Design, Analysis and Development of a Miniature

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle

Saad Javed Hassan Tariq

College of Aeronautical Engineering, National University College of Aeronautical Engineering, National University
of Science and Technology of Science and Technology
Risalpur, Pakistan Risalpur, Pakistan
[email protected] [email protected]

Nadeem Hussain Ali Javed

College of Aeronautical Engineering, National University College of Aeronautical Engineering, National University
of Science and Technology of Science and Technology
Risalpur, Pakistan Risalpur, Pakistan
[email protected] [email protected]

Abstract—Past the human demarcation, the unmanned requisite request for proposal serves as the basis for the
systems enable the reconnaissance, surveillance, monitoring, selection of target technical specifications along with
mapping and imaging of remote areas. The design and analysis of desirability values like minimum weight and cost[2]. The two
these unmanned aerial vehicles is the omphalos of modern day major categories include the fixed wing and rotary
aviation industry. This paper presents a complete package of the configurations[3]. This paper provides an insight into the
miniature UAV, initializing from the design to the performance
and stability analysis.The design process, ranging from the initial
design of the former.
weight estimation, geometric and electric sizing to the theoretical
performance and stability analysis of miniature unmanned aerial The UAVs generally operate in the Reynolds number
vehicles is elaborated thoroughly.Based on the literature review, ranging less than 500,000 creating a laminar boundary
an empirical relation is derived for the initial weight estimation layer[3]. The less energetic laminar flow causes the early flow
of these miniature aerial vehicles , leading to the subsequent separation as compared to the turbulent flow over the generic
design. The fabrication process for the designed UAVs is large scale aircraft (operating at a Reynolds number greater
elaborated, including the procedures, techniques, materials, and than one million). The UAVs have less maximum lift
safety measures. coefficients than the full scale aircraft, due to the afore
mentioned reason[3]. Due to the miniature size of the UAVs,
Keywords: Unmanned Ariel Vehicles(UAVs), Radio
the moments of inertia are way smaller as compared to the
Controlled(RC), Stability, Performance, Design, Testing,
large scale aircraft[3]. The UAVs are more prone to any
Case Study.
environmental disturbances, meaning a marginally stable
I. INTRODUCTION design.
The advancement of technology has led to the
The design procedure initializes from the conversion
transformation of conventional aerial frontier to the
of request for proposals[1] into technical parameters, where
Unmanned era. An Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) is a
the basic configuration is selected[1]. After analyzing the
pilotless aircraft capable of radio controlled, or autonomous
historical trends the initial weigh estimation is carried out[2].
flight. These vehicles range from Nano UAVs to large scale
As all the performance parameters depend upon the two basic
combat capable unmanned platforms and can be used for a
aerodynamic ratios, the thrust to weight ratio (or power
variety of tasks at hand, such as military tactical usage,
loading) and the wing loading[1]. The constraint diagram[11]
providing battlefield reconnaissance, remote combat
is drawn and the design point[11] selected in consultation with
capability, delivering equipment (logistics), aerial
the historical trends[2]. The geometric sizing is completed on
photography, and data collection from remote areas[2].
the basis of the design point[11], followed by the electric
sizing. This is succeeded by the performance and stability
The design and analysis of these unmanned aerial
analysis[5,6]. After this the design is optimized as per the
vehicles is the omphalos of modern day aviation industry. The

‹,(((

3URFHHGLQJVRIWK,QWHUQDWLRQDO%KXUEDQ&RQIHUHQFHRQ$SSOLHG6FLHQFHV 7HFKQRORJ\ ,%&$67 

,VODPDEDG3DNLVWDQWK±WK-DQXDU\
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on June 08,2020 at 12:56:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
reqquests for propposal. This leeads to the faabrication phaase, coinciddence with thee fuselage referrence line, a twin
t T-tail is
acccording to the CAD
C model. designeed. The UAV would be a tricycle for better b ground
This UAV
U was deesigned for the t purpose of steeringg.
surrveillance of the borders off any confinedd facility. It was
w
C. Weiight estimationn[1]
meeant to take off with surveiillance equipm ment (basicallyy a
cammera and a traansmitter), keepping in view the
t endurance of As thee first approacch, the generaal design proccedure using
aroound 20 minutees. weight fractions was employed. Thhe outcome off which is as
followss:
II. METHO
ODOLOGY
This section seekss to determinne the probleem ܹ௣௔௬௟௢௢௔ௗ ൌ ͵ͲͲ݃ ൌ ͲǤ͸͸ͳ͵݈ܾǤ
stattement, the meethods used forr development and the researrch ܹ௘௟௘௖௧௥௜௖ ൌ ͶͶͲ݃ ൌ ͲǤͻ͹݈ܾǤ
dessign of the minniature UAVs. The Methodoological approaach
adoopted to deveelop the miniaature UAV is the division of ܹ௘
ൌ ͳǤͳͻܹ௢ ି଴Ǥ଴ଽ ሺ‫ܪ‬
‫ݐ݈݅ݑܾ݁݉݋ܪ‬ሻ
oveerall workspacce into smallerr sub-tasks. On
O the successful ܹ௢
andd effective completion of o all the sub-tasks, thheir
ܹ௙
am
malgamation is processed. Prroposed approoach towards the t ൌͲ
prooblem is to usse the available resources ata the Aerospaace ܹ௢
Vehicle Designn Laboratory,, College of o Aeronauticcal
Enggineering, NUST . The desig gn process is explained
e usingg a ܹ௢ǡ௘௦௧௜௠௔௧௘ௗ ܹ௘ Τܹ௢ ܹ௢ǡǡ௖௔௟௖௨௟௔௧௘ௗ
casse study. The block diagram m for the taskss at hand are as
10 0.967 -5.233
folllows distribution is shown:
5 1.029 -1.673
Fig.. 1. Methodologyy of Research
1 1.190 -0.324
0.5 1.267 -0.169
ͲǤ͸͸ͳ͵
ܹ௢ ൌ ଴Ǥଽ଻
ͳെͲെ െ ͳǤͳͻܹ௢ ି଴Ǥ଴ଽ
ௐ೚

TABLE
E 1. WEIGHT ITERATIONS
I

After perforrming the iterrations, the gross

g takeoff
weight converges at about 0.5 lbs, which is an a unrealistic
value for
f a miniature UAV[2]. Hence H a noveel method is
proposeed and implem mented, that is i based on thet historical
trends[22]. Data for seeveral existing RC UAV[10]] aircraft was
collecteed from variouus sources and then amalgam mated into the
form off a graph. An empirical
e relattion was obtainned by fitting
a seconnd degree polyynomial upon the t values, thatt can be used
to calcuulate gross takkeoff weight after
a the selectiion of wing
loadingg. The weight would
w be calcuulated, after thee finalization
A. Request for Proposals[1]
P of the design
d point.
Thee case study inncludes the design and develoopment of a UA AV
as per
p the RFPs provided
p by th
he faculty of Design,
D Build and
a TABLE2.DESIIGN POINT BIFE
ERCATION RANG
GES
Flyy Completion(DBFC-14). Th he UAV shouuld be in pushher Category Oz./ft2)
W/S (O P/W(W/lb.)
P
connfiguration, electric powered with amperrage limit as 40
Park flier 10.0 – 14.9 50 – 80
Ammps. The winggspan should be b less than 2.55 meters and the t
weight be less thaan 3 Kgs. The takeoff roll shhould be less thhan Miild Sport/Trainner 15.0 – 20.0 80 - 120
60 ft. The UAV V should be capable of performing
p baasic 3D >220 120 - 180
maaneuvers and at a the same tim me worthy to fly a maximuum
enddurance missioon with a 300 0g payload. The
T UAV shouuld Fig. 2. Wing loading vs. Wo
havve payload dropp capability.
B. Configurationn Selection[2] W/S VS . WO
W
Thee first step to select the bestt design is to create
c an enouugh
27
sam
mple space off data from whichw the bestt options can be
W/S(OZ/FT2)

sorrted out, filttered and th hen after sellection can be 22

impplemented. Thhe UAV wou uld be electricc powered with
w
pussher configurattion. Keeping the
t endurance mission in minnd, 17
a high winger is selected. Keeping the thrust line in
12
0 20 40 60
0 80 1
100 120

WO((OZ)
3URFHHGLQJVRIWK,QWHUQDWLRQDO%KXUEDQ&RQIHUHQFHRQ$SSOLHG6FLHQFHV 7HFKQRORJ\ ,%&$67  
,VODPDEDG3DNLVWDQWK±WK-DQXDU\
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on June 08,2020 at 12:56:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 3. Constraint Analysis

CONSTRAINT ANALYSIS
140

120
P/W = 35 (lb.ft/s )/lb

100 W/S = 0.6 lb/ft2

Constantlevelturn

80 Takeoffspeed
rateofclimb
P/W((lbft/s)/lb)

60 cruisespeed
landingdistance
40

20

0
0 0.5 1 1.5
W/S (lb/ft2)
2 2.5 3 3.5

ܹ these ranges, a W/S of 16 Oz./ft2 and P/W of 110 W/lb. are

ൌ ͲǤͲͲʹʹܹ௢ ଶ െ ͲǤʹͷͶʹܹ௢ ൅ ʹʹǤͻ͹
ܵ selected.
The curve developed in the last section is used to
D. Airfoil Selection calculate the gross takeoff weight. The weight from the
empirical relation came out to be 51 Oz which is
The airfoil selected for the UAV is Eppler 193. The eppler approximately equal to 1450 grams.
series as described by Dr. Daniel P. Raymer in his book of
design is specifically for the low Reynolds number flows. The F. Wing Design
selected is selected upon the following factors The design of the wing is based on the surface area, chord
length span, aspect ratio, taper ratio, and the sweep angle.
Keeping in view the UAVs Mach number regime and RFPs.
x Better L/D Ratio As the UAV had to fly only in the low subsonic regime, a
x Greater stall angle of 12 degrees simple trapezoidal planform was selected and worked upon.
x Maximum thickness of 10.33 percent The design of the wing planform was done according to
x Ease of fabrication Daniel P. Raymer[1]
x Suited for low Reynolds Number
G. Geometric[1] and Electric Sizing
E. Design Point[11] After the selection of design point, the wings, horizontal
Different performance parameters such as takeoff roll, level stabilizer, vertical stabilizer, fuselage and the control surfaces
turn, cruise, climb, instantaneous turn, landing roll were are sized according to Raymer[1]. Selection of the propulsion
calculated to be the genesis of the constraint diagram. After system was done based upon the electric brushless motors
the plot of the constraint diagram, it was noticed that the datasheets available. The Emax GT2812/06 is selected as it
design point of the UAV, should be around 35 (lb. ft/s)/lb, provides adequate thrust while catering for the tail boom
which is approximately, 48 W/lb. Corresponding to this value, clearance and meeting the amperage rating.
on the abscissa lies the wing loading, which exhibits
approximately, 0.6 lb/ft2. H. Performance[5] and stability[6]
Different key performance parameters were calculated for the
Historical trends present the experimental values of proposed UAV. The capability of the UAV to perform
already fly worthy aircraft[2], so in reality they serve as more different maneuvers is elaborated by the performance
reliable sources of information, than the theoretical results parameters. The performance parameters relevant to the RFPs
calculated. Theoretical results are not accurate because including take off distance, endurance, and excess power are
number of assumptions were made driving the relations and calculated and tabulated. The static stability parameters,
environmental effects were also neglected. Hence it is decided including longitudinal, lateral and directional parameters are
to make a selection based on the historical trends. Based on calculated to confirm the fly worthiness of the UAV.

3URFHHGLQJVRIWK,QWHUQDWLRQDO%KXUEDQ&RQIHUHQFHRQ$SSOLHG6FLHQFHV 7HFKQRORJ\ ,%&$67  

,VODPDEDG3DNLVWDQWK±WK-DQXDU\
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on June 08,2020 at 12:56:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Fig. 4. Motor Data Sheet The purpose of this design procedure is the
fulfillment of the RFPs, hence the performance parameters are
then compared with the RFPs and analyzed. The endurance of
the proposed design is 21 minutes. Experimental testing
proves the results to be comparable at 18 minutes. The
comparison of the theoretical and experimentally achieved

III. FABRICATION
The high strength to weight ratio and cost
effectiveness of balsa wood, plywood and carbon fiber tubes,
makes them favorable for the fabrication of miniature UAVs.
The airframe is fabricated using mainly balsa wood and parameters is as follows: (the experimental values were taken
plywood to bear the loads. Carbon fiber tubes are used as by accelerometers and velocity sensors on board)
spars and longerons in ribbed wings and fuselages
TABLE 3. COMPARISON OF RESULTS
respectively.
Performance parameter Theoretical Experimental
The afore mentioned UAV is fabricated using balsa Endurance 21 min 18 min
wood, carbon fiber tubes and plywood as the main load Take off distance 27 ft 33 ft
bearing materials. It comprises a ribbed wing structure with a Turn radius (level Turn) 21.7 ft 30.3 ft.
carbon fiber spar. The empennage is as a Xerox to the wing. Turn Radius (Instantaneous 6.2 ft. 15.6 ft.
The fuselage is fabricated so as to accommodate the Turn)
propulsion system and the payload drop mechanism. Amperage 32 Amps 37 Amps
Gross takeoff weight 2.9 lb. 3.7 lb.
IV. RESULTS
This section includes the results obtained following All the stability coefficients prove the UAV to be fly
the above design procedure. Design changes are made after worthy and stable.
analysis into the proposed performance and stability
parameters in accordance with the RFPs of the UAV. The
final results of the geometric sizing after the optimization are Stability Parameters Gradient Intercept
tabulated in Table 4. Longitudnal -0.0123 0.08
Fig. 5. CAD Model of the UAV Directional 0.0113 0 (Theoretical)
Lateral -0.0125 0 (Theoretical)
The CAD model of the UAV is also drawn. TABLE 4. STABILITY COEFFICIENTS

Fig. 6. Fabricated UAV

3URFHHGLQJVRIWK,QWHUQDWLRQDO%KXUEDQ&RQIHUHQFHRQ$SSOLHG6FLHQFHV 7HFKQRORJ\ ,%&$67  

,VODPDEDG3DNLVWDQWK±WK-DQXDU\
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on June 08,2020 at 12:56:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Weights in Ounces (estimated) Wing Parameters Units
Empty Weight 32.8 Aspect ratio 6
Components 13.8 Mean chord 0.75 in.
Gross takeoff Weight 46.6 Span 4.5 ft.
Component vise weight Sref 3.375 ft2
Wing 10 Dihedral 0 degrees
Fuselage 7 Taper Ratio 1
Battery 9.2 CLmax 1.17
Motor 4.6 Stall AOA 12 degrees
Main Landing Gear 2.8 L/Dmax 15.76
Nose Landing Gear 1 Wing incidence 2 degrees
Tails 6 Leading edge sweep 0 degrees
Booms 6 Horizontal Tail Units
Vertical Tail Units Aspect Ratio 3
Aspect Ratio 1.2 Mean Chord 0.44 ft
Mean Chord 0.375 ft Span 1.33 ft
Span(b/2) 0.45 ft Surface Area 1.76 ft2
Surface Area 0.3375 ft2 Leading edge sweep 15 degrees
Leading edge sweep 15 degrees Moment arm 1.83 ft
Moment arm 1.8 ft. Fuselage Units
AILERON 2.67 ft x 0.17 ft Length 3.6 ft
RUDDER 0.45 ft x 0.15 ft Widthmax 0.33 ft
ELEVATOR 1.33 ft x 0/17 ft Length of the boom 1.125 ft
V @ CL3/2/CDmax 31.02 ft/s V @ L/Dmax 40.82 ft/s

TABLE 5. SUMMARY OF RESULTS

3URFHHGLQJVRIWK,QWHUQDWLRQDO%KXUEDQ&RQIHUHQFHRQ$SSOLHG6FLHQFHV 7HFKQRORJ\ ,%&$67  

,VODPDEDG3DNLVWDQWK±WK-DQXDU\
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on June 08,2020 at 12:56:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 V. REFRENCES
[1] Raymer, D.P., Aircraft Design : A Conceptual [6] R. Nelson, Flight Stability and Automatic Control.
Approach. Fourth ed. 2006, Virginia: American [7] Yechout, R. Thomas, Introduction to Flight
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. 212. Mechanics, (AIAA)
[2] Basis of R/C Model Aircraft Design by Andy [8] Nicolai, Leland M., Fundamentals of Aircraft and
Lennon Airship Design (AIAA)
[3] Sadraey, Mohammad H., Aircraft Design A [9] The Design and Construction of Flying Model
Systems Engineering Approach (Wiley) Aircraft by D. A. Russell
[4] Anderson, John D., Introduction to Flight, (Mc [10] Mattingly, J. D.,Aircraft Engine Design , AIAA,
Graw Hill, USA, 1989) 2002.
[5] Anderson, John D., Aircraft Performance, (Mc
Graw Hill, USA, 1989)

3URFHHGLQJVRIWK,QWHUQDWLRQDO%KXUEDQ&RQIHUHQFHRQ$SSOLHG6FLHQFHV 7HFKQRORJ\ ,%&$67  

,VODPDEDG3DNLVWDQWK±WK-DQXDU\
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Canberra. Downloaded on June 08,2020 at 12:56:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.