|
|
|
SAE Aero Design East Competition 2007
Introductory
Presentation for ME 490/492 Senior Design
The first Regular class prototype built this year was not airworthy.
There were several issues that needed to be worked out. These issues were
solved in the second prototype. Here’s a picture of the second prototype: Photo
Here is a short movie of us behind the Russ Engineering Center tooling
around with the airplane without the wing on: Movie
(15.4 MB)
Here are some movies of the first four flights that were made with
Prototype 2 (March 8, 2007, 4:30 p.m., outside temperature: 41 deg F,
elevation: 1057 ft):
|
First
Flight of Prototype 2 (10.0 MB) |
Second
Flight of Prototype 2 (14.1 MB) |
|
Third
Flight of Prototype 2 (30.7 MB) |
Fourth
Flight of Prototype 2 (19.3 MB) |
On Friday, March 30, 2007, we were at it again. This time, we gradually
loaded down our plane. Eddy wanted to fly it empty first, which was fine. We
marked off the landing strip with small flags in 10 foot increments and a
rolling tape measure in order to determine the takeoff distance. The airplane
was flown three times at each payload setting to get an idea of the
repeatability of the data. Some velocities were also taken. While something was
wrong with the video camera, the airplane was working beautifully! On the last
pass of the day, the airplane went long on a downwind landing and overturned,
breaking the tailboom. Sorry Ash!
|
Payload
Weight: 0 lb (35.1 MB) |
Payload
Weight: 4 lb (13.8 MB) |
|
Payload
Weight: 8 lb (23.7 MB) |
Payload
Weight: 12 lb (62.4 MB) |
Here are some photos of the plane after this incident and also the next
day when Mike had repaired it:
|
|
Flight practice on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 started out rough. On the
first flight, the plane crashed on landing. They were able to quickly repair
the tailboom (Sorry again, Ash!) and get the plane
airborne. They made many successful flights in which they examined the dynamic
performance of the top propellers, and also the effect of flaps on takeoff
distance.
Regular
Class Flight Practice (76.7 MB)
The Micro class guys decided to design a flying wing. Here is a movie of
them cutting the foam with a hot wire
(3.1 MB). They started out flight testing in February when it was really cold.
Everyone tried to convince them not to do a flying wing because of stability
issues (17.6 MB). And more stability
issues (3.8 MB).
Here’s the micro guys having another tough day. (6.8 MB)
Here’s a picture
of the micro class guys loaded for bear. April 20 was a very good day for the
Micro team!
|
First
flight (42 MB) |
Second
Flight (23.7 MB) |
Third
Flight (28.8 MB) |
|
Fourth
Flight (13.2 MB) |
Fifth
Flight (22.7 MB) |
|
Here are several flights made by the Micro guys from a paved runway. The
last one resulted in wing flutter that caused the electric motor to be ejected
from the airplane
(77.9 MB). Mike was able to land it with no problem! Here is some slowed down
footage of the wing
flutter (10.4 MB).
Both teams took the field on April 30, 2007. The Regular class guys
showed up with Prototype 3 and the Micro class guys had three prototypes to put
through their paces.
|
Micro class |
Regular class |
|
First
flight (62.4 MB) |
First
flight (43.8 MB) |
|
Second
Flight (35.4 MB) |
Second
Flight (25.1 MB) |
|
Third
Flight (18.8 MB) |
Third
Flight (34.1 MB) |
|
Fourth
Flight (21.0 MB) |
Fourth
Flight (28.1 MB) |
|
Fifth
Flight (9.3 MB) |
Fifth
Flight (20.0 MB) |
|
|
Sixth
Flight (26.0 MB) |
I am very happy to
report that our Regular Class team achieved a seventh-place finish out of 51
competitors at this year’s competition. Their first flight was flawless, in
which they were required to fly their plane with no payload in very heavy winds
(20 mph sustained, 30 mph gusts). This netted a 10 point empty payload bonus
score. On their second flight, they had loaded the plane with 14 pounds of
lead. The takeoff was perfect, but during climb-out, they experience a
malfunction that resulted in a devastating crash in the parking lot between two
parked cars. At this point, they were in 20th place in the contest. They went
back to the hotel and assembled their backup plane. After a full night of work
(and about one hour of sleep), they returned on Sunday to lift 19 pounds of
lead, which was one pound over their maximum predicted payload. This team has
been the best I’ve ever had in terms of being fully prepared ahead of time.
They gathered over 50 experimental data points prior to the competition, which
is by far a record for teams that have been sent to the AeroDesign
competition from Wright State University. They showed that they could work
under the most adverse conditions and still produce a quality product. I
couldn’t be more proud to have worked with them.
Our Micro Class
team did quite well also. In the first round, they flew their flying wing into
a 25 mph headwind, turned gracefully 180 degrees to travel the length of the
runway, and then turned again into the wind. At this point, the plane disintegrated
spectacularly in mid-air, which resulted in the Micro team winning the “Best
Crash” Team Award. With a flight score of zero, they stood in seventh place out
of eleven competitors based on their scores for the design report and the oral
presentation. Undaunted, they simply retrieved their best backup plane (one of
three), instrumented it, did a pre-flight checkout of all of the servos, and
flew it in the next round. They catapulted into first place with a score of
161, with the nearest competitor, the University of Puerto Rico, a close second
at 158 points. In Round 3, the Raiderwing team flew
their craft again to boost their score to 166.8 points, which proved to be the
highest overall score of the Micro Class, thus earning them a First Place
finish. This team of close friends was a joy to work with. They worked through
the most difficult of problems in terms of the stability of their design with
great diligence and skill. My heartfelt thanks to the following students:
Regular Class Team:
Kyle Miller, Matt Riley, Michael Bird, Ashley Whitney-Rawls
Micro Class Team:
Ryan Milligan, Steve Palluconi, Michael Graman, Dwight King
Pilot: Eddy Noble
I’d also like to
thank Dean Bor Z. Jang for his enthusiastic support
during the course of this project.
Here are some pictures that Mike’s mom took of the micro class team at the competition:
Regular Class video (38.3 MB)
Micro Class video (27.0 MB)
Here are Angie’s pictures of us after the contest:
Here are the overall results for the competition.
This is the movie that I produced for the College Awards Ceremony.
Here are the movies from the photogs at the contest:
|
|
Round 1 |
Round 2 |
Round 3 |
Round 4 |
Round 5 |
|
Micro |
|||||
|
Regular |
|