65466
22.65466
22.65466
23.03455
23.03455
23.03455
23.03455
0.08499
0.08499
0.08499
0.08499
0.08499
0.08933
0.08933
0.08933
0.08933
0.08933
0.09232
0.09232
0.09232
0.09232
0.09232
0.09653
0.09653
0.09653
0.09653
0.09653
0.09938
0.09938
0.09938
0.09938
0.09938
0.10464
0.10464
0.10464
0.10464
0.10464
0.10776
0.10776
0.10776
0.10776
0.10776
0.10957
0.10957
0.10957
0.10957
31 | P a g e
23.03455
23.86337
23.86337
23.86337
23.86337
23.86337
24.47809
24.47809
24.47809
24.47809
24.47809
25.01682
25.01682
25.01682
25.01682
25.01682
25.52794
25.52794
25.52794
25.52794
25.52794
26.04595
26.04595
26.04595
26.04595
26.04595
26.50181
26.50181
26.50181
26.50181
26.50181
26.55706
26.55706
26.55706
26.55706
26.55706
26.37058
26.37058
26.37058
26.37058
0.10957
0.11351
0.11351
0.11351
0.11351
0.11351
0.11644
0.11644
0.11644
0.11644
0.11644
0.11900
0.11900
0.11900
0.11900
0.11900
0.12143
0.12143
0.12143
0.12143
0.12143
0.12389
0.12389
0.12389
0.12389
0.12389
0.12606
0.12606
0.12606
0.12606
0.12606
0.12632
0.12632
0.12632
0.12632
0.12632
0.12544
0.12544
0.12544
0.12544
26.37058
25.81803
25.81803
25.81803
25.81803
25.81803
25.65226
25.65226
25.65226
25.65226
25.65226
25.92163
25.92163
25.92163
25.92163
25.92163
26.68830
26.68830
26.68830
26.68830
26.68830
28.30452
28.30452
28.30452
28.30452
28.30452
28.30452
28.30452
28.30452
28.30452
28.30452
29.03665
29.03665
29.03665
29.03665
29.03665
29.30601
29.30601
29.30601
29.30601
0.12544
0.12281
0.12281
0.12281
0.12281
0.12281
0.12202
0.12202
0.12202
0.12202
0.12202
0.12330
0.12330
0.12330
0.12330
0.12330
0.12695
0.12695
0.12695
0.12695
0.12695
0.13464
0.13464
0.13464
0.13464
0.13464
0.13464
0.13464
0.13464
0.13464
0.13464
0.13812
0.13812
0.13812
0.13812
0.13812
0.13940
0.13940
0.13940
0.13940
29.30601
29.59610
29.59610
29.59610
29.59610
29.59610
29.34055
29.34055
29.34055
29.34055
29.34055
29.56848
29.56848
29.56848
29.56848
29.56848
29.60992
29.60992
29.60992
29.60992
29.60992
30.16247
30.16247
30.16247
30.16247
30.16247
30.20391
30.20391
30.20391
30.20391
30.20391
30.59761
30.59761
30.59761
30.59761
30.59761
30.90842
0.13940
0.14078
0.14078
0.14078
0.14078
0.14078
0.13956
0.13956
0.13956
0.13956
0.13956
0.14065
0.14065
0.14065
0.14065
0.14065
0.14085
0.14085
0.14085
0.14085
0.14085
0.14347
0.14347
0.14347
0.14347
0.14347
0.14367
0.14367
0.14367
0.14367
0.14367
0.14554
0.14554
0.14554
0.14554
0.14554
0.14702
32 | P a g e
Appendix E Flexural Strength Results for

Extruded Polystyrene
33 | P a g e
Load (N)
0.62162
0.62162
0.62162
0.62162
0.62162
3.21861
3.21861
3.21861
3.21861
3.21861
9.55916
9.55916
9.55916
9.55916
9.55916
9.33123
9.33123
9.33123
9.33123
9.33123
9.09639
9.09639
9.09639
9.09639
9.09639
9.47627
9.47627
9.47627
9.47627
9.47627
9.47627
9.47627
9.47627
9.47627
9.47627
9.42793
9.42793
9.42793
Flexural
Stress (MPa)
0.00137
0.00137
0.00137
0.00137
0.00137
0.00711
0.00711
0.00711
0.00711
0.00711
0.02112
0.02112
0.02112
0.02112
0.02112
0.02061
0.02061
0.02061
0.02061
0.02061
0.02009
0.02009
0.02009
0.02009
0.02009
0.02093
0.02093
0.02093
0.02093
0.02093
0.02093
0.02093
0.02093
0.02093
0.02093
0.02083
0.02083
0.02083
9.42793
9.42793
10.28438
10.28438
10.28438
10.28438
10.28438
11.93513
11.93513
11.93513
11.93513
11.93513
12.60510
12.60510
12.60510
12.60510
12.60510
13.68949
13.68949
13.68949
13.68949
13.68949
15.05706
15.05706
15.05706
15.05706
15.05706
16.36937
16.36937
16.36937
16.36937
16.36937
17.80600
17.80600
17.80600
17.80600
17.80600
18.64864
18.64864
18.64864
0.02083
0.02083
0.02272
0.02272
0.02272
0.02272
0.02272
0.02636
0.02636
0.02636
0.02636
0.02636
0.02784
0.02784
0.02784
0.02784
0.02784
0.03024
0.03024
0.03024
0.03024
0.03024
0.03326
0.03326
0.03326
0.03326
0.03326
0.03616
0.03616
0.03616
0.03616
0.03616
0.03933
0.03933
0.03933
0.03933
0.03933
0.04119
0.04119
0.04119
18.64864
18.64864
20.07838
20.07838
20.07838
20.07838
20.07838
21.69459
21.69459
21.69459
21.69459
21.69459
22.70300
22.70300
22.70300
22.70300
22.70300
23.65616
23.65616
23.65616
23.65616
23.65616
24.74055
24.74055
24.74055
24.74055
24.74055
25.59700
25.59700
25.59700
25.59700
25.59700
26.41201
26.41201
26.41201
26.41201
26.41201
27.34444
27.34444
27.34444
0.04119
0.04119
0.04435
0.04435
0.04435
0.04435
0.04435
0.04792
0.04792
0.04792
0.04792
0.04792
0.05015
0.05015
0.05015
0.05015
0.05015
0.05226
0.05226
0.05226
0.05226
0.05226
0.05465
0.05465
0.05465
0.05465
0.05465
0.05654
0.05654
0.05654
0.05654
0.05654
0.05834
0.05834
0.05834
0.05834
0.05834
0.06040
0.06040
0.06040
34 | P a g e
27.34444
27.34444
28.31141
28.31141
28.31141
28.31141
28.31141
29.04354
29.04354
29.04354
29.04354
29.04354
29.30601
29.30601
29.30601
29.30601
29.30601
29.95526
29.95526
29.95526
29.95526
29.95526
30.85316
30.85316
30.85316
30.85316
30.85316
32.11021
32.11021
32.11021
32.11021
32.11021
33.36037
33.36037
33.36037
33.36037
33.36037
34.56216
34.56216
34.56216
0.06040
0.06040
0.06254
0.06254
0.06254
0.06254
0.06254
0.06416
0.06416
0.06416
0.06416
0.06416
0.06474
0.06474
0.06474
0.06474
0.06474
0.06617
0.06617
0.06617
0.06617
0.06617
0.06815
0.06815
0.06815
0.06815
0.06815
0.07093
0.07093
0.07093
0.07093
0.07093
0.07369
0.07369
0.07369
0.07369
0.07369
0.07635
0.07635
0.07635
34.56216
34.56216
35.54985
35.54985
35.54985
35.54985
35.54985
36.26126
36.26126
36.26126
36.26126
36.26126
37.82223
37.82223
37.82223
37.82223
37.82223
38.98949
38.98949
38.98949
38.98949
38.98949
40.23273
40.23273
40.23273
40.23273
40.23273
40.71622
40.71622
40.71622
40.71622
40.71622
41.02703
41.02703
41.02703
41.02703
41.02703
41.94565
41.94565
41.94565
0.07635
0.07635
0.07853
0.07853
0.07853
0.07853
0.07853
0.08010
0.08010
0.08010
0.08010
0.08010
0.08355
0.08355
0.08355
0.08355
0.08355
0.08613
0.08613
0.08613
0.08613
0.08613
0.08887
0.08887
0.08887
0.08887
0.08887
0.08994
0.08994
0.08994
0.08994
0.08994
0.09063
0.09063
0.09063
0.09063
0.09063
0.09266
0.09266
0.09266
41.94565
41.94565
42.51892
42.51892
42.51892
42.51892
42.51892
43.49971
43.49971
43.49971
43.49971
43.49971
44.25946
44.25946
44.25946
44.25946
44.25946
45.24025
45.24025
45.24025
45.24025
45.24025
46.00000
46.00000
46.00000
46.00000
46.00000
46.13815
46.13815
46.13815
46.13815
46.13815
47.06367
47.06367
47.06367
47.06367
47.06367
48.23784
48.23784
48.23784
0.09266
0.09266
0.09392
0.09392
0.09392
0.09392
0.09392
0.09609
0.09609
0.09609
0.09609
0.09609
0.09777
0.09777
0.09777
0.09777
0.09777
0.09993
0.09993
0.09993
0.09993
0.09993
0.10161
0.10161
0.10161
0.10161
0.10161
0.10192
0.10192
0.10192
0.10192
0.10192
0.10396
0.10396
0.10396
0.10396
0.10396
0.10656
0.10656
0.10656
35 | P a g e
48.23784
48.23784
49.69520
49.69520
49.69520
49.69520
49.69520
51.35976
51.35976
51.35976
51.35976
51.35976
52.09880
52.09880
52.09880
52.09880
52.09880
53.19700
53.19700
53.19700
53.19700
53.19700
53.70121
53.70121
53.70121
53.70121
53.70121
53.68739
53.68739
53.68739
53.68739
53.68739
53.63905
53.63905
53.63905
53.63905
53.63905
52.75496
52.75496
52.75496
0.10656
0.10656
0.10977
0.10977
0.10977
0.10977
0.10977
0.11345
0.11345
0.11345
0.11345
0.11345
0.11508
0.11508
0.11508
0.11508
0.11508
0.11751
0.11751
0.11751
0.11751
0.11751
0.11862
0.11862
0.11862
0.11862
0.11862
0.11859
0.11859
0.11859
0.11859
0.11859
0.11849
0.11849
0.11849
0.11849
0.11849
0.11653
0.11653
0.11653
52.75496
52.75496
52.29220
52.29220
52.29220
52.29220
52.29220
54.04656
54.04656
54.04656
54.04656
54.04656
58.15616
58.15616
58.15616
58.15616
58.15616
58.37718
58.37718
58.37718
58.37718
58.37718
58.05946
58.05946
58.05946
58.05946
58.05946
58.92283
58.92283
58.92283
58.92283
58.92283
59.28199
59.28199
59.28199
59.28199
59.28199
60.06938
60.06938
60.06938
0.11653
0.11653
0.11551
0.11551
0.11551
0.11551
0.11551
0.11939
0.11939
0.11939
0.11939
0.11939
0.12846
0.12846
0.12846
0.12846
0.12846
0.12895
0.12895
0.12895
0.12895
0.12895
0.12825
0.12825
0.12825
0.12825
0.12825
0.13016
0.13016
0.13016
0.13016
0.13016
0.13095
0.13095
0.13095
0.13095
0.13095
0.13269
0.13269
0.13269
60.06938
60.06938
60.94656
60.94656
60.94656
60.94656
60.94656
61.06397
61.06397
61.06397
61.06397
61.06397
61.57508
61.57508
61.57508
61.57508
61.57508
62.52823
62.52823
62.52823
62.52823
62.52823
62.09310
62.09310
62.09310
62.09310
62.09310
61.97569
61.97569
61.97569
61.97569
61.97569
62.55586
62.55586
62.55586
62.55586
62.55586
62.23124
62.23124
62.23124
0.13269
0.13269
0.13463
0.13463
0.13463
0.13463
0.13463
0.13489
0.13489
0.13489
0.13489
0.13489
0.13602
0.13602
0.13602
0.13602
0.13602
0.13812
0.13812
0.13812
0.13812
0.13812
0.13716
0.13716
0.13716
0.13716
0.13716
0.13690
0.13690
0.13690
0.13690
0.13690
0.13818
0.13818
0.13818
0.13818
0.13818
0.13747
0.13747
0.13747
36 | P a g e
62.23124
62.23124
62.81142
62.81142
62.81142
62.81142
62.81142
63.30872
63.30872
63.30872
63.30872
63.30872
63.60572
63.60572
63.60572
63.60572
63.60572
64.54505
64.54505
64.54505
64.54505
64.54505
64.99400
64.99400
64.99400
64.99400
64.99400
65.55346
65.55346
65.55346
65.55346
65.55346
65.96787
65.96787
65.96787
65.96787
65.96787
66.78980
66.78980
66.78980
0.13747
0.13747
0.13875
0.13875
0.13875
0.13875
0.13875
0.13985
0.13985
0.13985
0.13985
0.13985
0.14050
0.14050
0.14050
0.14050
0.14050
0.14258
0.14258
0.14258
0.14258
0.14258
0.14357
0.14357
0.14357
0.14357
0.14357
0.14480
0.14480
0.14480
0.14480
0.14480
0.14572
0.14572
0.14572
0.14572
0.14572
0.14754
0.14754
0.14754
66.78980
66.78980
66.59640
66.59640
66.59640
66.59640
66.59640
66.45827
66.45827
66.45827
66.45827
66.45827
67.35617
67.35617
67.35617
67.35617
67.35617
67.32163
67.32163
67.32163
67.32163
67.32163
66.00931
66.00931
66.00931
66.00931
66.00931
65.29790
65.29790
65.29790
65.29790
65.29790
64.12373
64.12373
64.12373
64.12373
64.12373
66.73455
66.73455
66.73455
0.14754
0.14754
0.14711
0.14711
0.14711
0.14711
0.14711
0.14680
0.14680
0.14680
0.14680
0.14680
0.14879
0.14879
0.14879
0.14879
0.14879
0.14871
0.14871
0.14871
0.14871
0.14871
0.14581
0.14581
0.14581
0.14581
0.14581
0.14424
0.14424
0.14424
0.14424
0.14424
0.14165
0.14165
0.14165
0.14165
0.14165
0.14741
0.14741
0.14741
66.73455
66.73455
70.11202
70.11202
70.11202
70.11202
70.11202
71.00301
71.00301
71.00301
71.00301
71.00301
71.18260
71.18260
71.18260
71.18260
71.18260
71.14115
71.14115
71.14115
71.14115
71.14115
70.89250
70.89250
70.89250
70.89250
70.89250
70.85796
70.85796
70.85796
70.85796
70.85796
70.50572
70.50572
70.50572
70.50572
70.50572
70.30542
70.30542
70.30542
0.14741
0.14741
0.15487
0.15487
0.15487
0.15487
0.15487
0.15684
0.15684
0.15684
0.15684
0.15684
0.15724
0.15724
0.15724
0.15724
0.15724
0.15715
0.15715
0.15715
0.15715
0.15715
0.15660
0.15660
0.15660
0.15660
0.15660
0.15652
0.15652
0.15652
0.15652
0.15652
0.15574
0.15574
0.15574
0.15574
0.15574
0.15530
0.15530
0.15530
37 | P a g e
70.30542
70.30542
70.42283
70.42283
70.42283
70.42283
70.42283
70.49190
70.49190
70.49190
70.49190
70.49190
70.58169
70.58169
70.58169
70.58169
70.58169
71.00301
0.15530
0.15530
0.15556
0.15556
0.15556
0.15556
0.15556
0.15571
0.15571
0.15571
0.15571
0.15571
0.15591
0.15591
0.15591
0.15591
0.15591
0.15684
71.00301
71.00301
71.00301
71.00301
71.65226
71.65226
71.65226
71.65226
71.65226
71.74205
71.74205
71.74205
71.74205
71.74205
71.74205
71.74205
71.74205
71.74205
0.15684
0.15684
0.15684
0.15684
0.15828
0.15828
0.15828
0.15828
0.15828
0.15848
0.15848
0.15848
0.15848
0.15848
0.15848
0.15848
0.15848
0.15848
71.74205
72.31533
72.31533
72.31533
72.31533
72.31533
72.57778
72.57778
72.57778
72.57778
72.57778
72.28079
72.28079
72.28079
72.28079
72.28079
0.15848
0.15974
0.15974
0.15974
0.15974
0.15974
0.16032
0.16032
0.16032
0.16032
0.16032
0.15967
0.15967
0.15967
0.15967
0.15967
38 | P a g e
Appendix F XLFR5 Data
39 | P a g e
Figure F1 Lift and Drag Coefficients for Airfoil E210
40 | P a g e
Figure F2 Lift and Drag Coefficients for Airfoil E193
41 | P a g e
Figure F3 Lift and Drag Coefficients for Airfoil S1223
42 | P a g e

Report 2

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Report 2

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Mechanical Design Project I - ENGI 7926 - Report #2

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Undercarriage Analysis (Lucas) (3 Page) ............................................. 2

Design Considerations .......................................................................................... 2

Rear Portion of Undercarriage........................................................ 4

Design Considerations .......................................................................................... 4

Wing Analysis ......................................................................................... 5

Empennage Analysis ............................................................................ 10

Materials Considerations and Manufacturability ............................... 13

Economics and Cost ........................................................................................... 17

Model Airplane Prototype .................................................................... 18

Management Plans and Project Completion ...................................... 18

List of References ............................................................................. 21

Appendix A Wing Calculations ....................................................................... 22

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Appendix C DOW SM Foam Insulation Datasheet ......................................... 28

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Front Portion of Undercarriage

2.1.1 Design Considerations

Figure 1 Front Portion of Landing Gear Prototype

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Figure 2 Von Mises Stress for Landing Gear Impact

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Rear Portion of Undercarriage

2.2.1 Design Considerations

Figure 3 Rear Portion of Landing Gear

Figure 4 Rear Portion of Landing Gear with Skid Highlighted

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

3.1 Design Considerations

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

3.3 Airfoil Analysis

Figure 5 E193, E210 and S122 Airfoils.

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

3.4 Wing Concept Selection

Figure 6 Final Prototype of Airfoil

4.1 Distribution of weights

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Figure 7 Layout of Fuselage and Airplane Subsystems

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Figure 8 Different Types of Drag Experienced by an Airplane (Sadraey, 2009)

Figure 9 Fuselage Shapes and Potential Profiles (Sadraey, 2009)

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Figure 10 Twin Tail Type Design

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Figure 11 Preliminary FBD

Figure 12 Final FBD of Plane

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Materials Considerations and Manufacturability

6.1 Choice of Materials

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Figure 13 FloraCraft Foam (left) and DOW Foam (right)

6.2 Material Testing

Figure 14 Flexural Test Configuration

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Figure 15 Expanded Polystyrene Testing Results

Figure 16 Extruded Polystyrene Testing Results

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design

Construction Cost Estimate

Remote Controlled Model Airplane Design