Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-17T12:32:41.560Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Design and performance quantification of VTOL systems for a canard aircraft

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2021

S. Pedro ,
D. Tomás ,
J. Lobo do Vale Open the ORCID record for J. Lobo do Vale [Opens in a new window]  and
A. Suleman
S. Pedro
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
D. Tomás
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
J. Lobo do Vale*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
A. Suleman
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada IDMEC, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
*
joselobodovale@uvic.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The design and performance quantification of four Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) architectures for a canard-type aircraft configuration are presented. The aero-structural sizing of the canard configuration and the sizing procedure for the proposed VTOL configurations are described and discussed. The proposed VTOL architectures are based on a range of rotor distances to the centre of gravity, quad- and tri-rotor configurations, retractable front rotors and tilt rear rotors. The aerodynamic performance, total installed power and VTOL system mass were modelled and experimentally validated. The results show that a fully exposed VTOL system penalises the Lift-over-Drag (L/D) ratio significantly relative to a clean configuration. The VTOL system mass can be reduced by up to 32% by using a tilt tri-rotor configuration when compared with an equidistant quad-rotor+pusher configuration. The fraction of installed power usable for forward flight can be increased by up to 80% with a tilt configuration. For the proposed mission, the range can be significantly increased if a tri-rotor tilt configuration is adopted in place of an equidistant quad-rotor+pusher configuration.

Keywords

UAVvertical take-off and landingcanard
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 125 , Issue 1292 , October 2021 , pp. 1768 - 1791
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Keane, J. and Carr, S. A brief history of early unmanned aircraft, Johns Hopkins APL Tech. Dig., 2013, 32, (3), pp 558–571.Google Scholar
Curtis, P. The VTOL dream – Will it always remain out of reach? Aeronaut. J., 2019, 1267, pp 1339–1355. doi: 10.1017/aer.2019.34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bacchini, A. and Cestino, E. Electric VTOL configurations comparison, Aerospace, 2019, 6, p 26. doi: 10.3390/aerospace6030026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ozdemir, U., Aktas, Y.O., Vuruskan, A., Dereli, Y., Tarhan, A.F., Demirbag, K., Erdem, A., Kalaycioglu, G.D., Ozkol, I. and Inalhan, G. Design of a commercial hybrid VTOL UAV system, J. Intell. Rob. Syst., 2014, 4, pp 371–393. doi: 10.1007/s10846-013-9900-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saeed, A.S., Younes, A.B., Cai, C. and Cai, G. A survey of hybrid unmanned aerial vehicles, Prog. Aerosp. Sci., 2018, 98, pp 91–105. doi: 10.1016/j.paerosci.2018.03.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabowski, T.G., Tarnowski, A., Figat, M., Mieloszyk, J. and Hernik, B. Lightweight unmanned aerial vehicle for emergency medical service – Synthesis of the layout, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part G J. Aerosp. Eng., 2021, 235-1, pp 91–105. doi: 10.1177/0954410020910584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stahl, P., Seren, T., Roessler, C. and Hornung, M. Development and performance comparison of optimized electric fixed-wing, 31st Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, 2018.Google Scholar
Boukoberine, M.N., Zhou, Z. and Benbouzid, M. A critical review on unmanned aerial vehicles power supply and energy management: solutions, strategies, and prospects, Appl. Energy, 2019, 255. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finger, D.F., Braun, C. and Bil, C. Impact of electric propulsion technology and mission requirements on the performance of VTOL UAVs. CEAS Aeronaut. J., 2019, 10, pp 827–843. doi: 10.1007/s13272-018-0352-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, W.F. Mechanics of Flight, John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey, USA, 2010.Google Scholar
Selberg, B.P. and Rokhsaz, K. Aerodynamic trade off study of conventional,canard and trisurface aircraft systems, J. Aircr., 1986, 23, pp 768–774. doi: 10.2514/3.45379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. Fundamentals of Aerodynamics, McGraw-Hill, New York, USA, 2017.Google Scholar
Corke, T.C. Design of Aircraft, Prentice Hall, 2003, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
Roskam, J. Airplane Design Part VI: Preliminary Calculation of Aerodynamic, Thrust and Power Characteristics, DARcorporation, Kansas, USA, 1987.Google Scholar
McMaster-Carr, , Carbon-fiber tube, 0.465 od, 0.39 id, 12long, URL: https://www.mcmaster.com/2153T121/. Online. Accessed:2020-6-4.Google Scholar
eSUN,eSun 3d 1.75mm solid gray petg 3d printer filament 1kg spool(2.2lbs), URL: https://www.amazon.com/eSUN-1-75mm-Printer-Filament-2-2lbs/dp/B01LMDFYCM. Online. Accessed:2020-12-3.Google Scholar
Ansys, Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Software Program Solutions, URL: https://www.ansys.com/products/fluids/ansys-cfx, Online. Accessed: 2020-12-30.Google Scholar
Menter, F.R. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications, AIAA J., 1994, 32, pp 1598–1605. doi: 10.2514/3.12149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
T-Motor, P60 Pin KV170, URL: https://store-en.tmotor.com/goods.php?id=420. Online. Accessed: 2020-05-20.Google Scholar
Goldstein, S. and Prandtl, L. On the vortex theory of screw propellers, Proc. R. Soc. London, 1929, 123, pp 440–465. doi: 10.1098/rspa.1929.0078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moffitt, B., Bradley, T., Parekh, D. and Mavris, D. Validation of vortex propeller theory for UAV design with uncertainty analysis, AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 2008. doi: 10.2514/6.2008-406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leishman, J.G. Principles of Helicopter Aerodynamics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2002.Google Scholar
Chen, M. and Hubner, J.P. Experimental investigation of wing-on-rotor effect at low disk loading and Reynolds number, J. Aircr., 2020, pp 1–10. doi: 10.2514/1.C035763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickles, D.J., Green, R.B. and Giuni, M. Rotor wake interactions with an obstacle on the ground, Aeronaut. J., 2018, 122, (1251), pp 798–820. doi: 10.1017/aer.2018.7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar