DOCSLIB.ORG

Building a Flying Machine

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Building a Flying Machine Building a Flying Machine By: Arianna Bilal-Threats At first we made our fuselage out of straws because we thought air flow would take over and increase lift. We made the wings out of folder paper because we thought it would be sturdier than regular paper. After learning about the 4 forces- lift, thrust, drag, and weight, we knew that there needed to be a point at the front of the plane called a nose. So, we used a fuselage made out of a plastic bottle because it has a point that looked like a nose. We cut the bottom off of the bottle. We thought the air would flow through and increase lift, the force that brings you up. And for wings, we used cardboard. We also had double wings because at a museum we saw the Wright brothers plane had double wings and their plane was a success. Then, we noticed our fuselage was the heaviest part of the plane. So, we made a plane with all paper. We folded a half of a paper into a tube and put a paper point at the front for a nose. Then, for the wings we made little rectangles (x4) and took 2. Then, we curved one and put it on top. The same for the other wing. We decided to put a curve on top of the wing to increase a stream lined shape. That flew! But, not for long. We were happy but we wanted something that flew long distance. So, we tried something simpler. We used a straw and taped two wings on top. We thought it did not fly because the wings on top were 2 pieces so we made it 1 piece wing on top. It still did not fly but we persevered and we made our final draft which is the same design as the all- paper plane. We decided that because that was the only successful plane. You know when you learn something you should keep the knowledge forever. So, I will keep what I learned about the four forces- lift, drag, thrust, and weight. I will take it away with me because they are important to flight. They are important because they help it move. Thrust pushes the plane forward and drag pulls it back. Lift brings it up and weight pushes it down. I will take that away because the 4 forces were one of the first things we learned about. Also, one of the main ways we decided how to make changes in our flying machines. And that, my learners, is the story of me and Kai’s flying machine! Building a Flying Machine By: Max Sawyer First, we made a plan for our flying machine. Second, we made our flying machine. It had no wings because we thought wings would create more weight. But it fell quickly. Third, we made a cardboard airplane with 4 wings because then we knew that wings made lift. It flew better than the first plane, but still not very well because it weighed too much. We learned it weighed too much when we dropped paper, cardboard, and plastic for an experiment and cardboard fell faster than paper. Fourth, we got rid of two wings because we learned that a plane only needs 2 wings. It worked! It flew for 2.53 seconds! But we still thought it could be better, so we decided to use paper wings and a pencil in the front because then it would be streamlined to reduce drag and increase thrust. But it did not work so we curved the wings once we learned about air pressure and drag, but it did not work so we got rid of the pencils and it flew for 4.23 seconds! This expedition taught me about the 4 forces and how they work on an airplane during the 7 phases of flight (pre-flight, taxiing, take-off, ascending, cruising, descending, and landing). Building a Flying Machine By: Anthony Coomber At first, we had a card board tube, and 2 parachutes to make the plane slow down when it fell. We didn’t know it then, but this is called drag. Then, we had a plane with a cardboard cup fuselage and small wings. Then, we put large wings on the top of the plane. We nicknamed it “the flying possum.” It has a streamlined nose to stop drag. At last, we made a hang glider like plane with a straw frame and a balloon engine to make thrust. Over all our flying machine was a success!!! Building a Flying Machine By: Quinn Joswick First, we used a flat piece of cardboard as the fuselage, flattened out tape boxes for the wings, and a parachute made out of straws and felt. The parachute would help the plane during landing by increasing drag. Drag is the force that slows you down. Next, we went to the college park aviation museum and learned that the wright brother’s plane had ribs. So, we changed the fuselage to a cardboard roll so we could easily add double wings with ribs, which the wright brothers had also put on their plane. Then, we did an experiment where we dropped a water bottle, cardboard roll, and a rolled up sheet of paper at the same time to see which one would hit the ground first because of gravity. The paper fell slowest so we made our plane out of paper and put the cardboard inside because we learned at the air and space museum that a plane needs some weight. We also learned that a plane needs surface area. Surface area is when air is pushing up or down on something flat. So, we taped the double wings together to make more surface area. Also, Ethan’s dad came in and told us that planes have ailerons, elevators, and a rudder. So, we made ailerons on our wing to help determine which way the plane will turn. We also put on a back peace which holds the rudder and elevators. The rudder also helps the plane turn and the elevator helps determine if the plane will go up or down. We added a bump on the top of the plane’s wings so the air would go fast over top and there would be little air pressure and s-l-o-w on the bottom and there would be lots of air pressure. That’s called Bernoulli’s principle. It was created by physicist Daniel Bernoulli. Finally, we decided to make the fuselage out of file paper and the nose out of normal paper. File paper for the fuselage because we wanted it to be light, but have some weight. Normal paper for the nose because it would curve nicely. It has paper plate wings, ailerons, and ribs made out of straws. The engine is a balloon that you blow up, let go, and it propels the plane forwards. This expedition taught me a lot about planes, the forces of flight, and how flight works. Building a Flying Machine By: Timothy Cox-Henderson At first, we used cardboard and popsicle sticks, but it was too heavy and gravity pulled it straight down and it broke. Next, we used paper and straws that worked out and we kept using those materials. Once, we tried it without straws and that worked out fabulously! I think it worked well because the wings were curved and the fuselage was small. It was well balanced. This made it fly fast and good. We used straws so the air could go through and the plane could cut through the air. This created thrust on our plane. We tried to add more surface area on the wings to create more lift, but if fell straight to the ground because it wasn’t well balanced, so we took them off. I feel good about our flying machine because we did good, we worked hard, and our plane flew well! Building a Flying Machine By: Darryl Wilkins Our first plane was made out of cardboard and foam. It had 2 wings, one in the back and one in the front. It did not fly well because I think it was too heavy. So, we used a plastic bottle for the body and cardboard wings. We cut a hole in the bottle so the air could go through it and lift it up. We also thought it would create thrust and fight off drag by pushing the air backwards so the plane can go forward. It flew for a few seconds and fell. Then, we did an experiment and I learned weight doesn’t matter, shape and surface area matter. There needs to be more surface area to make it catch air. The fast air needs to stay on top and the slow air needs to stay on the bottom. This helps the air push the wings up. This is called lift. We decided to make a kite instead of a plane because a kite has more surface area. My partner cut it into a heart shape, but it kept spinning out of control and wouldn’t fly. I think it didn’t work because the sides were not equal and the shape was not aerodynamic. Most kites have a point, but our kite did not so it couldn’t glide. This expedition taught me about flight and the four forces. This helped us build a more successful flying machine. Even though our flying machines didn’t work that well, we still worked hard and we learned from our mistakes.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Design and Development of an Electromechanical Drogue Parachute Line Release Mechanism for Level 3 High-Power Amateur Rockets
    Portland State University PDXScholar University Honors Theses University Honors College 5-24-2019 The Design and Development of an Electromechanical Drogue Parachute Line Release Mechanism for Level 3 High-Power Amateur Rockets Marie House Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/honorstheses Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation House, Marie, "The Design and Development of an Electromechanical Drogue Parachute Line Release Mechanism for Level 3 High-Power Amateur Rockets" (2019). University Honors Theses. Paper 753. https://doi.org/10.15760/honors.770 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in University Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. The design and development of an electromechanical drogue parachute line release mechanism for level 3 high-power amateur rockets by Marie House An undergraduate honors thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in University Honors and Mechanical Engineering Thesis Adviser Robert Paxton Portland State University 2019 Abstract This research has developed a viable drogue parachute release system sufficient for recovering level 3 amateur rockets. The system is based on the simple mechanics of combining two lever arms and a 2 to 1 pulley interaction to create a 200:1 force reduction between the weight applied to the system and the force required to release it. A linear actuator retracts a release cord, triggering the three rings that hold the system together to unfurl from one another and separate the drogue parachute from the payload.
    [Show full text]
  • This Index Lists the Army Units for Which Records Are Available at the Eisenhower Library
    DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER LIBRARY ABILENE, KANSAS U.S. ARMY: Unit Records, 1917-1950 Linear feet: 687 Approximate number of pages: 1,300,000 The U.S. Army Unit Records collection (formerly: U.S. Army, U.S. Forces, European Theater: Selected After Action Reports, 1941-45) primarily spans the period from 1917 to 1950, with the bulk of the material covering the World War II years (1942-45). The collection is comprised of organizational and operational records and miscellaneous historical material from the files of army units that served in World War II. The collection was originally in the custody of the World War II Records Division (now the Modern Military Records Branch), National Archives and Records Service. The material was withdrawn from their holdings in 1960 and sent to the Kansas City Federal Records Center for shipment to the Eisenhower Library. The records were received by the Library from the Kansas City Records Center on June 1, 1962. Most of the collection contained formerly classified material that was bulk-declassified on June 29, 1973, under declassification project number 735035. General restrictions on the use of records in the National Archives still apply. The collection consists primarily of material from infantry, airborne, cavalry, armor, artillery, engineer, and tank destroyer units; roughly half of the collection consists of material from infantry units, division through company levels. Although the collection contains material from over 2,000 units, with each unit forming a separate series, every army unit that served in World War II is not represented. Approximately seventy-five percent of the documents are from units in the European Theater of Operations, about twenty percent from the Pacific theater, and about five percent from units that served in the western hemisphere during World War II.
    [Show full text]
  • State Archives of North Carolina Tiny Broadwick Pioneer of Aviation Lesson Guide This Is a Picture of the Balloon from Which Tiny Made Most of Her Jumps
    State Archives of North Carolina Tiny Broadwick Pioneer of Aviation Lesson Guide This is a picture of the balloon from which Tiny made most of her jumps. 1 Fun facts about the “Broadwick” balloons •No altimeter was used so she had to listen for the sound of a blank being shot out of a gun for the signal to jump. •The balloon usually rose two thousand feet or higher. •The heat used to inflate the balloon was coal oil which gave the ever-present possibility of it catching on fire. •The winds were unpredictable and steering the parachute almost impossible. •The balloon was made out of eleven hundred yards of sheeting like unbleached muslin. •The balloon stood ninety-two feet high and fifty-six feet through the middle. •Tiny would hang on a trapeze suspended from the balloon. •When the air in the balloon cooled, it was at maximum height. •The aeronaut had to jump before the balloon cooled too much since it would start to fall. •There was no gauge to tell when the balloon was ready to rise; the aeronaut had to use his/her intuition. •Before Charles Broadwick invented a automatic ground support, at least 15 to 20 men would have to hold the balloon down before they released it and it rose. Make a list of things you notice about the balloon pictured here that is different from balloons used today? 2 While you are looking at these images of Tiny think about the type of clothing she is wearing. # 1 Photograph of Tiny Broadwick in outfit worn as #2 Tiny Broadwick wearing one of her outfits she “Doll girl.” wore for airplane jumps.
    [Show full text]
  • Training Guide for Powered Parachute Ultralights
    TTrraaiinniinngg GGuuiiddee ffoorr PPoowweerreedd PPaarraacchhuuttee UUllttrraalliigghhttss Safety Information for Instructors and Students EAA Powered Parachute Ultralight Training Guide Version 1.2 ______________________________________________________________________________ Introduction Ultralight aviation in the United States is the most unencumbered opportunity for solo flight in the world. Tremendous freedoms are given to ultralight pilots. However, at the same time there are strict limitations that must be followed. With this freedom, however, come responsibilities to ensure the safety of other individuals in the airspace as well as on the ground. In 1982 the FAA issued Federal Aviation Regulation Part 103, Ultralight Vehicles. With this regulation, the FAA chose to identify ultralights as vehicles and not aircraft. Because they are vehicles and not aircraft, this regulation allows individuals to operate ultralight vehicles without requiring FAA pilot or vehicle certification. Upon publishing Part 103 the FAA said it did not wish to issue pilot certificates for ultralight operators. Instead, the FAA said individuals who want to fly ultralights should participate in industry-established self-regulation and training programs. Since 1983 EAA has maintained programs to support Part 103 and has held an exemption to Part 103 that allowed the operation of 2-place ultralight training vehicles by authorized ultralight flight instructors. In 2004, the FAA passed the sport pilot & light-sport aircraft regulations. One specific purpose of this new rule was to transition 2-place ultralight training vehicles to experimental light-sport aircraft. As a result, after the training exemption expires on 1/31/08 there will no longer be a way to fly a 2-place ultralight to train ultralight pilots.
    [Show full text]
  • Properly Sizing Parachutes for Your Rockets
    I S S U E 1 4 9 - OCTOBER 7, 2 0 0 5 Properly Sizing Parachutes for Your Rockets INSIDE: • Working with Parachute Descent Rates • Refinishing Damaged Tubes • Website Worth Visiting 1130 Elkton Drive, Suite A Colorado Springs, Colorado 80907 USA www.ApogeeRockets.com e-mail: [email protected] phone: 719-535-9335 fax: 719-534-9050 I S S U E 1 4 9 - OCTOBER 7 , 2 0 0 5 than any other recovery method. The best parachutes are made from strong, thin, soft, fl exible material. For "Are Your Descent Rates Decent?": small models, thin plastic sheets work very well be- Calculating How Fast Your Models Fall cause they can be folded up tightly to fi t into small-di- ameter body tubes. Some sources for parachute cano- pies include: Mylar®, plastic drop cloths, dry-cleaning by John Manfredo bags, trash bags, and gift-wrapping plastic. Use care when selecting a plastic material for a parachute. Test {Ed. Part I of this article comes from the book: it by trying to tear it in both directions-sometimes the "Model Rocket Design and Construction" by Tim Van material is strong in one direction but weak in another. Milligan.} Use only plastic that is strong in both directions. For PART I rockets with a descent mass greater than 300 grams (10.5 oz.) use a cloth material like cotton, silk, polyes- ter, or nylon. These materials can withstand the larger Parachute Design opening forces that bigger models can create. Heat- Parachutes can be used on almost any size rocket.
    [Show full text]
  • Design and Testing of the Kistler Landing System Parachutes
    AIAA-99-1707 DESIGN AND TESTING OF THE KISTLER LANDING SYSTEM PARACHUTES Anthony P. Taylor*, Robert J. Sinclair , Richard D. Allamby, M.B.E.à Irvin Aerospace Inc., Santa Ana, California 92704 The Kistler Landing system consists of parachutes and airbags to land both stages of the Kistler Aerospace, K-1 Reusable Launch Vehicle. The K-1 Reusable Launch Vehicle is a commercial venture to develop the worlds first fully re-usable launch vehicle. The unmanned launcher consists of two stages, the first or Launch Assist Platform (LAP), and the second stage, or Orbital Vehicle (OV). This paper presents an update on the status of parachute testing for the Kistler program. Introduction The Kistler Landing system consists of parachutes and airbags to land both stages of the Kistler Aerospace, K-1 Reusable Launch Vehicle. The K-1 Reusable Launch Vehicle is a commercial venture to develop the worlds first fully re-usable launch vehicle. The unmanned launcher consists of two stages, the first or Launch Assist Platform (LAP), and the second stage, or Orbital Vehicle (OV). Following staging, the LAP performs a return to launch site maneuver and is then recovered for a soft earth landing using parachutes and airbags. Recovery of the nearly 45,000 lb vehicle is accomplished with a drogue and main stage, followed by an airbag attenuated impact. The drogue stage consists of two 40.0 ft conical ribbon parachutes, similar in design to the shuttle orbiter parabrake. The main stage consists of six (6), 156.0 ft. diameter ring sail parachutes. These parachutes are rigged in two clusters of three parachutes.
    [Show full text]
  • The System Approach to Spin/Stall Parachute Recovery Systems--A Five Year Update
    The System Approach to Spin/Stall Parachute Recovery Systems--A Five Year Update Anthony P. (Tony) Taylor Director, Business and Technical Development Irvin Aerospace Inc INTRODUCTION Slightly over 5 years ago, Irvin Aerospace Inc (Irvin) presented to the SETP Symposium our solution to the ‘System Approach’ for Spin/Stall Parachute Recovery Systems (SSPRS). In general, this involved additional involvement of the parachute manufacturer, to provide the entire suite of components that support the control, deployment and release of the parachute. In our previous experience, several of these components were designed and built by the airframe manufacturer, typically by a flight test organization. For reasons that will be described, this approach is largely being replaced by the ‘one stop shop’ approach. The benefits, including highly increased experience and lessons learned, are outlined herein. This Paper reviews our experiences over the past five (5) years. Having delivered, installed, and operated systems on tens of aircraft, and several classes, we have refined and improved equipment, procedures and processes. Many of these lessons learned are presented, either as general programmatic comments, or as descriptions of detailed changes to critical components. We also present some lessons learned that are directly related to flight-testing this class of system. Finally, we present some system deployment sequences that provide enhanced understanding of the overall system function. IRVIN AEROSPACE INC PAGE: 2 OF 34 WHAT IS A SPIN/STALL PARACHUTE RECOVERY SYSTEM? The parachute approach to Spin/Stall Parachute Recovery System (SSPRS) is rather well defined. It involves a relatively rapid deployment of the parachute from the aircrafts tail.
    [Show full text]
  • Part 105—Parachute Operations
    Federal Aviation Administration, DOT § 105.3 PART 105—PARACHUTE (c) Sections 105.5, 105.9, 105.13, 105.15, OPERATIONS 105.17, 105.19 through 105.23, 105.25(a)(1) and 105.27 of this part do not apply to Subpart A—General a parachute operation conducted by a member of an Armed Force— Sec. (1) Over or within a restricted area 105.1 Applicability. when that area is under the control of 105.3 Definitions. an Armed Force. 105.5 General. 105.7 use of alcohol and drugs. (2) During military operations in un- 105.9 Inspections. controlled airspace. Subpart B—Operating Rules § 105.3 Definitions. 105.13 Radio equipment and use require- For the purposes of this part— ments. Approved parachute means a para- 105.15 Information required and notice of chute manufactured under a type cer- cancellation or postponement of a para- tificate or a Technical Standard Order chute operation. (C–23 series), or a personnel-carrying 105.17 Flight visibility and clearance from U.S. military parachute (other than a cloud requirements. high altitude, high speed, or ejection 105.19 Parachute operations between sunset type) identified by a Navy Air Facility, and sunrise. 105.21 Parachute operations over or into a an Army Air Field, and Air Force-Navy congested area or an open-air assembly drawing number, an Army Air Field of persons. order number, or any other military 105.23 Parachute operations over or onto designation or specification number. airports. Automatic Activation Device means a 105.25 Parachute operations in designated self-contained mechanical or electro- airspace.
    [Show full text]
  • Stabilizing Mechanisms for Personnel Parachute Systems
    Stabilizing mechanisms for personnel parachute systems “…I lay on my back. The center of spinning is somewhere near my neck. My feet are going in a large circle, my head in a small one. I am spinning with frightening speed. I have do get out of this corkscrew spin, otherwise it will be bad. I am making reverse jerks, throwing out my right arm. With difficulty I get out of the spin, but I don’t see the ground…..I don’t even know in what position I am falling. Blood rings in my ears. In order to equalize the pressure I try to sing. But the song doesn’t work. Then I simply start to yell, like a town crier, the first words that come to mind….Losing orientation, I again can’t see anything. I am shaken, thrown from side to side, twisted and rolled. I am stunned and can’t figure out what I need to do in order to stop this torture…” This is an extract from a story of one the pioneers of Soviet parachuting, the well known sport jumper Nikolai Evdokimov, about the record setting jump with a 142 second delay from a height of 8100 meters made by him on July 17, 1934. The first parachutists, starting to master jumps with delayed openings, were confronted with what is now called unstable freefall. At that time they didn’t know how to control it. UNSTABLE FREEFALL In addition to jumps with an immediate opening of the parachute, when the parachute is opened immediately after exiting from the aircraft by a staticline, it is sometimes necessary to make jumps with a delayed opening.
    [Show full text]
  • Decision to Use an Airframe Parachute in a Flight Training Environment
    Publications 2014 Decision to Use an Airframe Parachute in a Flight Training Environment Scott R. Winter Florida Institute of Technology, [email protected] Richard O. Fanjoy Purdue University Chien-Tsung Lu Purdue University Thomas Q. Carney Purdue University James P. Greenan Purdue University Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/publication Part of the Aviation Safety and Security Commons, and the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Scholarly Commons Citation Winter, S. R., Fanjoy, R. O., Lu, C., Carney, T. Q., & Greenan, J. P. (2014). Decision to Use an Airframe Parachute in a Flight Training Environment. Journal of Aviation Technology and Engineering, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/2159-6670.1091 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Available online at http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/jate Journal of Aviation Technology and Engineering 3:2 (2014) 28–34 Decision to Use an Airframe Parachute in a Flight Training Environment Scott R. Winter Florida Institute of Technology Richard O. Fanjoy, Chien-Tsung Lu, Thomas Q. Carney, and James P. Greenan Purdue University Abstract The purpose of this study was to complete a qualitative analysis of the decision-making process used by pilots to determine whether or not to deploy an airframe parachute system. A sample of participants from the subject university’s flight training program was selected to complete a scripted simulator flight in instrument flight conditions. During the flight, participants experienced an engine failure while en- route during IFR conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • NTSB Aviation Incident Final Report
    National Transportation Safety Board Aviation Incident Final Report Location: Dallas, TX Incident Number: CEN13IA285 Date & Time: 05/16/2013, 1120 CDT Registration: N715CD Aircraft: CIRRUS SR22 Aircraft Damage: None Defining Event: Sys/Comp malf/fail (non-power) Injuries: 1 None Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Personal Analysis The pilot reported that he lost airplane control during cruise flight in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) and turbulence. He subsequently activated the airplane’s parachute system, but the parachute failed to deploy. The pilot regained control of the airplane after exiting IMC and landed the airplane without further incident. Certification tests were performed from level flight at speeds ranging from 62 to 137 knots indicated airspeed, and one test included deployment of the parachute system after a one-turn spin. The testing showed that to minimize the chances of parachute entanglement and reduce aircraft oscillations under the parachute, the parachute system should be activated from a wings-level, upright attitude if possible. Postincident examination of the parachute system did not reveal any system component failure. Postincident testing showed that off-axis deployment of the parachute could exceed the forces required for a successful deployment of the parachute. If the airplane has a large pitch or bank angle or angular rates (or a combination of these) as the parachute rocket leaves the airplane, the airplane will rotate and cause the rocket tether to pull at an angle other than that intended, and the parachute will fail to deploy. Radar data showed that the airplane was in a very dynamic flight pattern with extreme pitch and bank angles when the parachute system was activated.
    [Show full text]
  • National Transportation Safety Board Aviation Incident Data Summary
    National Transportation Safety Board Aviation Incident Data Summary Location: Dallas, TX Incident Number: CEN13IA285 Date & Time: 05/16/2013, 1120 CDT Registration: N715CD Aircraft: CIRRUS SR22 Injuries: 1 None Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Personal Analysis The pilot reported that he lost airplane control during cruise flight in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) and turbulence. He subsequently activated the airplane’s parachute system, but the parachute failed to deploy. The pilot regained control of the airplane after exiting IMC and landed the airplane without further incident. Certification tests were performed from level flight at speeds ranging from 62 to 137 knots indicated airspeed, and one test included deployment of the parachute system after a one-turn spin. The testing showed that to minimize the chances of parachute entanglement and reduce aircraft oscillations under the parachute, the parachute system should be activated from a wings-level, upright attitude if possible. Postincident examination of the parachute system did not reveal any system component failure. Postincident testing showed that off-axis deployment of the parachute could exceed the forces required for a successful deployment of the parachute. If the airplane has a large pitch or bank angle or angular rates (or a combination of these) as the parachute rocket leaves the airplane, the airplane will rotate and cause the rocket tether to pull at an angle other than that intended, and the parachute will fail to deploy. Radar data showed that the airplane was in a very dynamic flight pattern with extreme pitch and bank angles when the parachute system was activated.
    [Show full text]