dragon eye new - virginia techmason/mason_f/dragoneye.pdf · tornado 0.07 -0.1969 -0.301 software c...

AOE 4124 Configuration

Aerodynamics

Dragon Eye

Jessica Walker

Rich Stark

Brian Squires


Aerodynamics

Outline

• Purpose/Mission

• Air Vehicle Configuration

• Airfoil Data

• Planform Data

• Aerodynamic Characteristics

• Assessment


Aerodynamics

Purpose / Mission:

• Real-Time Imagery Data

• Single Company / Platoon Deployment

• Complete light-weight ready-to-use as delivered system

• Point reconnaissance.

• Area reconnaissance (less than point).

• Confirmation of other intelligence sources.

• Investigation of the situation in a city before entry.

• Reconnaissance of bridges and routes with patrols, andfrom towns.

• Identification of forces that were firing on them.

• Battle damage assessment.

• During a convoy movement.


Aerodynamics

Dragon Eye:

Naval Research Laboratory: Washington, D.C.

http://www.mcwl.quantico.usmc.mil/events/index.asp


Aerodynamics

Air Vehicle:

• Airframe– Comprised of Kevlar based

composite systems.

– Comprised of 5 pieces that can beassembled in under 5 minutes.

• Propulsion– Two small electric motors (props)

• Autonomous flight capability

• Payloads– Day time color, low-light level, and

infrared cameras

http://www.livingroom.org.au/uavblog/archives/dragon_eye_uav.php


Aerodynamics

Specifications:

• Wingspan – 45 in

• Chord – 12 in

• Operational Weight – 5 lbs

• Operational Radius – 3.1 mile

• Combat Radius – 6.2 miles

• Altitude – 300 to 500 ft

• Operational Speed – 35 kts


Aerodynamics

Airfoil Data:

CADD from N.R.L


Aerodynamics

Airfoil Data (cont.):

CADD from N.R.L


Aerodynamics

Planform Characteristics:

• Rectangular Wing

• No Twist

• Simplicity is the

Key!

http://www.turbosquid.com/HTMLClient/FullPreview/FullPreview.cfm/ID/199104/Action/FullPreview


Aerodynamics

Aerodynamic Parameters:

• CLcruise 2D = 0.31

• CLcruise 3D = 0.2804

• CLmax 2D = 1.2719

• CLmax 3D = 1.1447

• Mcruise = 0.05

• Span e = 0.98 (from LIDrag)


Aerodynamics

Cl Cruisew/o Boundary Layer Trip

SEPARATION BUBBLE


Aerodynamics

Cl CruiseBoundary Layer Trip at 25% c

NO SEPARATION BUBBLE


Aerodynamics

Alpha Sweepw/o trip


Aerodynamics

Alpha Sweeptrip at 25% c


Aerodynamics

Planform Analysis

http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/Index.cfm/I

D/199104/Action/FullPreview

http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/Index.cfm/I

D/199104/Action/FullPreview


Aerodynamics

Tornado Analysis Model

Deflected control surfaces that

trim the aircraft.


Aerodynamics

Longitudinal Stability

-0.0111-1.03590.00398VLMpc

-0.301-0.19690.07Tornado

Cm/Cm/ CLCmoSoftware

The reason for the discrepancy in the results obtained from

Tornado and VLM4998 result from the fact that the model of

Dragon Eye created in tornado was able to estimate the reflex of

the airfoil sections by deflection of the trailing-edge flaps. In order

to obtain more accurate results the reflex that the Dragon Eye UAV

has must be correctly modeled.

Tornado showed that the control surfaces must be deflected to -25

degrees in order to obtain the required CLcruise of 0.3115 at trim.

This deflection also serves as a rough estimate of the reflex and

the required control surface deflection for trim.


Aerodynamics

Lift Coefficient vs. Moment

Coefficient

Trim Crossplot

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

Coefficient of Lift, CL

Pit

ch

ing

Mo

me

nt

Co

eff

icie

nt,

Cm

cg

de = -14

de = -12

de = -10

de = -20

de = -30

de = -25

Trim Points


Aerodynamics

Lateral-Directional Stability

Lateral - Directional Stability Analysis

-0.07

-0.06

-0.05

-0.04

-0.03

-0.02

-0.01

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0 5 10 15 20 25

Beta (deg)

La

tera

l S

tab

ilit

y C

oe

ffic

ien

ts

Rolling Moment

Yawing Moment

Side Force


Aerodynamics

Drag Analysis:

DFormDFDOCCC +=

0.01233CDo

0.00228CDForm

0.01005CDF

Re

2

A

CCC

L

DoD+=

2

*086614935.001233.0LDCC +=

The drag analysis was completed with the

use of Tornado, FRICTION and Lifting Line

Theory.


Aerodynamics

Drag Polar Comparison

Dragon Eye Drag Polar Comparisons

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2

Coefficient of Drag, CD

Co

eff

icie

nt

of

Lif

t, C

L

Tornado

Tornado (Corrected)

FRICTION

LLT (Induced Drag)


Aerodynamics

Assessment

• “The true value of it is that it’s right there inthe hand of the guy who needs the info andneeds the intel,” said Col. Jim Howcroft,who served as the intelligence officer forthe 1st Marine Division in Iraq. “It wasliterally in his hip pocket … and gives himinfo on what he wants to find and gets itback, no kidding, as it’s flying.”

• “It’s somewhat fragile … and its range isn’thuge”

By Sandra Jontz, Stars and StripesEuropean edition, Friday, January 23, 2004

• Increased range and endurance would beconsidered desirable—provided there is noincrease to weight of air vehicle

Department of the Navy (OIF feedback)

Department of the

Navy


Aerodynamics

References

• Carruthers, Steven. Naval Research Laboratory.

• Bryant, John. Naval Research Laboratory.

• http://www.composites.sparta.com/uav.htm

• http://www.mcwl.quantico.usmc.mil/events/index.asp (mission)

• http://www.mcwl.quantico.usmc.mil/divisions/expplans/dragon_eye_employment.pdf

• http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/Index.cfm/ID/199104/Action/FullPreview

• “Stars and Stripes” European edition, Friday, January 23, 2004

dragon eye new - virginia techmason/mason_f/dragoneye.pdf · tornado 0.07 -0.1969 -0.301 software c...

Documents