2. PROJECT I: SPACE PROGRAM AIRCRAFT DESIGN
Project Type: Funded Mentorship
Project Name: Noise Reduced Private Supersonic Aircraft
Date: November 2016 - Present
MB
3. CONCEPT AND ROLE STAKE-HOLDER
Space Program (NASA) has funded Arjun Wasan, a 13 year old
student at Falk Laboratory School at the University of Pittsburgh,
to design a functioning and feasible supersonic aircraft through
Illinois Tech. The purpose of this aircraft is to provide comfort and
a hasty journey for a small number of passengers while causing
little to no sound disruption.
• Main Role: Student Mentor
• Assigned Duties:
• General management of the project
• Guidance through design process
• Personal meetings
MB
4. RESEARCH AND INSPIRATION
The design of the aircraft
was inspired by the Aerion
AS2 which carries similar
functions to our target.
Modifications and other
technologies must be
introduced in order to
reduce takeoff/landing
distances for STOL.
MB
5. PRELIMINARY DESIGN
• Specific design features are
chosen and implemented on
XLR5
• The two airfoils chosen were the
NACA 1206 and the NACA 0004
for the wing and
vertical/horizontal
stabilizers
MB
6. PRELIMINARY TESTING
It is required in this stage to
make sure the aircraft will be
statically stable for flight. By
a look at the moment
coefficient vs. angle of
attack (Alpha) on the top
right corner we were able to
confirm its stability.
MB
7. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
• Extract the lateral-directional
and longitudinal stability and
control derivatives from XFLR5
• Design a simulation on Simulink
through MATLAB and upload
design of aircraft as part of the
simulation.
• Improved estimates on:
• takeoff/landing distances
• initial weight and fuel specific
coefficient
• etc…
MB
9. The purpose of this project was to produce a functioning
aircraft design using XFLR5 and demonstrate stable
longitudinal 3 degrees of freedom flight as well as lateral-
directional 6 degrees of freedom flight using Simulink.
• Main Role: Project Manager
• Assigned Duties:
• Data acquisition for control derivatives using XFLR5, MATLAB, and
an Excel
• Construct a functioning control block on Simulink
CONCEPT AND ROLE
MB
10. C-414 AIRCRAFT DESIGN SPECS.
Engine: 2X Pratt & Whitney PT6A-41 Series
• 850 Shaft Horsepower Each (1700 shp)
• Combined Thrust of 2,192 lb (at cruise)
Cruise Speed: 250 knots = 290mph
Max Climb rate: 15m/s
• 12.7 m/s used in Simulation
Range: 2240 nm
Takeoff Weight: 12,356lb
• 2 crew 9 passengers
Airfoils:
• H.T. and V.T: NACA 0010
• Main Wing: NACA 2415 - NACA 0010
PRELIMINARY DESIGN
MB
11. I was required to extract lateral-directional
and longitudinal properties in order to
manually obtain the control derivatives for 3
and 6 degrees of freedom flight simulation.
This code was written in order to obtain
datum (reference) and subtract it from the
different plots (Cm, CL, CY, etc… vs. Alpha
and Beta) which resulted in the control
derivatives needed for the simulation.
This code was specifically done for the drag
coefficients experienced from different
elevator deflection angles.
MB
PROGRAMING USED FOR CONTROL DERIVATIVES
12. FLIGHT SIMULATION ON SIMULINK
• Control block was
designed to
perform a 3
degree of freedom
simulation
• Perform a simple
mission profile
• Takeoff
• Cruise
• Landing
MB
13. RESULTS
• Uploaded coefficients to aerodynamic coefficient blocks
• Ran a 3DoF simulation abiding to mission profile
• Mission profile included a takeoff/landing and straight t
path cruise for a specific duration
• Only showing phugoid oscillations which damps out
• Ran a 6DoF simulation abiding to mission
• Mission profile included a 180 degree bank turn done
using a Dutch-roll maneuver
MB
14. MMAE 414 Design Project
Fall 2016 Final
Description
Flight simulation of midterm aircraft design
Michael Miszczak
Muaz Bondokji
Daniel Pietrzyk
15. Al
ph
a
C
Y
1. Introduction
The loiter and climb performance will be determined for the aircraft designed during the
midterm. XFLR5 will be used to determine the airplane’s side force, roll and yaw moment
increments, depending on aileron/rudder/elevator deflection, sideslip angle, and their
relationship to the angle of attack. The data will then be exported into an Excel
spreadsheet, and inputted into MATLAB. Then, two Simulink models must be created: one
to model the climbing capability of the aircraft, and another to simulate a level turn. The
Simulink models will use the control data for the airplane in order to generate an output.
2. XFLR 5 Simulations
First, we used XFLR5 to determine the aircraft stability and control derivatives and their
relation to the angle of attack. All of the simulations were conducted at a cruise speed of
130m/s, as that is the cruise speed calculated in the preliminary design. A total of 4
simulations were issued: sideslip angle, aileron deflection, rudder deflection, and elevator
deflection. The control derivatives determined from the simulations include: CD, CL, Cl, Cn,
Cm, and CY. Furthermore, tables of the control derivatives vs alpha were inputted into
Excel, plotted, and transferred into MATLAB. Visual representations for each XFLR5 case are
presented below:
2.1 Sideslip Angles
The simulation was completed for sideslip angles of -6, -3, 0, 3, and 6 degrees. CY, Cn, and Cl
vs alpha datum was
obtained:
Fig. 1 Fig. 2
16. Fig. 3
2.2. Aileron Deflection
The simulation was completed for aileron deflections of -10, -5, 0, 5, and 10 degrees. CY, Cn,
and Cl vs alpha datum was obtained:
Fig. 4 Fig. 5
Fig. 6
2.3. Rudder Deflection
The simulation was completed for rudder deflections of -10, -5, 0, 5, and 10 degrees. CY, Cn,
and Cl vs alpha datum was obtained:
17. Fig.
7 Fig. 8
Fig. 9
2.4. Elevator Deflection
The simulation was completed for rudder deflections of -10, -5, 0, 5, and 10 degrees. CD,
Cm, and CL vs alpha datum was obtained:
Fig. 10 Fig. 11
18. Fig. 12
Once all of the XFLR5 data was obtained, it was inputted into MATLAB to create datum and
control derivative tables for the Simulink simulations.
3. MATLAB Data Preparation
The initial step was to create systematic .m files (or scripts) that are easy to modify for all the
data tables needed. Once that was created it was a matter of editing parts of the script and saving
each of the tables in their separate files. Datum files were extracted from the zero degrees
deflection in controls for longitudinal elevator control.
Fig. 13
Next was to create the derivative control tables for longitudinal elevator controls by subtracting
the datum values of CD, CL, CM from the raw values taken from the XFLR5 files. This results
in the dCD, dCL, dCM files shown respectively as shown in figure 14. Next was to find the
lateral-directional control derivatives using the same approach. That included dCl, dCn, and dCY
19. for beta, ailerons, and rudder deflections as shown in figures 15 and 16.
Fig. 14
20. Fig. 15
Fig. 16
4. Simulink Flight simulation
This section explains the procedure taken to perform certain maneuver requirements in both
3DoF and 6DoF setups. The first part required the plane to initially fly for 10 seconds at 1000 ft
AGL and then climb at a constant rate to 10,000 ft. Then it needed to fly for 30 seconds at that
level. This was performed using step function with a 304 meter (1000 ft) constant that initially
took the plane to that height. Then, a ramp function was used with a slope of 12.7 m/s at 10
seconds that took the plane to 10,000 ft altitude. Lastly, another ramp function was used with the
same slope, but negative, to level off the flight at 310 seconds. The figure below shows the setup
21. of the simulink file. An altitude feedback loop was required in order to perform an altitude hold
at certain points as well as perform the thrust adjustment for stable climb and flight.
Fig. 17
Next was the lateral-directional and longitudinal performance simulation (6DoF). This part
required the aircraft to perform a bank angle turn of 180 degrees stably at level flight. It initially
required a level flight for 10 seconds. This was achieved by using 8 step functions with 22.5
degrees of heading that guided the aircraft into the bank turn. Lastly, the aircraft was required to
fly straight back for 30 seconds which was done successfully. Thrust adjustment and altitude
hold were also performed in order to keep the plane in level flight as well.
22. Fig. 18
4.2. Simulink Animation
In order to give a better understanding of how the plane would fly during its flight, it
would be optimal to place a figure that looked like our plane in the animation, as opposed to
the default red triangle. Sadly, there is no way to export directly from XFLR5 to Simulink,
but MatLab does have the capabilities of taking 3-Dimensional parts from CAD programs
and importing them into simulink. So the plane surfaces that were outlined in XFLR5 were
redrawn in SolidWorks leaving gaps between the surfaces that would touch. The reasoning
for this is that it would keep surfaces from intersecting which would make MatLab very
unhappy.
The plugin from MatLab to SolidWorks that automatically takes the parts in the assembly
and transfers them over to the animation is a paid plugin that could not be acquired in the
time needed for this project. So the airplane model was saved as an .STL file which could
then be manually brought into MatLab. We were able to bring the airplane up in a figure,
however, we were unable to save it as a Geometric Variable. Because of this we hit a stone
wall. The only things which the animation block in Simulink will accept is as an object are
either .mat files or geomVar, geometric variables. since we were unable to save either and
upload them into matlab, we have been forced to use the standard red triangle for our
animation object.
Another path that could have been taken would have been to ditch the animation block
entirely and go to using VRML, Virtual Reality Modeling Language. This language is
compatible with Simulink, and there are even VR blocks in the Simulink Library. However,
this program is operated very differently from Simulink and could not be figured out in the
allotted time.
23. Fig. 19 Fig. 20
4.3. Simulink Results
After inputting everything into our simulink models we then ran our models and got the
following graphs. They were exactly as we would have expected and all our mission
parameters were met.
For our 3 DoF side view we had an initial jump to a desired height, then leveling itself
out, then after 10 seconds the plane started climbing. When it reached 10,000 ft, roughly
3050 m, the plane leveled out and flow at a level trajectory for 30 seconds.
For our 6 DoF Top view it was clear that the plane did a level flight turn. Looking at the
side view the plane was increasing and decreasing in altitude slightly due to reduced or too
little phugoid damping, but looking at the scale, the amount that it was oscillating up and
down was negligible, and decreased as the flight continued. Therefore it can be seen that this
initial oscillation is because of the Phugoid mode stabilizing. If we had wanted to make sure
that there was no oscillations what so ever in the turn we would have let the plane fly for a
long enough period that the oscillations would have dampened themselves out, at which point
the plane would have initiated the level turn
25. PROJECT III: AIAA UAV
Project Type: Student Organization/Extracurricular
Project Name: Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems
International Competition
Date: August 2015 - Present
MB
26. CONCEPT AND ROLE
The UAVSI competition is one that brings brilliant minds
together to compete in designing the best performing UAVs
which are required to perform specific functions such as
autonomous takeoff/landing and flight.
• Main Role: Experimenting and Design Team
• Assigned Duties:
• CAD Design of UAV parts
• Construction of UAV
MB
27. • Aircraft design was done by
previous project manager
• Semi-glider
• Push propeller
• I modified the design of
fuselage better fit
performance requirements
and for increased modularity
PRELIMINARY DESIGN
MB
28. RIB DESIGN AND EXTRACTION
• Finding location of needed
ribs
• Extracting the shapes from
the fuselage using offset
planes and extrusions
• Setting multiple compact
sheets for CNC laser cutter
MB
29. • The fuselage mold was simply
extracted from the original
fuselage design
• Modifications for wing placement
and opening for front and middle
access chamber covers were made
• Fuselage mold was made as
a negative mold and the
covers were positive molds
• Covers made out of clear
plastic using suction molding
FUSELAGE MOLDS DESIGN
MB
30. CONSTRUCTION OF THE UAV
• Design the molds of the fuselage on Inventor Pro
• Mold was made from wood blocks that were cut using a CNC
router machine
• Currently in the stage of fiber-glassing the fuselage and
wings
• Constructed an insulated heat box for curing process
MB
31. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
• Design engine mount for propeller
at the back of the fuselage
• Wind tunnel tests required to
ensure enough clearance for
undisturbed flow for propeller
• Assemble avionics system on
center board
• Assemble UAV parts
• Test fly autonomous flight
capabilities
MB
32. PROJECT IV: IPRO I
Project Type: Product Development
Project Name: REFEED
Date: April 2016
MB
33. CONCEPT AND ROLE
Energy consumption has been increasing the demand for
sustainable resources. This project was aimed towards
providing a sustainable solution to the problem of low
access to charging outlets facing people living in urban
cities similar to Chicago.
• Main Role: Project Manager
• Assigned Duties:
• Main Impact of Product
• Product Cost-benefit Analysis
MB
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54. PROJECT V: MMAE 315 AEROSPACE LAB
Project Type: Laboratory Research
Project Name: Schlieran Photography Analysis of Oblique
Shocks
Date: December 2nd, 2015
MB
55. Muaz Bondokji
Schlieran Photography Analysis of Oblique Shocks
Lab Partners: Monil Shah, Przemyslaw Szozda, Brian Korthals
Professor Candace Wark, Professor Bruno Monnier
MMAE 315-002, Wednesday December 2, 2015
56. Abstract:
Combining the knowledge of optic lenses and mirrors with the knowledge of
compressible flow, we can analyze the effects of shockwaves on the properties
of air. To do so, we had to install a wedge inside a test section of a wind tunnel
undergoing supersonic flow. This wedge will form oblique shocks which will
change the properties of air significantly and deflect light passing through this
area. Using a light source and mirrors placed to send multiple light beams
through the test section –through the area affected by the shock –which will be
projected on a camera lens, we can analyze the change in direction of the light
beams. This is known as Schlieran Photography. The properties of the air can
be analyzed through measuring the angle of the oblique shock or from pressure
relationships. These two methods will give slightly different Mach numbers.
I. Introduction
The purpose of this lab procedure is to analyze the effect of an oblique shock on the properties of
air which include, velocity or Mach number, pressure, density, and subsequently affecting the
index of refraction Explained by Snell’s Law of Refraction.
𝑛1 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃1 = 𝑛2 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃2 (1)
Where n is the index of refraction.
Figure 1: Diagram explaining Snell’s Law where θ1> θ2, θ1’= θ2’, and rwater>rair
𝜃1
𝜃2
Beam 1
Beam 2
rair
rwater
𝜃2′𝜃1′
57. θ1’ and θ2’ represent Brewster’s angle of total reflection. The relationship between Snell’s law
and density is represented in the Gladstone-Dale
𝜌 =
𝑛−1
𝐶
(2)
Where r is the density and C is dependent on the properties of the gas and the wavelength of the
light beam passing through. r can be used in the Ideal Gas Law to find pressure where,
𝑃 = 𝜌𝑅𝑇 (3)
R is the gas constant for air and T is the ambient
An oblique shock is analyzed by initially finding the deflection angle of the flow which, in our
case, is found using simple geometry of a triangle.
Figure 2: Diagram showing the geometry of a wedge used to create an oblique shock
It was possible to find an uncertainty for our first δ measurements which gave an average of
14.99 degrees. The Standard Error (SE) would be very close to that of the second wedge used.
To calculate SE
𝑆𝐸 =
𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
√𝑁
(4)
Where
𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = √∑(𝛿−𝛿̅ )
2
𝑁−1
(5)
In order to find the deflection angle of the flow, δ, we use
𝛿 = tan−1 𝑙 2⁄
𝐿
(6)
This will not be possible to calculate unless the angle between the flow, U∞, and the orthogonal
line from the tip of the triangle is zero. In other words, using an isosceles triangle the angle of
attack must be zero.
Now, to find the Mach number upstream of the wedge, M∞, we will need to measure the angle
between the shock and the direction of flow, θ. We use a relationship where tanδ is a function of
the Mach number, θ, and γ. Where γ is the specific heat ratio.
𝑡𝑎𝑛𝛿 = 2𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃 [
𝑀1
2 sin2 𝜃−1
2+𝑀1
2(𝛾+𝑐𝑜𝑠2𝜃)
] (7)
Where
L
l
U∞ δ
δ
58. 𝛾 =
𝑐 𝑝
𝑐 𝑣
𝑅 = 𝑐 𝑝 − 𝑐 𝑣
Rearranging 5 and solving for M1, we get
𝑀∞ = √
−2(
𝑐𝑜𝑡𝜃
𝑡𝑎𝑛𝛿
+1)
𝛾+𝑐𝑜𝑠2𝜃−𝑠𝑖𝑛2𝜃/ tan 2𝜃
(8)
The stagnation and static pressure are calibrated according to these two functions
𝑃𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑔 = (𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑔 − 𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑔 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑒𝑡
) × (−37 ×
20
15
) (9)
𝑃𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐 = (𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐 − 𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑒𝑡
) × (−37 ×
15
150
) (10)
Figure 3: Diagram showing the angle of the oblique shock, θ
The stagnation and static pressure are used to find the Mach number upstream of the shock using
this relationship
𝑃𝑡 = 𝑃 (1 +
𝛾 − 1
2
𝑀2
)
𝛾
𝛾−1
Which is rearranged to find M
𝑀∞ = √(
𝑃 𝑡
𝑃
)
1
3.5
−1
𝛾−1
2
(11)
II. Experimental Setup
2.1 Equipment Used
- Function Generator, AFG 3021B
- Camera, DMK-31BK03
- Adjustable Stands for mirrors and cutting blade
- Adjustable Mirror, Focal Length = 65”
- Light Source
- Cutting Knife
- Pitot-static Tube
- IE Capture, camera software
δ
δ
θ
M∞
M1
Pstag, Pstatic
Prandtl-Meyer fan
59. 2.2 Setup of Equipment
Figure 4: Wind tunnel with camera and parabolic mirrors set up to reflect light through test section, the oblique
shocks, the knife edge, and captured through camera.
Since the focal length of both parabolic mirrors is 65 inches, both the slit and the knife edge were
set up at that distance and the light source focuses the light at the slit and similarly, the DMK
camera is focused on the knife edge. This way the camera will capture a focused picture that
shows any light deflection caused by changes in the property of air.
2.3 Experimental Procedure
Initially the Experiment was carried out to demonstrate how changes in air properties will deflect
light by taking pictures while the tunnel was off and adding a heat source right under the path of
light between the two parabolic mirrors. The function generator was supplied with 15 volts and
set to generate a square wave at 2 hertz, which dictates the flickering of the light, and 5 volts
(peak to peak.) The duty cycle was set at 10% for 5 volts and 90% for 0 volts to reduce
brightness.
A LabVIEW VI setup was constructed to process the pressure readings and offsets (in volts) and
to measure the duration. Sampling rate was 1000 Hz for 20,000 samples, and a 20 second
timeout.
The second part was done with the wind tunnel running at the same settings for the function
generator. The wedge was added into the testing section with approximately zero angle of attack.
After the wedge was set, the tunnel was turned on and the Mach number was increased to the
point where a steady oblique shock can be observed through the IE capture software. Multiple
photographs were taken and then the tunnel was shut off.
DMK
Camera
Metal
Wedge
60. III. Results
3.1 Finding Angle of the Wedge
The angle was found using calipers and calculating it using equation 4. Results were found done
by multiple students for a 15.1 degree wedge. The wedge used for the experiment is a 10.6 in
which the same SE will be used of the 15.1 degree wedge. The SE was found to be ±0.339
degrees.
Initial stage of the experiment showing images taken with the knife edge cutting part of the light
beam in different positions.
Figure 5: Knife cutting the bottom side of the light source (horizontal)
Figure 6: Knife cutting the left side of the light source (vertical)
61. The following images show the light source disturbed by a heat source which causes a change in
direction of light.
Figure 7: Six images showing the light disturbed due to change of air properties from a heat source
It is obvious to note the change in light density due to the heat source by observing areas with
higher brightness and other areas that are noticeably darker.
62. The following photographs show oblique shocks (OS) as well as Prandtl-Meyer waves generated
from a wedge at a zero angle of attack from startup to running conditions to pressure cut off.
Figure 8: Diagrams in order show duct with wedge installed and starts with no flow, goes to startup, running
conditions with a visible Mach wave and OS, and Prandtl-Meyer waves, to a stopping state with a normal shock at
the tip.
63. Figure 9: Estimates of θ angles were as shown.
Finding the angle of the oblique shocks in each photograph was done by using ImageJ. I used all
the photographs acquired from the experiment which gave 13 results. The values shown below
have a SE value of ±0.339 with a 95% certainty, which is the same for both θ and δ.
Table 1: Mach number calculated based on different θ values at δ = 10.6 ± 0.339 degrees
Deviation Angle, δ
OS angle,
θ M1
10.6 42.47 1.888482
- 45 1.793658
- 43.75 1.838439
- 43.11 1.862905
- 42.2 1.89962
- 43.38 1.852451
- 42.27 1.896712
- 41.99 1.90843
- 42.85 1.873158
- 43.04 1.865647
- 42.68 1.879964
- 42.31 1.895057
- 44.34 1.816822
- 42.47 1.888482
In table 1 equation 8 was used to find the Mach number using multiple theta angles measured
from the pictures shown in figure 8. To establish a comparison, we used equation 11 to find the
Mach number using a different method. Results are shown in the following graph.
θ = 42-45°
64. Figure 10: Mach number plotted against the time the data was recorded
The wind tunnel was only active and fully functioning between 2 seconds and 10 seconds where
the Mach number reached an average of 1.925 in that same time interval.
65. IV. Discussion
The oblique shocks were stable throughout the entire interval the wind tunnel was running at the
highest. One Mach wave upstream of the wedge was visible as shown in figure 8 which had
negligible effects on the properties of air. Another phenomena can be observed downstream at
the end of the wedge tip which is a Prandtl-Meyer wave. This occurs when the air goes under an
expansion which causes its Mach number to increase, therefore, changing the air’s properties.
The Mach number was found using two methods. One was through the calculated stagnation and
static pressures found using the Pitot static tube and the druck sensor and running the numbers
through equation 11. The other was found using the photo’s obtained and measuring the shock
angles to be used in equation 8. Both methods showed very similar results which were around M
= 1.9 with more possible error to occur in the method which uses equation 8. This is due to the
inaccuracy of measuring the angle of the oblique shocks.
V. Conclusion
The supersonic wind tunnel experiment was done in order to measure the upstream Mach
number using two different techniques which relied on simply using Schlieran Photography,
which allows us to measure angles, or simple pressure measurements using a Pitot static tube and
sensor. Both methods provided similar results with more room for error in the Schlieran method
due to quality of photographs and inaccuracy in measuring the angles of the shocks. This can be
greatly improved by using a better quality camera. After doing this experiment my conclusion is
that measuring the Mach number through finding pressure readings upstream can have better
accuracy as long as the probe does not cause significant losses.
Reference:
Experiment setup figure 4:
http://www.mdpi.com/micromachines/micromachines-03-
00364/article_deploy/html/images/micromachines-03-00364-g004-1024.png
