Performance Analysis of High Wing for a Micro Class

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.

1. Abstract:

The paper manages the plan and execution examination of high wing of a Micro Class Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.
The wing configuration includes its underlying contemplations like and weight of the airplane, planform choice,
determination of airfoil, area of the endlessly wing stacking attributes. The study is done in view of the determined
qualities and analysis is done to show airfoil attributes, and execution of the wing with the assistance of XFLR5
programming. The aim of this research is to analyze the outcomes received for various wing planforms, different
approach over a scope of paces. From the outcomes we will finish up which wing setup meets the payload lifting
objectives. Choice of wing setup is an iterative cycle. The iterative interaction permits us to oblige other plan rules
like catering stockpiling, frameworks establishments (high lift gadgets, connection of engines and the principle
underside) which could conceivably be straightforwardly connected with the objectives of the mission. The
aftereffect of iterative advancement is ordinarily a split the difference in setup which best fulfills the general
requirements of the mission. A ultimate choice upon arrangement will address a trade off in light of plan needs.

2. Notations of Symbols:

CL - Coefficient of Lift

CLmax - Maximum Coefficient of Lift

CD - Coefficient of Drag

CL/ CD – lift to drag ratio α -

Angle of Attack
D – Fluid density

V – Fluid velocity

L – Characteristic length or Chord Length µ -

Fluid Dynamic Viscosity

3. Literature Review:

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3631317

[1] M. J. Smith, N. Komerath, R. Ames and O. Wong led research on wing with different winglets. Their work
inspected the capability of various winglets for the decrease of takeoff haul without increasing the area of wings. Air
stream models were assembled utilizing a NACA - (National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics) 0012 airfoil
segment for the untwisted, rectangular wing and level plates for the winglets. Testing of these setups was performed
over a scope of Reynolds numbers from 161,000 to 300,000. Air stream adjusts gave lift and drag estimations, and
laser stream perception got wingtip vortex data. A significant expansion in lift bend slant happens with dihedral
spread of winglets set at zero occurrences comparative with the wing. Dihedral spread likewise disseminates the tip
vortex. These perceptions supplement past outcomes on drag decrease because of lift reorientation with wound
winglets set at negative rate.
[2] PRISACARIU Vasile directed execution examination on Flying Wing airfoils. He presumed that Flying
wings flight exhibitions rely straightforwardly upon the 2D streamlined advancement (picking streamlined profile).
The streamlined profiles utilized in tailless airplane have a progression of explicit useful execution. His article
presents a piece of investigation in regards to the 2D streamlined profile utilized in the development of a flying wing
UAV type.

4. Wing Design Parameters:

The design parameter such as area, taper ratio, sweep, thickness, aspect ratio and dihedral are determined and the
wing is planned in Solid works. Genuine wing area can be determined from the maximum take-off weight and the
real Volumetric Wing cube loading (C) values.

These parameters will be considered for a Micro Class fixed-wing type UAV with a most extreme drop weight of
1.75 KG, slow down speed of 6 m/s and greatest voyage speed of 10 m/s.

The wing should be planned and tried to guarantee it can endure the most extreme burdens forced by moving, and by
air blasts. To plan a wing that can without much of a stretch produce lift of 1.75 KG, we will consider Factor of
Safety of 1.5 which implies, we will plan a wing for greatest lift of 2.62 Kilograms in the scope of 6 m/s to 10 m/s.

5. Required Lifting Area and Wing Planform selection:

To calculate the required lifting area, Volumetric Wing cube loading (C) can be considered and the formula used is:

(𝑴𝒂𝒙.𝑻𝒂𝒌𝒆𝒐𝒇𝒇 𝑾𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕) (1)

=
𝑪 (𝑳𝒊𝒇𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑨𝒓𝒆𝒂) .𝟓

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3631317

The most optimum value of Volumetric Wing cube loading (C) is selected to calculate the lifting area. After
considering various values of C, ranging from C=4 to C=12, C=10 was found as the most optimum value of
Volumetric Wing cube loading and the lifting area required to lift a weight of 2.62 KG was found to be 4200 cm 2.
Various wing planforms were compared in order to achieve the best possible wing configuration and maximum
lifting capabilities within the given dimensional constraints. There are several types of wing configurations each
with its advantages and disadvantages:
• Elliptical Aerodynamically, the elliptical planform is the most efficient as elliptical span-wise lift
distribution has the lowest possible induced drag (as given by thin air foil theory). However, the
disadvantage of elliptical wing is that its manufacturability is poor. The elliptical wing was not decided to
minimize induced drag, but to house the retractable landing gear along with guns and ammunition inside a
wing that had to be thin. The ellipse was simply the shape that allowed the thinnest possible wing with
room inside to carry the necessary structure.
• Rectangular the simplest wing planform from a manufacturing point of view, the rectangular wing is a
straight, un-tapered wing. The disadvantage of this wing is that it is aerodynamically inefficient.
• Tapered Wing is a modification of the rectangular wing where the chord is varied across the span to
approximate the elliptical lift distribution. While not as efficient as the elliptical wing, it offers a
compromise between manufacturability and efficiency.

The correct configuration was selected by performing a trade study by assigning points ranging from 1 to 10 to the
topics mentioned below in table 1:

Table 1: Wing Planform comparison

Parameters Rectangular Tapered Elliptical

Efficiency 8 9 10

Lift at 0o Angle of Attack 8 9 10

Construction 10 8.5 6

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3631317

 Stall Characteristics 10 9 9

Total 36 35.5 35

Rectangular planform is chosen by considering the total points and due to the ease of construction that it provides.
Also, the performance of rectangular planform varied marginally from the tapered or elliptical wing.

6. Air foil Selection:

The choice of air foil is important for our application which demanded a “High Lift - Low Reynolds number” air
foil. High lift air foils at low angle of attacks demand air foils with high degree of asymmetry. A few air foils are
extensively used in high lift applications - E423, S1210 and S1223. The properties of these air foils were studied
which is tabulated below in table 2:

Table 2: Airfoil Comparison

Parameters S1223 S1210 E423

CL Max 2.375 2.235 2.311

Maximum L/D 125.155 109.915 67.65

Stall Angle 8 9 14.5

Thickness 12% 11.9% 12.1%

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3631317

 Figure 1: CL v/s Alpha for S1223

Figure 2: CL/CD v/s Alpha and CL v/s CD for S1223

7. Aspect Ratio:

The selection of the Aspect Ratio was made through an iterative process, starting with a literature research in which
High and Low Aspect Ratios were compared. It was then decided to use a moderate Aspect Ratio wing due its
efficiency. Aspect Ratios of 4.5, 4.85 and 5 were compared between their CLmax and CL/CD. The AR of 5 resulted in
higher efficiency and lift but increased wing deflection so was discarded. After detailed analysis in the given range,
Aspect Ratio of 4.85 was selected. After selecting this aspect ratio, and detailed simulation of the wing planform, a
Chord of 30 cm and Wingspan of 148 cm was determined.

8. Selection of Angle of Attack:

Take-off distance for Micro Class UAV should be in the range of 8-12 ft. In order to generate more lift during take-
off and reduce the overall take-off distance, initial angle of attack is provided to the wing. Angle of Attack ranging
from α = 0 to α = 2.5 was simulated on XFLR5 Software. It was found that α = 2 o is the most optimum angle of
attack. Though S1223 has comparatively low efficiency, total useful lift produced by S1223 is greater comparative
to other air foils at every angle of attack. Design approach is to design a higher payload lifting aircraft.

9. Full Wing Performance Analysis:

Full wing performance analysis was conducted on XFLR5 Software for flat rectangular planform with aspect ratio of
4.85 and 4200 cm2 of lifting area at 12 m/s which is the maximum cruise speed of this
aircraft. The Reynolds Number (Re) was found using the given formula:

𝑫𝑽𝑳

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3631317

 Re = µ (2)

Figure 3: Rectangular Configuration

10. Optimization and results:

Simple rectangular configuration offered high lift and moderate coefficient of drag. To optimize performance of this
wing keeping speed and dimensions constant, dihedral angle and tip dihedral configurations were also considered
and the results were studied.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3631317

 Figure 4: Dihedral Configuration

Photo 1: Manufactured Dihedral Wing

Figure 5: Tip Dihedral Configuration

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3631317

 Photo 2: Manufactured Tip Dihedral Wing

Table 3: Performance Comparison

Configuration CL CD CL/CD Efficiency

Simple Rectangular 1.030 0.069 14.940 0.993

Dihedral 1.029 0.069 14.874 0.987

Tip Dihedral 1.036 0.069 14.936 0.999

Results for all three configurations were studied in table 3 and it was found that Tip Dihedral configuration was the
most suitable amongst the three configurations as it offered the most optimum efficiency while offering 10% higher
coefficient of lift than simple rectangular configuration. Though it offered marginally higher drag coefficient, our
design approach is to design a high payload lifting aircraft. Therefore, Tip Dihedral configuration was selected.

11. Conclusion:

Based on the performance analysis for three wing configurations with Selig 1223 air foil we observed 6 to 10
percent increase in generated lift, however we observed the difference in overall aerodynamic efficiency and
increase in drag for all three configurations are marginal. We observed rise in induced drag by 8 to 11%. However
tip dihedral wing configuration offers higher roll stability and thus it is the most suitable configuration for a micro
class UAV.

12. Future Scope:

Further work must be done on wings with sweep, taper alongside dihedral and tip dihedral arrangements and
contrast those outcomes and these outcomes. The previously mentioned wing is intended for moderate speed

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3631317

miniature class UAV. Comparably other kind of wing designs and air foil should be read up and perceived for high
velocity and low speed miniature class UAVs. Future work incorporates underlying model and examination for a
wing alongside estimation of absolute drag and lift delivered by the wing utilizing progressed apparatuses like
Computational Fluid Dynamics.

13. References:

[1] Alka Sawale, MD Khaleel and S. Jaswanth “Design and Analysis of Winglet”. International Journal of
Civil Engineering and Technology 842–850.
[2] Shamil PC, Mohammed Sanjid, Muhammed E A, Aravind Krishnan, Prof. Thomas Jacob,
“PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF WINGLET USING CFD”- International Research Journal of
Engineering and Technology (IRJET)

[3] “Performance Analysis of the Flying Wing Airfoils”: PRISACARIU Vasile Henri Coandă Air Force
Academy, Brasov, Romania
[4] AIAA-2001-2407 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics: “PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF
A WING WITH MULTIPLE WINGLETS” - M. J. Smith, N. Komerath, R. Ames, O. Wong and J. Pearson
[5] International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology – “Design and
Analysis of Wing of an Ultra light Aircraft”: Yuvaraj S R , Subramanyam P.
[6] International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems September-October 2016: 1–17 – “Analysis and
optimization of a camber morphing wing model”: Bing Li,and Gang Li

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3631317