Aerodynamics Preliminary Design Review 2 October 23 Bridget

Aerodynamics Preliminary Design Review #2 October 23, Bridget 2000 Fitzpatrick Patrick Dempsey Heather Garber Keith Hout Jong Soo Mok

Objectives -Three View Drawing Update -Coefficient of Lift -Methods Update: Warner and Roskam -Drag Polar -Lift to Drag Curve -Endurance Parameter -CMARC Update -Aerodynamic Effectiveness of the Control Surfaces -Stability Derivatives

Aircraft Geometry – 3 -View SID 5

Coefficient of Lift Method Clmax Warner 1. 25 Roskam 1. 48 Average 1. 37 2 -D 1. 53

Aerodynamic Mathematical Model WARNER

Aerodynamic mathematical model Roskam 3 -D Coefficient of Lift

Aerodynamic mathematical model Roskam 3 -D Coefficient of Lift Slope

Aerodynamic mathematical model Roskam 3 -D Coefficient of Drag

3 -D Drag Polar Optimum CL~1

Lift to Drag Ratio

Endurance Parameter:

Endurance:

Flight Conditions for maximum endurance L/D max: 7. 2 Velocity: 20. 52 ft/s Angle of Attack: 8. 37 degrees CL: 1. 03 CD: 0. 16

Coefficient of Moment

Coefficient of Moment Calculations Equations taken from Mark Peters thesis

Aircraft Geometry -SM: the static margin was set at 0. 18

Aircraft Geometry Aircraft wetted Area 59. 5 ft 2 Wing 38. 7 ft 2 Struts 0. 83 ft 2 Tails 9. 01 ft 2 Landing gear -0. 003 ft 2 Aspect ratio of wing 4. 4

Control Surfaces Raymer’s Suggestions Orion Aerospace Ailerons 15 -25% chord 15% chord full span Elevator 25 -50% chord 40% chord full span Rudder 25 -50% chord 40% chord full span

Aerodynamic Effectiveness of the control surfaces Rudder Effectiveness: 60% Elevator Effectiveness: 60% Aileron Effectiveness: 30% Effectiveness determined from Roskam’s Flight Dynamics and Controls

Stability Derivatives -Theoretical Method: This was presented on Tuesday. -Will be compared to CMARC needs: -working wake -will use to verify theoretical derivatives

Aerodynamic coefficients CL CL wing CLo Cm Cmo Cm CDo 3. 938 3. 7914. 5242 -. 4428. 5503. 5992 -. 8667. 0427

Questions?