Scribd
Upload
6 views

Homework3

Uploaded by

Juan Felipe Uribe Cifuentes
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
6 views

Homework3

Uploaded by

Juan Felipe Uribe Cifuentes
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

School of Mechanical Engineering Report

Universidad del Valle


EIME-UV 2023
April 20, 2024, , Cali, Valle del cauca, Colombia

HOMEWORK 3.

Juan Felipe Uribe Cifuentes


Flight Dynamics
Universidad del valle
Code: 2302139

Statement central ”wing box” was define as an equivalent mass set in the
Using the XFLR5 software, analyze and specific configuration symmetric wing plane and the whole body aircraft was model as
for the Impetus-Purdue aircraft and find the pitching moment co- a single part. The base model design in the XFLR5 software is
efficient as a function of the angle of attack and determine its shown in the figure 2.
stability for free flow velocities equals to 5,10 and 15 m/s.
1 CAD
The CAD model in which this homework was based is the
Purdue-Impetus aircraft, that is shown below:

FIGURE 2: Base model design in the software XFLR5


.
Finally, model mass properties were defined in function of the
.
masses registered in the real PLA prototype constructed by the
Impetus Indomitus research team. An example, of mass distri-
FIGURE 1: Impetus-Purdue CAD model bution over the base model is shown in the figure 3. The model
. total mass is described in the next section.

The model develop on this homework has the following charac-


teristics:
1. variable length in the range of 1.0 to 1.2 meters
2. Main wing spam and chord of 1.40 and 0.12 meters, respec-
tively, dihedral angle of 30°, winglets and Eppler E205 air-
foil
3. Horizontal stabilizer spam and chord of 0.4 and 0.12 meters,
respectively, and NACA 0012 airfoil
4. vertical stabilizer with a root and tip chord of 0.12 and 0.06
meters, respectively, and NACA 0012 airfoil
two simplifications were made in order to be able to desing the FIGURE 3: Representation of Mass distribution over the model
aircraft body on the XFLR5 software, which are as follows: The .

1
2 Aircraft configurations analyzed
Initially, just one configuration was studied for the three different
values of flow velocity, However, the corresponding curve to
pitching moment coefficient as a function of the angle of attack
does not change in spite of changes in the flow velocity, this,
due to the magnitude of aerodynamic forces over the prototype
increase proportionally with flow velocity but the distances
still constant respecto to center of mass, then, the moment
over the center of mass did not change. Therefore, other two
configuration were studied, which are shown below:

Configuration 1: it is set when the ”tail” is on the closest


possible position respect to the main wing and the angle
of attack of both main wing and horizontal stabilizer
equals zero, also, there is not additional masses on the glider
noose, therefore, the model total mass is equal to 450 grams.

Configuration 2: the same aerodynamic set and mass of


configuration 1, except, the tail is on the furthest possible
location respect to the main wings. FIGURE 4: pitching moment coefficient as a function of the an-
gle of attack for the three configurations set
configuration 3: the tail is set at 0.44 meters respect to the .
main wing, the angle of attack to the main wing and the hor-
izontal stabilizer are 0° and -2°, respectively, also, 50 grams
of mass were added to the glider noose, then, the total model
mass is equal to 500 grams for this configuration.

3 Longitudinal moment coefficient as a function of


the angle of attack
The results for the pitching moment coefficient as a function of
the angle of attack, for the set configurations are shown in the fig-
ure 4, where the the blue line with triangular marker, the purple
line with square marker and the gray dot line represent the curves
for configuration 1, 2 and 3 respectively, for the three free flow
velocities, however, these are overlapping ( for the reason ex-
press in the previous), for this, there are just three curves instead
nine curves (three free flow velocities for three configurations).

FIGURE 5: pitching moment coefficient as a function of the an-


4 Longitudinal static stability gle of attack.
as could be appreciated in the figure 4, the configurations 1 and 2 .
are unstable in face of perturbations of their trim flight conditions
due to both curves has a positive slope at the condition where Despite the longitudinal static stability, it is important to know
the pitching moment coefficient equals zero, therefore, the forces the magnitude of the lift force that the aerodynamic configura-
distribution will increase the movement response in front of a tion can deliver in order to ensuring the lift force will be greater
perturbation instead of reduce it, and the aircraft stability will than the model weight. For this reason, in the figure 5 it is shown
diverge. however, the configuration 3 shows a better stability the lift as a function of the angle of attack for the three different
behaviour having a negative slope in their trim flight conditions values of flow velocity, the blue lines with triangles marker repre-
that is at an angle of attack of 7.3° sent the Lift for the configuration 2 and 3 (there are two different

2 Copyright © by ASME
configurations but the curves are overlapping) and the gray dot
line represent the Lift for the configuration 1. The curves rep-
resent the free flow velocities of 5, 10 and 15 m/s in ascending
order, and it is possible to appreciated that for free velocity flow
of 5 m/s, the magnitude of Lift force is less than the model weight
for all the angles of attack analyzed, therefore, the model will not
able to fly, however, at a free flow velocities of 10 an 15 m/s the
lift generated for angles above the trim angle is greater than the
model weight, then, the model will able to flight.

3 Copyright © by ASME

You might also like