DOCSLIB.ORG

The Screamin' Dingo

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Screamin' Dingo The Screamin’ Dingo An Investigation and Adventure into Competitive Aerobatic Light Sport Aircraft AIAA Undergraduate Team Aircraft Design Competition 2015 - 2016 Jefferson Vlasnik Joel Eppler Liam Murphy Riley Sprunger Michael Gritsch Justin Fox Taylor George Joel Kennedy Cameron Clanchy Team Member Nationality AIAA Number Signature Cameron Clanchy AUS 688036 Joel Eppler USA 688495 Justin Fox AUS 687865 Taylor George USA 665629 Michael Gritsch AUS 592050 Joel Kennedy AUS 687576 Liam Murphy AUS 687950 Riley Sprunger USA 464114 Jefferson Vlasnik USA 688450 Team Advisors Nationality AIAA Number Signature Dr. Ron Barrett USA 022393 Cees Bil AUS 077937 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ ii Acknowledgments The team would like to extend their gratitude towards those who lent their time and expertise throughout this design process: University of Kansas Representatives: Dr. Ron Barrett – Faculty Advisor Dr. Richard Hale Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology University Representatives: Dr. Cees Bil – Faculty Advisor DARCorp Representatives: Dr. Jan Roskam Dr. Willem Anemaat U.S.A. 2015 Unlimited Aerobatic Team: Mark Norwosielski Alligator Inc.: Ron Renz Federal Aviation Administration: Marv Nuss Wes Ryan OzAero Pty. Ltd.: David Pilkington All who attended the 2nd Annual “Snowbird Classic” Aerobatic Contest in Dunnellon, Florida for allowing us to observe, participate, and ask many questions. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ iii Table of Contents Page No. Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents........................................................................................................................................................... ii List of Symbols .............................................................................................................................................................. v List of Acronyms .......................................................................................................................................................... vi List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................................... vii List of Figures .............................................................................................................................................................viii Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 Compliance Matrix ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 Aircraft 3-Views ............................................................................................................................................................ 2 1. Mission Specification and Profile ................................................................................................................... 3 2. Historical Overview of Aerobatic Aircraft ...................................................................................................... 4 2.1 World War I ............................................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 Post War Barnstorming ............................................................................................................................ 5 2.3 Competitions and Modern Developments ................................................................................................ 6 2.4 Design Research Trip ............................................................................................................................... 7 3. STAMPED Vector Analysis, Initial Sizing ..................................................................................................... 9 4. Class I Configuration Selections ................................................................................................................... 18 4.1 Fuselage Configuration .......................................................................................................................... 20 4.2 Wing Configuration ............................................................................................................................... 20 4.3 Landing Gear .......................................................................................................................................... 21 4.4 Tail Configuration .................................................................................................................................. 21 4.5 Engine Configuration ............................................................................................................................. 22 4.6 Class I Configurations ............................................................................................................................ 23 5. Class I Design Procedure .............................................................................................................................. 24 5.1 Wing Layout .......................................................................................................................................... 24 5.2 Empennage Sizing .................................................................................................................................. 27 5.3 Undercarriage Integration ...................................................................................................................... 27 5.4 Weight and Balance ............................................................................................................................... 29 5.5 Longitudinal Stability ............................................................................................................................. 31 5.6 Lateral Stability ...................................................................................................................................... 31 5.7 Drag Polars ............................................................................................................................................. 32 6. Class I Propulsion System Layout and Integration ........................................................................................ 34 6.1 Potential Fuel Sources ............................................................................................................................ 34 6.1.1 100LL .............................................................................................................................................. 35 6.1.2 Motoring gasoline (Mogas) ............................................................................................................. 35 6.1.3 Jet A-1 ............................................................................................................................................. 36 6.1.4 Bio Fuels ......................................................................................................................................... 36 6.1.5 Electric ............................................................................................................................................ 36 6.2 Powerplant Selection .............................................................................................................................. 37 6.3 Leaded Fuel Replacement: Consideration .............................................................................................. 39 6.4 Propeller Selection ................................................................................................................................. 40 7. Down Selection from Class I Design Configurations .................................................................................... 41 8. Class II Cockpit and Fuselage Layout ........................................................................................................... 41 8.1 Fuselage Layout ..................................................................................................................................... 41 8.2 Cockpit Layout ....................................................................................................................................... 42 8.3 Cockpit Instrumentation - Single Seat Variant and Dual Variant Rear Seat .......................................... 42 8.4 Cockpit Instrumentation – Dual Variant Front (Subordinate) Seat ........................................................ 43 8.5 Flight Control Layout ............................................................................................................................. 44 9. Class II Design Procedure ............................................................................................................................. 44 9.1 Wing Design .......................................................................................................................................... 44 9.2 Undercarriage Integration ...................................................................................................................... 46 9.3 Weight and Balance
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Flying Wing Concept for Medium Size Airplane
    ICAS 2002 CONGRESS FLYING WING CONCEPT FOR MEDIUM SIZE AIRPLANE Tjoetjoek Eko Pambagjo*, Kazuhiro Nakahashi†, Kisa Matsushima‡ Department of Aeronautics and Space Engineering Tohoku University, Japan Keywords: blended-wing-body, inverse design Abstract The flying wing is regarded as an alternate This paper describes a study on an alternate configuration to reduce drag and structural configuration for medium size airplane. weight. Since flying wing possesses no fuselage Blended-Wing-Body concept, which basically is it may have smaller wetted area than the a flying wing configuration, is applied to conventional airplane. In the conventional airplane for up to 224 passengers. airplane the primary function of the wing is to An aerodynamic design tools system is produce the lift force. In the flying wing proposed to realize such configuration. The configuration the wing has to carry the payload design tools comprise of Takanashi’s inverse and provides the necessary stability and control method, constrained target pressure as well as produce the lift. The fuselage has to specification method and RAPID method. The create lift without much penalty on the drag. At study shows that the combination of those three the same time the fuselage has to keep the cabin design methods works well. size comfortable for passengers. In the past years several flying wings have been designed and flown successfully. The 1 Introduction Horten, Northrop bombers and AVRO are The trend of airplane concept changes among of those examples. However the from time to time. Speed, size and range are application of the flying wing concepts were so among of the design parameters.
    [Show full text]
  • 3-VIEWS - TABLE of CONTENTS to Search: Hold "Ctrl" Key Then Press "F" Key
    3-VIEWS - TABLE of CONTENTS To search: Hold "Ctrl" key then press "F" key. Enter manufacturer or model number in search box. Click your back key to return to the search page. It is highly recommended to read Order Instructions and Information pages prior to selection. Aircraft MFGs beginning with letter A ................................................................. 3 B ................................................................. 6 C.................................................................10 D.................................................................14 E ................................................................. 17 F ................................................................. 18 G ................................................................21 H................................................................. 23 I .................................................................. 26 J ................................................................. 26 K ................................................................. 27 L ................................................................. 28 M ................................................................30 N................................................................. 35 O ................................................................37 P ................................................................. 38 Q ................................................................40 R................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CANARD.WING LIFT INTERFERENCE RELATED to MANEUVERING AIRCRAFT at SUBSONIC SPEEDS by Blair B
    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19740003706 2020-03-23T12:22:11+00:00Z NASA TECHNICAL NASA TM X-2897 MEMORANDUM CO CN| I X CANARD.WING LIFT INTERFERENCE RELATED TO MANEUVERING AIRCRAFT AT SUBSONIC SPEEDS by Blair B. Gloss and Linwood W. McKmney Langley Research Center Hampton, Va. 23665 NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION • WASHINGTON, D. C. • DECEMBER 1973 1.. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. NASA TM X-2897 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date CANARD-WING LIFT INTERFERENCE RELATED TO December 1973 MANEUVERING AIRCRAFT AT SUBSONIC SPEEDS 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. L-9096 Blair B. Gloss and Linwood W. McKinney 10. Work Unit No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address • 760-67-01-01 NASA Langley Research Center 11. Contract or Grant No. Hampton, Va. 23665 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Technical Memorandum National Aeronautics and Space Administration 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington , D . C . 20546 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract An investigation was conducted at Mach numbers of 0.7 and 0.9 to determine the lift interference effect of canard location on wing planforms typical of maneuvering fighter con- figurations. The canard had an exposed area of 16.0 percent of the wing reference area and was located in the plane of the wing or in a position 18.5 percent of the wing mean geometric chord above the wing plane. In addition, the canard could be located at two longitudinal stations.
    [Show full text]
  • Experience Early Aviation with Fully
    REVIEW Maxford’s vintage- themed models look extremely authentic when they are in the air, although pilots EXPERIENCE EARLY will probably want to spring for the available optional pilot figures to more AVIATION WITH capably create a convincing scalelike profile. FULLY FUNCTIONING WATCH A VIDEO! WING WARPING Access additional Maxford USA 1/9 Rumpler Taube EP 64-Inch ARF content by visiting By Jon Barnes | [email protected] www.ModelAviation. Photos by the author com/bonuscontent. THERE IS NO DENYING the surfaces, which would in the the Etrich Taube. Why the logic behind man’s eager efforts future become the standard for seeming disparity? It is primarily to take to the sky in a flying almost all aircraft, was the yaw because, with no licensing fees, machine. Engineers of the early axis. at least 14 companies built vari- 20th century understandably Designed by Igo Etrich in 1909, ations of the initial design. The attempted to mimic the methods the Taube first flew in 1910. It two-seat Rumpler Taube ulti- used by birds to change direction would become the first mass-pro- mately proved to be the most and altitude. At least one early duced aircraft in Germany, and common type and thus most effort to imitate the eminently go on to be used for military pur- appropriately the subject of flexible tail and wing feathers of poses by several of the nations Maxford’s attention. a bird can be seen in a mono- embroiled that were in World Maxford USA’s propensity to plane known as the Taube. War I.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolving the Oblique Wing
    NASA AERONAUTICS BOOK SERIES A I 3 A 1 A 0 2 H D IS R T A O W RY T A Bruce I. Larrimer MANUSCRIP . Bruce I. Larrimer Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Larrimer, Bruce I. Thinking obliquely : Robert T. Jones, the Oblique Wing, NASA's AD-1 Demonstrator, and its legacy / Bruce I. Larrimer. pages cm Includes bibliographical references. 1. Oblique wing airplanes--Research--United States--History--20th century. 2. Research aircraft--United States--History--20th century. 3. United States. National Aeronautics and Space Administration-- History--20th century. 4. Jones, Robert T. (Robert Thomas), 1910- 1999. I. Title. TL673.O23L37 2013 629.134'32--dc23 2013004084 Copyright © 2013 by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The opinions expressed in this volume are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the United States Government or of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. This publication is available as a free download at http://www.nasa.gov/ebooks. Introduction v Chapter 1: American Genius: R.T. Jones’s Path to the Oblique Wing .......... ....1 Chapter 2: Evolving the Oblique Wing ............................................................ 41 Chapter 3: Design and Fabrication of the AD-1 Research Aircraft ................75 Chapter 4: Flight Testing and Evaluation of the AD-1 ................................... 101 Chapter 5: Beyond the AD-1: The F-8 Oblique Wing Research Aircraft ....... 143 Chapter 6: Subsequent Oblique-Wing Plans and Proposals ....................... 183 Appendices Appendix 1: Physical Characteristics of the Ames-Dryden AD-1 OWRA 215 Appendix 2: Detailed Description of the Ames-Dryden AD-1 OWRA 217 Appendix 3: Flight Log Summary for the Ames-Dryden AD-1 OWRA 221 Acknowledgments 230 Selected Bibliography 231 About the Author 247 Index 249 iii This time-lapse photograph shows three of the various sweep positions that the AD-1's unique oblique wing could assume.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bleriot Xi: a Study in Aerodynamics by Robert G
    THE BLERIOT XI: A STUDY IN AERODYNAMICS BY ROBERT G. WALDVOGEL If you wished to study aerodynamics, you would only need to look at the very early aircraft designs, such as the Bleriot XI. There are no high bypass ratio turbofans, nor upper deck lounges, nor global positioning systems. Instead, the aircraft is a sheer expression of the design solutions needed to overcome the four forces of flight: lift, weight, thrust, and drag. One of these “studies” can be made at Cole Palen’s Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome in Rhinebeck, New York. The culmination of ten previous configurations built by Louis Bleriot, who had reinvested 60,000 French francs amassed during an automobile lamp manufacturing venture to develop a technologically successful airplane in a race with such names as the Wright Brothers, Henri Farman, Santos Dumont, and Glenn Curtiss, the Bleriot XI itself had become the world’s first practical monoplane. The Bleriot VII, providing its initial foundation, had appeared with a partially enclosed fuselage to house its single pilot; wings braced to a tubular cabane framework over the cockpit; a four-bladed, 50-hp Antoinette engine; a large, dual-elevon horizontal tail; a small rudder; and swivelable, independently-sprung wheels. Although it crashed on December 18, 1907, it had nevertheless provided the foundation for a later, definitive design. The Bleriot VIII, rapidly following, had retained the low-wing configuration, but had featured pivoting, wing tip ailerons and a tricycle undercarriage, each comprised of single wheels. Although the Bleriot IX had been a larger variant of the VIII, and the Bleriot X had introduced a pusher-propeller arrangement with triple canard rudders, these intermediate steps had offered little to the ultimate design and therefore had been quickly discarded.
    [Show full text]
  • Model Builder October 1972
    OCTOBER 1972 65 cents volume 2, number 12 CARL GOLDBERG MODELS THAT G R A N G E R 4 2 The Versatile Almost· ARE REALLY Ready-To-Fly Full. Model. $1995 GREAT TO FLY! SKYLANE 62 ® © Takes Single To 4 Channel Proportional Radio. Molded Fuselage...One Piece Molded Wing, Stabilizer and Vertical Semi-Scale Beauty in Fin. Also Free Flight. Span 42". Weight 26 oz. For .049— .10 Engines. a Great Flying Model! Tough Roomy Cabin and Front End. For 2 1 ^ 4 Channel Proportional Steerable Nose Gear. Span 62". Weight 4>/2-5 Lbs. For 35 Tn .45 Engines. 10 FEATURES: Now With 1-Piece Full-Length Sides. Takes 2 to 4 Channel Pro­ portional. Span 56". Weight 3 Vi-4 tø lbs. For _15-.19-.35 Engines. • See-through cabin, with die-cut plywood cabin sides FEATURES: • Shaped leading edges plus sheeting • Semi-symmetrical wing section • Coil-sprung nose gear. • Cleanly die-cut parts that fit formed main gear • Clark Y wing section, hardwood struts • Shaped and notched leading and J R Ο κ η Α Μ ί trailing edges For Single or 2 Channel, Pulse or Digital. Span 37" • Steerable nose gear, formed main gear • Cleanly die-cut ribs, fuse sides, Weight 18 oz. For .049 formers, etc. • New simple "Symmet-TRU” Engines. $8.95 1/2A SKYLANE $9.95 wing construction For Single or 2 Channel, Pulse or Digital Span 4 2 ". Weight 22 oz. For .049 To • 10 Engines S k o e s t i m q $2995 The Goodyearfinndvpar RarprRacer With EnoughFnmioh ^ Area and Stability So You Can Fly It! For 4 Channel Proportional.
    [Show full text]
  • Design and Flight Testing of Inflatable Wings with Wing Warping
    05WAC-61 Design and Flight Testing of Inflatable Wings with Wing Warping Jamey D. Jacob, Andrew Simpson, and Suzanne Smith University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506 Copyright c 2005 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. ABSTRACT The paper presents work on testing of inflatable wings for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Inflatable wing his- tory and recent research is discussed. Design and con- struction of inflatable wings is then covered, along with ground and flight testing. Discussions include predictions and correlations of the forces required to warp (twist) the wings to a particular shape and the aerodynamic forces generated by that shape change. The focus is on charac- terizing the deformation of the wings and development of a model to accurately predict deformation. Relations be- Figure 1: Goodyear Model GA-468 Inflatoplane. tween wing stiffness and internal pressure and the impact of external loads are presented. Mechanical manipula- tion of the wing shape on a test vehicle is shown to be an effective means of roll control. Possible benefits to aero- craft was developed as a military rescue plane that could dynamic efficiency are also discussed. be dropped behind enemy lines to rescue downed pilots. Technology development, including delivery of dozens of INFLATABLE WINGS aircraft, continued until the early 1970s. PREVIOUS WORK While the concept of inflatable The Apteron unmanned aerial vehicle with inflatable structures for flight originated centuries ago, inflatable wings was developed in the 1970s by ILC Dover, Inc. wings were only conceived and developed within the last The Apteron (Figure 2) had a 1.55 m (5.1 ft) wingspan, few decades.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Design Final Design Review
    Group 7 AIRCRAFT DESIGN FINAL DESIGN REVIEW March 20, 2013 Sagun Bajracharya Roger Francis Tim Tianhang Teng Guang Wei Yu Abstract This document summarizes the work that group 7 has done insofar regarding the design of a radio-controlled plane with respect to the requirements that were put forward by the course (AER406, 2013). This report follows the same format as the presentation where we inform the reader where the current design is, how the group progressed towards that design and how we started. This report also summarizes a number of the important parameters required for a conceptual design like the cargo type & amount,Wing aspect ratio, Optimum Airfoil lift(CL), Thrust to weight ratio & Takeoff distance. In addition, this report presents the plane's wing and tail design, stability analysis and a mass breakdown. The report finally ends with pictures of the current design. 2 Contents 1 Design Overview6 2 Required Parameters6 3 Trade Studies6 3.1 Wing Design....................................... 7 3.2 Wing Configuration................................... 8 3.3 Fuselage Design..................................... 8 3.4 Tail Design ....................................... 9 3.5 Overall Selection .................................... 10 3.6 Parameters from Reference Designs.......................... 11 4 Flight Score Optimization 11 4.1 Cargo Selection..................................... 11 4.2 Propeller Selection ................................... 12 4.3 Flight Parameter Selection............................... 13 5 Wing Design 16 5.1
    [Show full text]
  • FALL 2003 - Volume 50, Number 3 Put High-Res Scan Off ZIP Disk of Book Cover in This Blue Space Finished Size: 36 Picas Wide by 52 Picas High
    FALL 2003 - Volume 50, Number 3 Put high-res scan off ZIP disk of book cover in this blue space finished size: 36 picas wide by 52 picas high Air Force Historical Foundation Benefits of Membership Besides publishing the quarterly journal Air Power History, the Foundation fulfills a most unique mis- sion by acting as a focal point on matters relating to air power generally, and the United States Air Force in particular. Among its many worthy involvements, the Foundation underwrites the publication of meaningful works in air power history, co-sponsors air power symposia with a national scope, and provides awards to deserving scholars. In 1953, a virtual “hall of fame” in aviation, including Generals Spaatz, Eaker Vandenberg, Twining, andFoulois, met to form the Air Force Historical Foundation, “to preserve and perpetuate the history and traditions of the U.S. Air Force and its predecessor organizations and of those whose lives have been devoted to the service.” By joining, one becomes part of this great fellowship doing worth- Exclusive Offer for Air Force Historical Foundation Members while work, and receives an exceptional quarterly publication as well. See page 55 for details. Come Join Us! Become a member. FALL 2003 - Volume 50, Number 3 Why the U.S. Air Force Did Not Use the F–47 Thunderbolt in the Korean War Michael D. Rowland 4 “Big Ben”: Sergeant Benjamin F. Warmer III, Flying Ace John W. Hinds 14 The Dark Ages of Strategic Airlift: the Propeller Era Kenneth P. Werrell 20 Towards a Place in History David G. Styles 34 Remembrance Richard C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wright Stuff
    1203cent.qxd 11/13/03 2:19 PM Page 1 n a chilly North Carolina edge. It is likely that this informa- Omorning 100 years ago, two tion became the basis for the design brothers from Dayton, Ohio, at- of their early gliders. It also led them tempted a feat others considered im- to contact Octave Chanute, an possible, and their success changed American engineer who was the world. leading the way for experiments in Today we take air travel for aeronautics. granted, and rarely give a second thought to our capability to fly liter- Three problems ally anywhere in the world. But one The Wrights realized from the be- hundred years ago, the endeavors ginning that they had to solve three of the Wrights and other aeronau- problems: tical pioneers were widely viewed • Balance and control. as foolhardy. Although some of the THE WRIGHT • Wing shape and resulting lift. world’s most creative minds were • Application of power to the converging on a solution to the flight structure. problem, well-respected scientists STUFF: Of the three, they correctly recog- such as Lord Kelvin thought flight Materials in the Wright Flyer nized that balance and control were impossible. the least understood and probably In fact, Simon Newcomb, pro- The flight of the Wright Flyer was the most critical. To solve that fessor of mathematics and as- the “first in the history of the world problem, they turned to gliding ex- tronomy at Johns Hopkins Univer- periments. sity and vice-president of the in which a machine carrying a man National Academy of Sciences, had had raised itself by its own power The 1900 glider declared only 18 months before the into the air in full flight, had sailed After a few preliminary experi- successful flight at Kitty Hawk, forward without reduction of speed, ments with small kites, they built “Flight by machines heavier than air and had finally landed at a point as their first glider in 1900.
    [Show full text]
  • Program Monitors
    ALLEVIATION OF FUSELAGE FORM DRAG USING VORTEX FLOWS DOE/CE/15277--T1 Final Report on work performed under TI89 004158 U.S. Department of Energy Grant DE-FG01-86CE15277 15 September 1987 DISCLAIMER DR. A. Wortman This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi- bility for the accuracy, completeness. or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or . process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refer- ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recom- mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. ISTAR INC. 406 Aka Avenue Santa Monica, CA 90402 (213) 394-7332 PROGRAM MONITORS: _* T. Levinson D. Mello DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. FOREWORD AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The concept of employing discrete large vortices, to develop favorable cross-flow and to energize the boundary layer in the aft regions of transport aircraft fuselages, was first proposed by the author almost 10 years ago as an apparently original approach to the reduction of fuselage drag. A series of feasibility demonstration proposals, starting with the 1981 USAF DESAT program was submitted to various U.S.
    [Show full text]