propeller locations study on delta-winged unmanned...
TRANSCRIPT
PROPELLER LOCATIONS STUDY ON DELTA-WINGED UNMANNED
AERIAL VEHICLE (UAV) MODEL
KHUSHAIRI AMRI BIN KASIM
A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Philosophy
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
MARCH 2017
iii
Specially dedicated to my supportive and lovely parents,
siblings and friends for always being at my side.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and above all, I praise Allah S.W.T for providing me this opportunity
and granting me the capability to proceed successfully. This thesis appears in its
current form due to the assistance and guidance of several people. I would therefore
like to offer my sincere thanks to all of them.
Firstly, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Dr.
Shabudin bin Mat for the continuous support of my Master study and related
research, for his patience, motivation, and immense knowledge. His guidance helped
me in all the time of research and writing of this thesis. I also would like to thank
my co-supervisor Dr. Iskandar Shah bin Ishak for his constant support availability
and constructive suggestion, which were determined for the accomplishment of the
work presented in this thesis.
Besides my advisor, I would like to thank the rest of my thesis committee:
Dr. Rizal Effendy Mohd Nasir and Assoc. Prof. Dr. Syahrullail bin Samion for their
insightful comments and encouragement, but also for their insight which encouraged
me to widen my research from various perspectives.
My sincere thanks also to the technicians of the UTM Aerolab for their help
in offering me the resources in running the research. Without their precious supports
and guides, it would not be possible to finish this research.
Finally, I must express my very profound gratitude to my parents and to my
friends for providing me with unfailing support and continuous encouragement
throughout my years of study and through the process of writing this thesis. This
accomplishment would not have been possible without them.
v
ABSTRACT
Delta wing design is being used in aircraft to obtain high manoeuvre properties.
The flow above the delta wing is complicated and dominated by a very complex vortex
structure. This research investigates the effects of the propeller locations on the
aerodynamic characteristics above a generic 55° sharp-edged non-slender delta wing
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) model. This research was performed by an
experimental method. The experiments were conducted in a closed circuit Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia-Low Speed Tunnel (UTM-LST) wind tunnel at wind speed of 20
m/s and 25 m/s respectively. In this project, the propeller was located at three different
locations at front, middle and rear of the wing. The experimental data highlights an
impact of propeller locations on lift, drag, pitching moment and vortex characteristic
of the UAV model. Rear propeller configuration recorded the highest lift generation.
Meanwhile, middle propeller configuration has the highest drag with increment by 2%
to 15%. The results also show that the propeller advance ratio plays important roles in
development of the primary vortex above the delta-winged model. The higher
propeller advance ratio would decrease the development of the vortex on the wing,
consequently limiting the lift generation and stall condition in which are
disadvantageous for aircraft aerodynamic characteristics. The lift coefficients decrease
by 7% when the propeller advance ratio is increased from 0.98 to 1.20. Lastly, suction
effect from the propeller has improved the vortex properties better than blowing
mechanism in which is beneficial for the delta-winged UAV propeller selection.
vi
ABSTRAK
Penggunaan reka bentuk sayap delta diaplikasikan pada pesawat bagi
memperoleh olah gerak yang tinggi. Penggunaan sayap delta ini dapat dimanfaatkan
dengan penghasilan daya angkatan yang lebih baik berbanding dengan reka bentuk
pesawat konvensional. Walau bagaimanapun, aliran udara di atas permukaan sayap
delta ini sangat kompleks kerana reka bentuk ini mempunyai aliran pusaran yang
terhasil di sisi sayap. Oleh itu, kajian ini dibuat bagi mengenal pasti kesan lokasi kipas
yang diletakkan pada model Pesawat Udara Tanpa Pemandu (UAV) dari segi aspek
aerodinamik dan corak perubahan aliran pusaran di atas permukaan sayap delta. Model
UAV yang digunakan dalam kajian ini merupakan sayap delta 55° bersisi tajam.
Kajian dijalankan secara eksperimen menggunakan terowong angin litar tertutup
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia-Low Speed Tunnel (UTM-LST) pada kelajuan angin
20 m/s dan 25 m/s. Posisi kipas diletakkan di tiga tempat berbeza iaitu di hadapan,
tengah dan belakang model. Hasil dapatan kajian difokuskan terhadap kesan lokasi
kipas terhadap daya angkatan, daya heretan, momen anggulan dan ciri vorteks. Data
daripada eksperimen mendapati pemasangan kipas terhadap model UAV
mempengaruhi daya angkatan, daya heretan dan momen anggulan model pesawat.
Kipas yang dipasang di belakang model mencatatkan nilai pekali daya angkat yang
tertinggi. Manakala kipas yang dipasang di tengah model mencatatkan daya heretan
yang tertinggi dengan peningkatan sebanyak 2% hingga 15%. Hasil dapatan kajian
juga menunjukkan bahawa nisbah mara kipas memainkan peranan penting dalam
pembentukan aliran pusaran di atas sayap delta. Nisbah mara kipas yang tinggi akan
mengurangkan pembentukan aliran pusaran di atas sayap delta sekaligus mengehadkan
penghasilan daya angkatan dan pendakian pesawat. Pekali daya angkat didapati
berkurangan sebanyak 7% apabila nisbah mara kipas dinaikkan dari 0.98 ke 1.20.
Akhir sekali, kesan penggunaan kipas terhadap aliran pusaran menunjukkan bahawa
mekanisme sedutan memberikan kesan yang lebih ketara berbanding dengan
mekanisme tiupan.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE
DECLARATION ii
DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
ABSTRACT v
ABSTRAK vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF FIGURES xi
LIST OF SYMBOLS xv
LIST OF APPENDICES xvii
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background of the Study 1
1.2 Delta Winged UAV 5
1.3 Research Objectives 7
1.4 Scope of Study 7
1.5 Significant of Studies 8
2 LITERATURE REVIEW 9
2.1 Why Delta Wing 9
2.2 Delta Wing Flow Topology 11
2.3 Non-Slender Delta Wing Flow Topology 17
2.4 Influences of Reynolds Number on Non-Slender Delta
Wing
22
2.5 Effects of Angle of Attack on Non-Slender Delta Wing 28
2.6 Vortex Breakdown on Non-Slender Delta Wing 31
2.7 Delta Winged UAV Flow Topology 32
2.8 Delta Wing with Propeller Configuration 35
2.9 Delta-Winged UAV with Propeller Configuration 39
2.10 Unresolved Issues in Delta Wing Aerodynamics 51
3 METHODOLOGY 52
3.1 Research Design 52
3.2 UAV Wind Tunnel Model Design 54
3.3 Model Specification 57
3.4 Wind Tunnel Testing 61
3.5 Electrical Motor System 65
3.6 Propeller 66
3.7 Data Collection 66
3.8 Reynolds Number Calculation 70
3.9 Balance Data and Pressure Coefficient Calculation 71
3.9.1 Coefficient of Lift, CL 72
3.9.2 Coefficient of Drag, CD 72
3.9.3 Coefficient of Pitching Moment, CM 73
3.9.4 Coefficient of Pressure, CP 73
3.10 Data Correction Analysis 74
3.10.1 Solid Blockage 76
3.10.2 Wake Blockage 77
3.10.3 Total Blockage and Data Correction 79
3.11 Propeller Advance Ratio (J) 80
3.12 Data Presentations 81
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 82
4.1 Repeatability Test 82
4.2 Results: Steady Balance 84
4.2.1 Effects of Reynolds Number (Clean Wing
Configuration)
84
4.2.2 Effects of Propeller Advance Ratio, J
(Propeller Configurations)
87
4.2.3 Effects of Propeller Locations 93
4.3 Results: Surface Pressure Measurement 98
4.3.1 Effects of Reynolds Number on Pressure
Distribution
98
4.3.2 Effects of Propeller Advance Ratio, J on
Pressure Distribution
100
4.3.3 Effects of Propeller Locations on Pressure
Distribution
102
4.3.4 General Overview on Propeller Effects on
Vortex
111
4.5 Surface Pressure Contour 111
5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 117
5.1 Conclusions 117
5.2 Recommendations 119
REFERENCES 120
Appendices A-D 129-154
x
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE
1.1 Classification of UAVs by EUROVS 3
2.1 Comparison between tractor, pusher and middle propeller
configurations
50
3.1 Experiment set of the delta winged UAV model 64
3.2 Parameter of the model and correction factors for data
correction
76
3.3 Value of J in the experiments 80
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE
1.1 Robo-fly UAV 2
1.2 LA100 UAV 4
1.3 Delta wing configurations 5
1.4 Several examples of delta winged UAVs 6
2.1 SYMDEL 1 10
2.2 Shear layer and leading-edge vortices above a delta wing 12
2.3 Leading edge flow structure on a delta wing 13
2.4 Lift on a delta wing 13
2.5 Internal structure of primary vortex 14
2.6 Main features flow with leading edge separation and
vortex sheet
16
2.7 Dual vortex structure formation on Λ=50° sweep delta
wing
17
2.8 Sketch of dual vortex mechanism 18
2.9 Dual vortex formation for 45° sweep delta wing 19
2.10 Effects of sweep angle toward vortex properties 20
2.11 Detachment of the primary vortex based on sweep angles 21
2.12 Effect of Reynolds number on vortex above non-slender
delta wing
22
2.13 Primary vortex location with Reynolds number from
several experiments
24
2.14 Primary vortex location with Reynolds number 24
2.15 Reynolds number effects on primary and shadow vortices
above non-slender delta wing
25
2.16 Effects of Reynolds number on dual vortex structure 26
xii
2.17 Oil flow pattern of non-slender delta wing at Reynolds
number of 200,000
27
2.18 Effects angle of attack on vortex formation at Reynolds
number of 8,700
28
2.19 Vortex distance from wing at angle of attack 5° and 10° 29
2.20 Effects of angle of attack on vortex distance from wing
surface
29
2.21 Effect of angle of attack on vortex above non-slender
delta wing
30
2.22 Effects of angle of attack on surface flow pattern 31
2.23 Vortex breakdown on non-slender delta wing 32
2.24 Flow on 55° delta wing with different leading-edge radius 33
2.25 Flows on delta winged UAV with/without centerbody 33
2.26 Flow visualization studies over the upper surface of the
half-span 1303 UAV model at Re = 3.5 × 104
34
2.27 Surface flow field of Boeing 1301 UCAV 35
2.28 Side and top view of the experiment set up 36
2.29 Suction fan effect on vortex at α = 25° 36
2.30 Suction fan speed effects on vortex system at α = 25° 37
2.31 Delta wing model with nozzles near the apex 38
2.32 Vortex core location on blowing 39
2.33 Oil flow pattern above MAV for three configurations 40
2.34 Lift, drag and pitching moment coefficient of MAV 41
2.35 Delta winged UAV with middle propeller 43
2.36 Lift generated by MAV in motor ON and OFF modes 43
2.37 Leading edge extension configurations 44
2.38 Aerodynamic characteristics for leading extension
configurations with the motor ON and OFF modes
45
2.39 MAV aerodynamic characteristics 45
2.40 Flow visualization on MAV with propeller effects 46
2.41 Experimental setup and installation 47
xiii
2.42 Lift and pitching moment coefficient on 65° swept delta
wing
48
2.43 Effects of pusher propeller actuation on 65° swept delta
wing upper surface pressure distribution
48
3.1 Framework of research 53
3.2 Existing delta-winged model with several propeller
locations
54
3.3 UAV wind tunnel model in CAD drawing 55
3.4 Dimensions of the UAV model 56
3.5 Pressure taps location on UAV model 57
3.6 Pressure taps numbering 58
3.7 UAV model configurations 59
3.8 Support system for the UAV model 60
3.9 Model installation for each configuration in wind tunnel 62
3.9 (c)-(d) 63
3.10 Electrical motor system of the UAV model 65
3.11 Propeller used for the UAV model 66
3.12 General process in data collection and data analysis 67
3.13 UTM-LST external balance 68
3.14 FKPS 30DP electronic pressure scanner 69
3.15 The notation of forces and moment 71
3.16 Flow chart of data correction 74
3.17 Solid blockage constant 77
3.18 CDu against CLu2 plot 78
3.19 Data Presentation 81
4.1 Measurement of CL and CD for clean wing 83
4.2 Effects of Reynolds number for clean configuration 85
4.2 (c) 86
4.3 Lift coefficient with angle of attack from experiment and
various sources
87
4.4 Effects of advance ratio on balance data (Front propeller) 88
4.4 (c) 89
xiv
4.5 Effects of advance ratio on balance data (Middle
propeller)
89
4.5 (b)-(c) 90
4.6 Effects of advance ratio on balance data (Rear propeller) 91
4.6 (c) 92
4.7 Effects of propeller locations on lift coefficient 94
4.8 Effects of propeller locations on drag coefficient 95
4.9 Effects of propeller locations on pitching moment
coefficient
96
4.10 Effects of propeller locations on lift-drag ratio 97
4.11 Effects of Reynolds number on pressure distribution
above the wing
99
4.12 Propeller advance ratio effects on pressure distribution 100
4.12 (b)-(c) 101
4.13 The effects of front propeller on vortex properties 103
4.13 (c)-(d) 104
4.14 The effects of middle propeller on vortex properties 106
4.14 (c)-(d) 107
4.15 The effects of rear propeller on vortex properties 109
4.15 (c)-(d) 110
4.16 Surface pressure contour for clean wing at α=8° 112
4.17 Surface pressure contour for front propeller at α=8° 113
4.18 Surface pressure contour for middle propeller at α=8° 113
4.19 Surface pressure contour for rear propeller at α=8° 114
4.20 Surface pressure contour for clean wing at α=12° 115
4.21 Surface pressure contour for front propeller at α=12° 115
4.22 Surface pressure contour for middle propeller at α=12° 116
4.23 Surface pressure contour for middle propeller at α=12° 116
xv
LIST OF SYMBOLS
c - Mean aerodynamic chord
C - Wind tunnel cross sectional area
CD - Drag force coefficient
CL - Lift force coefficient
CM - Pitching moment coefficient
CP - Pressure coefficient
D - Propeller diameter
f - Propeller frequency
F - Force
J - Propeller advance ratio
L - Spanwise length
L/D - Lift to drag ratio
M - Moment
P - Pressure
q - Dynamic pressure
Re - Reynolds number
S - Surface area
T - Temperature
v - Velocity
V - Volume
xvi
Y/Cr - Chordwise location
Λ - Wing sweep angle
α - Angle of attack
β - Prandtl-Glauert compressibility factor
ε - Blockage component
µ - Dynamic viscosity
ζ - Angle between wing surface with vortex core
ρ - Air density
τ - Solid-blockage constant
xvii
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX TITLE PAGE
A Delta-Winged UAV Model Drawing 129
B Kriging Method 146
C Polhamus Method 148
D Published Research Article 153
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) is an aerial vehicle that operates without a
pilot on board. UAVs can be operated by the pilot at the ground control station
(controlled aircraft) or autonomous flying by preprogramed flight routes (autopilot
system). There are numerous types of UAVs available with various shapes and sizes.
UAVs exist in many types with different capabilities for the user requirements (Bento,
2008). Development of UAV was instigated by the piloted aircrafts evaluations (Koma
et al., 2008). The primary advantage of the UAV over piloted aircraft is portability.
UAV is easily to be stored, transported and launched in time-sensitive manner. Thus,
this made the operational cost of UAVs are cheaper compared to conventional aircraft.
UAVs can overcome the limitations of piloted aircraft such that unnecessary risk
exposure towards pilots and air crews during rescue missions or surveillance
operations. As UAVs are operated remotely, rescue and surveillance activities in
dangerous and non-accessible area can be performed without risking more lives
(Tajima et al., 2013; Nakashima et al., 2014). Aircraft with smaller design is becoming
essential to be used for limited period missions for both military and civil purposes
(Koma et al., 2008). Development of battery, wireless and Micro-Electromechanical
Systems (MEMS) have enable UAVs with increased capability at lower cost and
smaller in size (Hall et al., 2009). The current smallest UAV is Robo-fly shown in
Figure 1.1 is having insect imitation (entomopters) only weighing 106mg and capable
of search and rescue missions (Griffiths, 2014). UAVs becoming more favourable as
its special capability to operate lower than crewed aircraft. Furthermore, UAVs are
2
capable to achieve a higher elevation than any land vehicles. The usage of UAVs can
be seen in 1940 when 15,000 units of radio controlled target drones were sold to United
States military for anti-aircraft training for World War II by Reginald Danny (Dillow,
2014). Currently, large and small companies are developing and designing UAVs
(Shafer & Green, 2010). Large companies conducting research on the UAVs design
by using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and wind tunnel testing, enabling them
to have better potential design before flight testing.
Figure 1.1: Robo-fly UAV (Griffiths, 2014)
Numerous different groups have suggested reference standards for UAVs. One
of them is the European Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems (EUROVS). The
EUROVS had classified UAVs based on several parameters such flight endurance,
altitude and size (Bento, 2008). Table 1.1 shows the classification of UAVs created
by EUROVS.
3
Table 1.1: Classification of UAVs by EUROVS (Bento, 2008)
Category
(acronym)
Maximu
m Take
Off
Weight
(kg)
Maximu
m Flight
Altitude
(m)
Endura
nce
(hours)
Data Link
Range
(km)
Micro/
Mini
UAVs
Micro (MAV) 0.10 250 1 <10
Mini <30 150-300 <2 <10
Tactical
UAVs
Close Range
(CR)
150 3,000 2-4 10-30
Short Range
(SR)
200 3,000 3-6 30-70
Medium Range
(MR)
150-500 3,000-
5,000
6-10 70-200
Long Range
(LR)
- 5,000 6-13 200-500
Endurance
(ER)
500-1,500 5,000-
8,000
12-24 >500
Medium
Altitude, Long
Endurance
(MALE)
1,000-
1,500
5,000-
8,000
24-48 >500
Strategic
UAVs
High Altitude,
Long
Endurance
(HALE)
2,500-
12,500
15,000-
20,000
24-48 >2,000
Special
Task
UAVs
Lethal (LET) 250 3,000-
4,000
3-4 300
Decoys (DEC) 250 50-5,000 <4 0-500
Stratospheric
(Strato)
TBD 20,000-
30,000
>48 >2,000
Exo-
stratospheric
(EXO)
TBD >30,000 TBD TBD
In the past, UAVs had been used mostly for the military purposes. Currently,
UAVs is starting to be used in scientific, commercial and public safety tasks (Bento,
2008). UAVs purpose to carry out civil missions’ potential was discovered when
UAVNET (UAV Network) project is launched in October 2001. This is followed by
another two projects, USICO (UAV Safety Issues for Civil Operation) and CAPECON
(Civil UAV Applications and Economic Effectivity and Potential Configuration
Solutions) in May 2012 (Smith & Rajendran, 2014). Dillow (2014) stated the usage of
UAVs for non-military purposes have been escalating in developed countries such as
4
Japan, France, United Kingdom and Australia. UAVs are a potential device to be used
in various applications such as in agriculture, map building, traffic surveillance,
construction, film production, search and rescue mission and weather forecasting. For
the meteorology field, UAV is used to observe development of storms (Handwerk,
2013). From the program, the valuable surveillance in stormy area can be captured by
the UAV which cannot be performed by the manned plane. In topography field,
Sensefly and Drone Adventures promotes usage of UAV for civil application by
mapping Matterhorn mountain, which is located on the border between Switzerland
and Italy (Carrol, 2013). For agriculture purposed, UAV cameras can be used to
monitor growth of plants at specific field section. Current UAV is equipped with
infrared camera enabling plant health observation based on the photosynthesis
efficiency (Handwerk, 2013). One of the flying UAV used for civil application is
LA100 which is shown in Figure 1.2. LA100 is produced by Lehmann Aviation Ltd
and having 92 cm wingspan and 1.25 kg in weight. LA100 is designed for civil
applications such as reconnaissance, security, mapping, survey and monitoring. The
UAVs are able to take still aerial images and real-time videos.
Figure 1.2: LA100 UAV (Lehmann Aviation, 2014)
92 cm
5
1.2 Delta-Winged UAV
The advancement of the technology has triggered essential of aircraft that
capable of higher speed and manoeuvre. Delta wing configurations are suitable for
both supersonic and subsonic aircraft (Pevitt & Alam, 2014). The delta wing design
initially was carried out in Germany in the early 1940s (Whitford, 1987). After the
Allied won the Second World War, delta wing design was appeared on drawing for
major aircraft design. The delta wing is having triangle appearance on wing plan and
is named after Greek letter delta (Δ) as their similar shape (Teli et al., 2014). The delta
wing configuration can be divided into slender and non-slender wing based on their
swept angle (Λ). Slender wing having very high swept angle which are Λ>60°. Delta
wing is categorised in fixed-wing UAVs alongside with flying wing class and blended
winged body (BWB) class. There is different type of delta wings, which are standard
delta, tailed delta, cropped delta, compound delta, cranked arrow, ogival delta, lambda
delta and diamond wing. The delta wing configurations are shown in Figure 1.3.
(a) Standard
delta
(b) Tailed Delta (c) Cropped delta
(d) Compound
delta
(e) Cranked
arrow
(f) Ogival delta (e) Lambda
(f) Diamond
Figure 1.3: Delta wing configurations (Pevitt & Alam, 2014)
6
Currently, delta wing design is implanted in UAVs application (Tricoche et al.,
2004). Delta planform is favourable in the UAVs design because of the excellent
properties at a higher angle of attack (Polhamus, 1966). Delta wing configuration in
UAV shows aerodynamic advantages over conventional design in power efficiency
and lower ratio of wetted area to volume (Tajima et al., 2013). Delta-winged UAV
design is always simple and robust. Thus, the delta wing aircraft is having less complex
design and having high durable design accompanied by extra internal volume for
power source and aircraft system. Normally, delta wing UAV is stronger than a similar
swept wing UAV. The delta winged UAV can be built stronger than swept wing
aircraft as the spar attaches with the fuselage afar in front of the centre of gravity. Since
delta wing aircraft having simple design, it is likely to have less impact during crash
and could minimise the possible damage that may occur. The manufacturing cost of
the delta wing could be reduced as it need less materials. Figure 1.4 shows several
existing flying delta wing UAVs.
Figure 1.4: Several examples of delta winged UAVs (RCGroups.com, 2014;
SkyHighHobby.com, n.d.)
7
1.3 Research Objective
The aim of this project is to investigate the effects of propeller locations on the
aerodynamic and vortex characteristics above sharp-edged delta wing UAV. In order
to achieve the said objectives, the research will;
(i) Measure the aerodynamic characteristics of delta-winged UAV with and
without rotating propeller.
(ii) Investigate the effects of propeller locations on the vortex characteristics
of the delta-winged UAV model.
(iii) Investigate the effects of advance ratio for all propeller configurations on
the delta-winged UAV.
1.5 Scope of the Research
As the main objective of this project is to investigate the effects of propeller
locations on the vortex properties above non-slender sharped-edge delta wing, the
scopes of this research are divided into four stages:
(i) Literature review on delta wing UAV and delta wing flow topology.
(ii) Model design and fabrication of the UAV model in standard delta category.
(iii) Wind tunnel experiment of the model without the propeller, called as clean
wing configuration.
(iv) Wind tunnel experiment of the model with several propeller locations. In
this project, the locations of the propeller were set at three stations:
In front of the wing.
In the middle part of the wing.
In the rear part of the wing.
It has been decided that the motor speed was set at 6,000 rpm since most of the UAVs
are flying at this speed.
8
1.6 Significance of the Research
This research would provide a better insight into the aerodynamic
characteristic and the vortex properties above delta-winged UAV under the effects of
rotating propeller installed on the wing at three locations, i.e. front, middle and rear.
The speed of the motor was set at 6,000 rpm based on the standard range of propeller
speed in the same category of UAV. Two measurements techniques which are steady
balance data and surface pressure measurement are used to evaluate the UAV
performance.
120
REFERENCES
Abbott, I. H., & Doenhoff, A. E. (1959). Theory of Wing Sections Including a
Summary of Airfoil Data. New York: Dover Publications.
Ahn, J., & Lee, D. (2012). Airfoil Designs and Free-Flight Tests of a Fixed Wing
MAV Design. 30th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference (pp. 1-8). New
Orleans: AIAA.
Ahn, J., & Lee, D. (2013). Aerodynamic Characteristics of a Micro Air Vehicle and
the Influence of Propeller Location. 31st AIAA Applied Aerodynamics
Conference. San Diego, CA: AIAA.
Barlow, J. B., Rae Jr, W. H., & Pope, A. (1999). Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing
(3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Bento, M. D. (2008, January-February). Unmanned Aerial Vehicle: An Overview.
54-61. InsideGNSS.
Brett, J., & Ooi, A. (2014). Effect of Sweep Angle on the Vortical Flow Over Delta
Wings at an Angle of Attack of 10°. Journal of Engineering Science and
Technology, 9(6), 768-781.
Carroll, J. (2013). The future is here: Five applications of UAV technology.
Retrieved December 14, 2015, from Vision Systems Design:
http://www.vision-systems.com/articles/2013/12/the-future-is-here-five-
applications-of-uav-technology.html
Chen, L., Wang, J., Zuo, L., & Feng, L. (2010). Influence of Reynolds Number on
Vortex Flow over a Nonslender Delta Wing. AIAA Journal, 48(12), 2831-
2839.
121
Choi, S., & Ahn, J. (2010). A Computational on the Aerodynamic Influence of a
Pushe Propeller on a MAV. 40th Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit
(pp. 1-7). Chicago: AIAA.
Cooper, K. R. (2000). A Summary of Classical Blockage Corrections for Aircraft
Models in Closed-Wall Wind Tunnels. Ottowa, Canada: Aerodynamic
Laboratory NRC.
Cummings, R. M., Morton, S. A., & Siegel, S. G. (2008). Numerical prediction and
wind tunnel experiment for a pitching unmanned combat air vehicle.
Aerospace Science and Technology, 12(5), 355-364.
Dillow, C. (2014, October). Get Ready for Drone Nation. 15, 58-67. Fortune.com.
Earnshaw, P. B. (1961). An Experimental Investigation of the Structure of a Leading-
Edge Vortex. Aeronautical Research Council Reports and Memoranda, No.
3786.
Earnshaw, P. B., & Lawford, J. A. (1964). Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Experiments on a
Series of Sharp-Edged Delta Wings. Aeronautical Research Council Reports
and Memoranda No. 3424.
Elkhoury, M. (2014). Performance of Transition-Sensitive Models in Predicting
Flow Structures over Delta Wings. Journal of Aircraft, 1-13.
Galinski, C., & Mieloszyk, J. (2012). Results of the Gust Resistant MAV Progranne.
28th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences (pp. 1-10).
Brisbane: ICAS 2012.
Galiński, C., & Żbikowski, R. (2007). Some problems of micro air vehicles
development. Buletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences Technical Sciences,
55, 91-99.
Galiński, C., Lawson, N. J., & Żbikowski, R. (2004). Delta Wing with Leading Edge
Extension and Propeller Propulsion for Fixed Wing MAV. 24th International
Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences (pp. 1-10). Yokohama: ICAS 2004.
122
Galiński, C., Mieloszyk, J., & Piechna, J. (2010). Progress in the Gust Resistant
MAV Programme. 27th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences
(pp. 1-10). Nice: ICAS 2010.
Gordnier, R. E., & Visbal, M. R. (2003). Higher-Order Compact Difference Scheme
Applied to the Simulation of a Low Sweep Delta Wing Flow. 41st Aerospace
Sciences Meeting and Exhibit (pp. 1-15). Reno: AIAA.
Gordnier, R. E., & Visbal, M. R. (2007). Computational and Experimental
Investigation of a Nonslender Delta Wing. 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences
Meeting and Exhibit (pp. 1-24). Reno: AIAA.
Griffiths, S. (2014). World's smallest drone Robofly. Retrieved April 5, 2015, from
Daily Mail Online: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article2660255/
Gursul, I., Gordnier, R., & Visbal, M. (2005). Unsteady aerodynamics of nonslender
delta wings. Progress in Aerospace Sciences 41, 515-557.
Gursul, I., Wang, Z., & Vardaki, E. (2007). Review of flow control mechanisms of
leading-edge vortices. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 43, 246-270.
Guy, Y., Morrow, J. A., & Mclaughlin, T. E. (2000). Velocity Measurements on a
Delta Wing with Periodic Blowing and Suction. 38th Aerospace Sciences
Meeting and Exhibit. Reno, Nevada: AIAA.
Hall, C. J., Morgan, D., Jensen, A., Chao, H., Coopmans, C., Humpherys, M., &
Chen, Y. (2009). Team OSAM-UAV’S Design for the 2008 AUVSI Student
UAS Competition. Proceedings of the ASME 2009 International Design
Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in
Engineering Conference IDETC/CIE 2009 (pp. 1-10). California: ASME.
Handwerk, B. (2013). 5 Surprising Drone Uses (Besides Amazon Delivery).
Retrieved December 14, 2015, from National Geographic:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/12/131202-drone-uav-uas-
amazon-octocopter-bezos-science-aircraft-unmanned-robot/
Hill, M. L. (1989). Delta Wing Mini-UAVs. 23-31. Spring.
123
Houghton, E. L., Carpenter, P. W., Collicott, S. H., & Valentine, D. T. (2013).
Aerodynamics for Engineering Students (6th ed.). United States: Elsevier,
Ltd.
Huang, X. Z., Mébarki, Y., Benmeddour, A., & Brown, T. (2004). Experimental and
Numerical Studies of Geometry Effects on UCAV's Aerodynamics. 42nd
AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. Reno, Nevado: AIAA.
Hummel, D. (2004). Effects of Boundary layer Formation on the vortical Flow above
Slender Delta Wings. RTO specialist Meeting on Enhancement of NATO
military Flight Vehicle Performance by Management of Interacting Boundary
Layer transition and Separation. 30-1 - 30-2.
Ji, Z., Marchetta, J., Hochstein, J., & Mo, J. D. (1999). The Effect of Downstream
Suction on the Delta Wing Leading-Edge Vortex. Proceedings of the Eighth
Asian Congress of Fluid Mechanics. Shenzhen: AFMC.
Koma, A. Y., Afshar, S., Maleki, H., Mohammadshashi, D., & Shahi, H. (2008).
Design and Fabrication of Delta Wing Shape MAV. 10th WSEAS
International Conference on Automatic Control, Modelling & Simulation
(ACMOS'08) (pp. 267-274). Istanbul: WSEAS.
Kwak, D. Y., & Nelson, R. C. (2010). Vortical Flow Control over Delta Wings with
Different Sweep Back Angles Using DBD Plasma Actuators. 5th Flow
Control Conference (pp. 1-10). Chicago: AIAA.
Lee, D., Kim, Y., Jeon, H., & Lee, S. (1991). An Experimental Study of the Effects
of Power on an Airplane with a Pusher Type Propeller. Journal of Korean
Society for Aeronautical & Space Sciences, 19(2), 26-36.
Lehmann Aviation. (2014). Drones L-A Series. Retrieved April 17, 2015, from
Lehmann Aviation: http://www.lehmannaviation.com/laseries.
Luckring, J. M. (2004). Compressibility and Leading-Edge Bluntness Effects for a
65° Delta Wing. 42nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting & Exhibit. Reno,
Nevada: AIAA.
124
Luckring, J. M. (2004). Reynolds number, compressibility, and leading-edge
bluntness effects on delta-wing aerodynamics. 24th International Congress of
Aeronautical Sciences. Yokohama: ICAS.
Luckring, J. M., & Hummel, D. (2013). What Was Learned From the New VFE-2
Experiments. Aerospace Science & Technology, 24(1), 77-78.
Mat, S. (2011). The analysis of flow on round-edged delta wings (Doctoral
dissertation). Retrieved from http://theses.gla.ac.uk/2387/
Mat, S., Green, R., Galbraith, R., & Coton, F. (2016). The effect of edge profile on
delta wing flow. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part
G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 230(7), 1252-1262.
McKinney, M. O., & Drake, H. M. (1948). Flight Characteristics at Low Speed of
Delta-Wing Models. NACA Research Memorandum No. L7K07.
Miau, J. J., Kuo, K. T., Liu, W. H., Hsieh, S. J., Chou, J. H., & Lin, C. K. (1995).
Flow Developments Above 50-Deg Sweep Delta Wings with Different
Leading-Edge Profiles. Journal of Aircraft, 32(4), 787-794.
Mieloszyk, J., & Galiński, C. (2013). Assessment of the concept of a propeller
working in a slot in the middle of wing of a micro air vehicle. Archive of
Mechanical Engineering, 60(2), 269-282.
Mitchell, A. M., Morton, S. A., Huang, X. Z., & Verhaagen, N. G. (2003). NATO
RTO AVT Task Group-080 "Vortex Breakdown over Slender Wings"
Validation and Verification, Conclusions and Recommendations. 21st
Applied Aerodynamics Conference. Orlando, Florida: AIAA.
Mitchell, A., Morton, S., Molton, P., & Guy, Y. (2001). Flow Control of Vortical
Structures and Vortex Breakdown Over Slender Delta Wing. Advanced Flow
Management: Part A – Vortex Flows and High Angle of Attack for Military
Vehicles. Loen: RTO AVT.
Moore, D. W., & Pullin, D. I. (1995). Inviscid separated flow over a non-slender
delta wing. Journal Fluid Mechanic, 305, 307-345.
125
Nakashima, K., Okabe, K., Oshima, Y., Tajima, S., & Kumon, M. (2014). Small
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle with Variable Geometry Delta Wing. 5th
International Symposium on Advanced Control of Industrial Process
(ADCONIP 2014) (pp. 307-311). Hiroshima: ADCONIP 2014.
Nelson, R. C., & Pelletier, A. (2003). The unsteady aerodynamics of slender wings
and aircraft undergoing large amplitude maneuvers. Progress in Aerospace
Sciences, 39, 185-248.
Nelson, R. C., Corke, T. C., He, C., Othman, H., & Matsuno, T. (2007). Modification
of the Flow Structure over a UAV Wing for Roll Control. 45th Aerospace
Sciences Meeting (pp. 1-15). Reno: AIAA.
Ol, M. V. (2001). An Experimental Investigation of Leading Edge Vortices and
Passage to Stall of Nonslender Delta Wings. RTO AVT Symposium on
“Advanced Flow Management: Part A – Vortex Flows and High Angle of
Attack for Military Vehicles” (pp. 2-1 - 2-16). Leon: NATO RTO-MP-069(I).
Ol, M. V., & Gharib, M. (2001). The Passage Toward Stall of Nonslender Delta
Wings at Low Reynolds Number. 31st AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference &
Exhibit (pp. 1-11). Anaheim: AIAA.
Ol, M. V., & Gharib, M. (2003). Leading-Edge Vortex Structure of Nonslender Delta
Wings at Low Reynolds Number. AIAA Journal, 41(1), 16-26.
Oyama, A., Ito, M., Imai, G., Tsutsumi, S., Amitani, N., & Fujii, K. (2008). Mach
Number Effect on Flowfield over a Delta Wing in Supersonic Region. AIAA
Paper 354, 1-7.
Pershing, B. (1964). Seperated flow past slender delta wings with secondary vortex
simulation. El Segundo Technical Operations Aerospace Corporation Report
No. TDR-269(4560-10)-4.
Pevitt, C., & Alam, F. (2014). Static Computational Fluid Dynamics simulations
around a specialised delta wing. Computers & Fluids 100, 155-164.
126
Polhamus, E. C. (1966). A Concept of the Vortex Lift of Sharp-Edge Delta Wings
Based on a Leading-Edge-Suction Analogy. Washington D.C.: NASA TN D-
3767.
RCGroups.com. (2014). HEAD to HEAD Best Flying Fast Build Deltas. Retrieved
Novemver 2016, from RCGroups.com:
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2126466
Saha, S., & Majumdar, B. (2012). Experimental and Numerical Study of Surface
Flow Pattern on Delta Wing. International Journal of Emerging Technology
and Advanced Engineering, 2(3), 215-222.
Said, M., Mat, S., Mansor, S., Abdul-Latif, A., & Lazim, T. M. (2015). Reynolds
Number Effects on Flow Topology Above Blunt-Edge Delta Wing VFE-2
Configuration. 53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting. Kissimmee, Florida:
AIAA.
Shafer, T. C., & Green, B. E. (2010). CFD Generation of Flight Databases for UAVs
for Use in the Flight Certification Air-Worthiness Process. 48th AIAA
Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and
Aerospace Exposition (pp. 1-14). Orlando: AIAA.
SkyHighHobby.com. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2016, from SkyHighHobby.com:
http://www.skyhighhobby.com/plane-pictures
Smith, H., & Rajendran, P. (2014). Review of the Elementary Aspect of Small Solar-
powered Electric Unmanned Aerial. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied
Sciences, 8(15), 252-259.
Sutton, E. P. (1955). Some Observations of the Flow over a Delta-Winged Model
with 55-deg Leading-Edge Sweep, at Mach Numbers between 0. 4 and 1.8.
Aeronautical Research Council Reports and Memoranda No. 3190.
Tajima, S., Akasaka, T., Kumon, M., & Okabe, K. (2013). Guidance Control of a
Small Unmanned Aerial Vehicle with a Delta Wing. Proceedings of
Australasian Conference on Robotics and Automation. Sydney: University of
New South Wales.
127
Talay, T. A. (2006). Introduction to the Aerodynamics of Flight. NASA SP-367.
Taylor, G. S., & Gursul, I. (2004). Buffeting Flows over a Low-Sweep Delta Wing.
AIAA Journal, 42(9), 1737-1745.
Taylor, G. S., Schnorbus, T., & Gursul, I. (2003). An investigation of vortex flows
over low sweep delta wings. 33rd AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and
Exhibit (pp. 1-13). Orlando: AIAA.
Teli, S. N., Jagtap, M., Nadekar, R., Gudade, P., More, R., & Bhagat, P. (2014).
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle For Surveillance. International Journal of
Scientific & Technology Research, 3(5), 256-260.
Traub, L. W. (2016). Effect of a pusher propeller on a delta wing. Aerospace Science
and Technology, 48, 115-121.
Tricoche, X., Garth, C., Bobach, T., & Scheurmann, G. (2004). Accurate and
Efficient Visualization of Flow Structures in a Delta Wing Simulation. 34th
AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit (pp. 1-13). Portland: AIAA.
Verhaagen, N. G. (2010). Effects of Leading-Edge Radius on Aerodynamic
Characteristics of 50° Delta Wings. 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting
Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition. Orlando,
Florida: AIAA.
Verhaagen, N. G. (2011). Flow over 50° Delta Wings with Different Leading-Edge
Radii. 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons
Forum and Aerospace Exposition (pp. 1-14). Orlando: AIAA.
Verhaagen, N. G., & Bossuyt, B. V. (2006). Flow on a 65-Deg Blunt Apex. 24th
Applied Aerodynamics Conference. San Francisco: AIAA.
Verhaagen, N. G., & Elsayed, M. (2008). Effects of Leading-Edge Shape on the
Flow over 50° Delta Wings. 26th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference.
Honolulu, Hawaii: AIAA.
Wang, J. J., & Zhang, W. (2008). Experimental Investigations on Leading-Edge
Vortex Structures for Flow over Non-Slender Delta Wings. Chinese Physics
Letters, 25(7), 2550-2553.
128
Wentz, W. H., & Kohlman, D. L. (1971). Vortex Breakdown on Slender Sharp-
Edged Wings. Journal Aircraft, 8(3), 156-161.
Whitford, R. (1987). Design for Air Combat (1 ed.). London: Jane's Publishing
Company Limited.
Williams, N. M., Wang, Z., & Gursul, I. (2008). Active Flow Control on a
Nonslender Delta Wing. 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit
(pp. 1-15). Reno: AIAA.
Yaniktepe, B., & Rockwell, D. (2004). Flow Structure on a Delta Wing of Low
Sweep Angle. AIAA Journal, 42(3), 513-523.