Design and Analysis of A Micro Class UAV Integrating Zimmerman Configuration

Volume 9, Issue 3, March – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24MAR1051
Design and Analysis of a Micro Class UAV

Integrating Zimmerman Configuration
K Harshavardhan1; AM Sanjana2; P Shyam Raja3; Dileshwar Rao4; A Neha5; P Karthik Reddy6; J H S D Anoohya7
Aeronautical Department, MLR Institute of TechnologyHyderabad
Abstract:- This document describes the design and

analysis processes followed by team to build a micro class
UAV. Through this opportunity our team has gotten a
chance to test and enhance our skills by developing a
design and fabricate flying wing UAV of Zimmerman
configuration. Integrating this flying wing into the
blended body micro classed UAV, allowed the team
members to push limits further and work extra hard to
make the ends meet, with the final design of a lightweight
UAV following all the constrains for the SAE ADC 2020.
Keywords:- UAV; Zimmerman; Lightweight. Fig 1: Vought V-173
I. INTRODUCTION B. Vought XF5U

The Vought XF5U is also known as “Flying Flapjack”.
The objective of the team was to design and fabricate a It was also experimental aircraft by U.S Navy which was a
micro class UAV that can be quickly deployed which is light developed version of V-173 which is 5 times heavier with
weight. The design, analysis and testing of the fabricated two 1,600 HP Pratt &Whitney R- 200 radial engines. It was
model should give a brief idea of the effects of blended wing designed with low aspect ratio with low take-off and landing
of Zimmerman configuration on overall performance, but with great high speeds up to 550mph and also promised
providing a base to the proposed design. high maneuverability, but it was the time Navy was switching
from propeller to jet engines during development. By the time
The evolution of aircraft design has witnessed numerous project was over it was of high budget, and the project was
iterations and breakthroughs, each surpassing its predecessor. dropped off.
Amidst this progress, the Zimmerman wing stands out as a
particularly promising avenue for advancement.
Characterized by its distinctive and exceptional design, it
offers ample opportunities for further refinement and
innovation.
A. Vought V-173
The Vought V-173, affectionately dubbed the "Flying
Pancake," is an iconic experimental aircraft renowned for its
distinctive appearance and innovative aerodynamic design.
Originating during World War II, the V-173 was
commissioned by Chance Vought to explore the
unconventional concepts of designer Charles H. Zimmerman. Fig 2: Vought XF5U
Despite its peculiar look, the Flying Pancake not only
captivates with its unique aesthetics but also astonishes with C. Boeing X-48
its exceptional flight performance. The Boeing X-48 is U.S experimental unmanned aerial
vehiclewhich has a blended wing and flying wing design. The
Earning various nicknames, including the "Flying Blended Wing Body concept was developed in the
Pancake," this aircraft became one of the pioneering collaboration of NASA Langley Research Centre and Boeing
examples of vertical short takeoff and landing capabilities. Phantom Works. It is made of composite material. Boeing
Developed under a U.S. Navy contract, the V-173 took to the designed two versions of X-48 built by Cranfield Aerospace
skies for the first time on November 23, 1942. Its propulsion in UK. X-48B was modified into X-48C which was flight
was provided by two 80 HP Continental A-80 engines, tested between 2012 and 2013. Boeing and NASA tend to
contributing to its experimental prowess and historical develop larger aircrafts of this type.
significance.
IJISRT24MAR1051 www.ijisrt.com 1429

II. DESIGN PROCESS
To consider all the constraints of the competition and

accommodate all the desired objectives of the final design
wasa demanding process. An iterative design process method
ensured an optimal result which geared and triggered us.
Fig 3: Boeing X-48C

Table 1: Design Constraints and Target
Parameter Constrain Target
Dimension Maximum volume combining length, width and height Required as per given dimensional and
(L*W*H) Less than or equal to 3ft3 weight requirements
Empty Weight Less than or equal to 1.5 kg 1.0kg-1.2kg
Gross Weight Less than equal to 5kg 2kg
Material FRP & Pb are prohibited Is to use Metals, PLA, Wood
Battery 3 cell lithium polymer battery pack Prioritize power plant during Weight
estimation and design structure
accordingly.
Propulsion Electric propulsion only with one motor Electric propulsion
Requirements
Propeller Metal propellers are prohibited, safety nut or spinners are Commercially available plastic propeller
must
Landing 200ft Must land in the same direction as take-
off within landing zone
Controllability No excessive sloppy surface & FAA safety criteria must be Good controllability for all flight
satisfied. No gyro assistance. conditions at low altitude.
Take-Off Launch circle (Distance from start before initial turn 100ft) Hand launched to so aircraft
attains stall velocity
Payload bay 5×1.5×1.5 in3 +tolerance made of any material with uniform To fit in the internal member of the
mass distribution fuselage
A. Weight Build Up will suffer by reducing its maneuverability. The take-off

Total weight of the aircraft is the “Design take-off gross gross weight can be taken as empty weight of aircraft, crew
weight” for which it was designed as the mission of the weight and payload. The aircraft structure (made of balsa,
aircraft begins. “Maximum take-off weight” may or may plywood and other material, fixed equipment, propulsive
not be same as the “Design take-off gross weight”. As the system (electric motor) and anything apart payload as per the
aircraft is overloaded beyond the design weight the aircraft design requirements.
Table 2: Weight Build-up of the aircraft

S. No COMPONENT QUANTITY WEIGHT (grams)
1 1000 mAh 3s Battery 1 110
2 Motor (Racerstar BR2814) 1 100
3 Propeller (10×4.5) in 1 20
4 Esc (Hobbywing Skywalker 50A) 1 80
5 Servo 4 80
6 Other - 90
7 Structural Weight - 900
Total 1400
Payload - 600
Total with Payload 2000

The initial weight build-up of the complete model is surfaces. Elevons are a combination of elevators and ailerons
shown in the table above that is weight of model without pay which controls the rolling and pitching moment. Yawing
load 1.4 Kgs and weight of model with payload 2 Kgs. moment is produced by the tail fin placed at the end of the
wing trailing edge. But by any tail configuration the main
B. Configuration Selection functions to be satisfied are given below:
 Wing Layout  Stability

One of the vital factors affecting the overall aircraft  Control
performance is “Aircraft Wing Configuration”.
Configuration of an aircraft wing is possible in many Through this type of configuration, we can attain both
numerous ways. Our configuration of the aircrafts wing is a themain functions of tail.
Monoplane having a Low Aspect Ratio which is causing the
wing to have large surface area producing high lift even under  Motor Placement
low speeds of take. Zimmerman is the shape of the wing that Motor placement selected for the design of the aircraft
has been selected which has low aspect ratio and very high is tractor installation. The propeller in front of its attachment
aerodynamic efficiency and aerodynamic nature. The entire point that is the motor is known as the tractor installation
aircraft body contributes to lift production. Zimmerman's where a single motor is installed at the nose of the aircraft.
blended wing body aircraft features a uniquely flattened and This type of installation provides a ready source of cooling
seamlessly integrated fuselage, resembling a central airfoil- air and places the propellers in undisturbed air.
shaped body that primarily generates lift, with the wings
complementing this function for balance. C. Wing Sizing
 Airfoil Selection and Optimization

An Airfoil is the heart of the wing and it is the cross
section ofthe wing in the lateral of the aircrafts wing. Airfoil
is placed in an airstream in order to produce a useful
aerodynamic force in the most effective manner possible.
As per our design configuration of the unmanned aerial

vehicle the following are the criteria to be attained.
 Airfoil which has maximum coefficient of lift CL max.

 Enough lift to drag ratio must be present.
 To prevent laminar separation bubble and drag reduction
the thickness of the selected airfoil must be thin as
possible. Yet it needs a thickness between 8% and 11%.
 The stall AOA (αstall) must be more than 10°.
 Drag coefficient of airfoil must be low.
Fig 4: (a) Zimmerman Wing and
 Provided the lift required lift.
(b) Representative Cross Section
After comparing many airfoils, we have concluded that
 Tail Layout
- The very close airfoils for our requirement are as follows.
Flying Wing aircrafts are also known to be tail less
aircrafts. As per our design requirements the tail less problem
is solution is given by providing large elevator or elevons
Table 3: Airfoils with Required Parameters

Airfoil α CL CD CL/CD CL max αStall
MH20 3.5 0.1432 0.0143 10 0.92 8
S5010 3.3 0.1403 0.0142 9.89 1.33 13
S3 3.3 0.1426 0.0147 9.67 0.89 8
EH2510 3.5 0.1416 0.0155 9.12 1.04 12.5
The final Airfoil selected for our design of the

unmannedaerial vehicle is S5010. It was worth mentioning
that along with the selection of Airfoil with CL/CD being
equal to 9.98.
Fig 5: S5010 Airfoil

Table 4: S5010 Airfoil parameters Considering all factors, the Zimmerman planform was
Ncrit 9 chosen to optimize performance. In addition, the aircraft's
Re 3,12000 weight buildup totals 2 kilograms. The stall speed required
Cl at AOA 11 1.1964 for lift off is determined to be 8 meters per second.
CD at AOA 11 0.02652
CL max 1.0767
Cd0 0.00768
Max CL/CD 9.98
 Design of Wing
Throughout the entire design process, the wing assumes
a pivotal and central role, functioning as the cornerstone of
the aircraft. Serving as the primary source of lift generation,
wings significantly influence the performance of any airborne
vehicle. Circulation around the wing tips contributes to lift
production while simultaneously increasing drag. The
spacing of wing tips varies with aspect ratio, directly Fig. 6: Design of Wing
impacting stalling angles. Lower aspect ratio wings tend to
stall at higher angles compared to their high aspect ratio
counterparts.
Table 5: Wing Parameters

AR b c Sref Swet Vs L
Wing 1.45 0.8m 0.702 0.44m2 0.89m2 7.944m/sec 20.6N
 Design of Fuselage configuration, and other pertinent parameters. For instance, if

In contrast to micro aerial vehicles, our unmanned aerial the planform necessitates the aerodynamic center of the wing
vehicle incorporates a fuselage based on our design to be positioned forward, aligning the center of gravity
configuration. However, we ensure adaptability, allowing for requires items to be placed ahead of the aircraft, necessitating
bespoke body design when necessary. Crafting the fuselage the consideration of body length.
demands meticulous attention, adhering to the fundamental
principles of aircraft fuselage design. Our primary focus lies The design of the fuselage structure must adhere to
in accommodating motor placement and payload within our several key objectives:
design framework.
 Minimization of drag to enhance aerodynamic efficiency.
Various factors dictate fuselage design, including the  Elimination of sharp angles to promote smooth airflow.
installation angle, planform type, dimensions of equipment,  Mitigation of any adverse effects on wing lift distribution.
battery positioning, centralization of the aircraft, tail
Fig 7: Design of FuselageTable
Table 6: Fuselage Data

Parameter
Fuselage body Bluff body
Cross-section geometry Circular
Fuselage length 0.4m
Frontal cross-section area 6.911×10-3 m2
Payload bay cross-section area 5×1.5 m2
Fuselage Structure Ribbed structure

 Payload Bay
The following dimensions of pay load is final payload
constraints. The above dimensional constraint of payload bay
dimension is the internal dimensions of the box that should be
equal to that of payload which must be fitted into the payload
box.
Fig 8: Pay Load Bay
D. Design of Tail Section
Fig 9: Design of Tail Section
 Vertical Tail Design Serving as a stabilizing element, the vertical stabilizer is a

Aircraft configurations vary, featuring anywhere from fixed wing section tasked with ensuring aircraft stability and
one to three vertical tails, or even none at all. When designing maintaining straight flight. Its primary function is to
the vertical tail, a critical consideration is its surface area, a counteract side-to-side yawing motions of the aircraft nose,
key variable in tail design. In our design, the vertical tail takes thereby enhancing overall control and maneuverability.
the form of a fin positioned at the trailing edge of the wing.
Table 7: Tail Dimensions

AR b c St Ct Lt
Vertical tail 1.45 0.211m 0.1457m 0.0352m2 0.04m 0.54m
E. Control Surface Sizing aileron and elevator surfaces at his disposal. Elevon span is
To determine the stability and maneuverability it is 15-25% of wingspan and 5 to 10% of root chord.
essential tohave an appropriate control surface sizing. Since
the horizontal tail is not present the elevator and ailerons are
on the same control surface and the rudder is set on tail fin.
 Elevons Sizing
A very fundamental and primary function of elevators
and ailerons is to establish safe flight in longitudinal and
lateral direction respectively. Elevons are also known as
tailerons. The combination of functions of elevator and the
aileron through the same control surface forms the name
elevons. At the trailing edge of the aircrafts wing elevons are
installed on each side. The elevons of the aircraft are
controlled by the transmitter as though the pilot has separate Fig 10: Elevon Sizing

Table 8: Elevon Sizing

% of wingspan % of wing chord b c S
Elevons 21 8.6 0.168m 0.0602m 17.58×10-3m2
 Rudder Sizing conditions, where increased drag from control surfaces causes
Situated at the trailing end of the vertical stabilizer, the the nose to deviate further from the intended trajectory.
rudder connects to the fixed section via hinges. Functioning
as the primary control surface for flight management, the
rudder rotates around the vertical axis. Its main purpose is to
regulate and induce yaw motions in the aircraft. Notably, the
rudder does not directly facilitate turning during flight; rather,
it adjusts the orientation of the aircraft's nose. Typically,
banking the aircraft to one side, achieved through ailerons or
spoilers, initiates a turn.
Ensuring proper alignment along a curved flight path is

the role of rudder input. Without this adjustment, the aircraft
risks encountering additional drag or potential adverse yaw
Fig 11: Rudder Sizing
Table 9: Rudder Sizing

% of VT span b c S Tr
Rudder 34 0.15m 0.051m 0.00765m2 0.5
F. Drag Estimation the thrust required increases by the overcome the drag force.
As we know drag is an aerodynamic force which is Not only that higher thrust means larger propulsive system
along the direction of flow of the aircraft. From all the means more weight, hence drag is a huge factor. Since in our
different types of drag, it is cut down to mainly two different case we don’t have horizontal tail, it reduces weight
types. They are parasite and induced drag. The drag force compared to other aircrafts with tail. Due to the aerodynamic
directly affects the power requirements, as the drag increases nature of our aircraft, it decreases parasite drag.
Table 10: Drag Estimations

Induced drag (C di) Parasite drag (Cdf)
Wing 1.406 1.85259
Fuselage - 0.0161
Vertical tail - 0.00683
Total 1.406 1.87552
Total Sum 3.28152
III. PERFORMANCE & STABILITY
A. Servo Sizing
The servo size depends upon the force exerted by the flow onto the control surface and the distance between the control
surface and push rod. The above two parameters give us the approximate amount of torque required to deflect the control surface.
Table 11: Servo Sizing

Control Surface Force Generated Control Arm Length Torque Required
Elevons 0.2 Kgs 1.5cm 1.58 Kg-cm
Rudder 0.17Kgs 1.5cm 0.1008 Kg-cm
B. Take-Off Performance C. Level Turn

The aircraft can be held at the fuselage belly and can be Effective turning performance is crucial for aircraft
hand tossed by troughing the aircraft. One of the members of navigating confined spaces or executing agile maneuvers.
the team vaayuputra remains inside the Key parameters defining turning performance, often
stipulated in design requirements, include turn rate and turn
Launched zone before and after releasing the aircraft. radius, both of which can be characterized as either
The unmanned aerial vehicle can be tossed while running for instantaneous or sustained capabilities. A sustained turn
gaining the required airstream velocity. The aircraft needs refers to the ability of an aircraft to maintain a consistent turn
minimum of 8m/sec velocity to be air borne and has velocity rate or radius over an extended duration, spanning minutes or
for cruise 11 m/sec. even hours. In contrast, an instantaneous turn denotes a

momentary capability where the aircraft can swiftly alter its constant altitude while altering its velocity vector to change
direction, albeit with the potential for a subsequent decrease direction within a horizontal plane. In a coordinated turn, the
in maximum performance. aircraft experiences zero sideslip, ensuring that the level turn
remains primarily a longitudinal challenge.
One of the most common turning maneuvers executed
by aircraft is the level turn, wherein the aircraft maintains a
Fig 12: Level Turn Performance
D. Stability it is recommended to maintain the CG of the aircraft at 25%

The stability of the aircraft depends upon the location of of MAC which provides the most stable flight possible with
the Center of Gravity from the Mean Aerodynamic Chord and better controllability of the aircraft.
Fig 13: cg Location on the Mac

E. Power Plant Performance IV. MODELING AND ANALYSIS

Powerplant in our configuration is an electric motor
which produces a trust of 2 kgs. Thrust to weight ratio directly Our team has selected CATIA V5 for modelling for the
affects the performance of the Aircraft. Higher t/w of the required unmanned aerial vehicle and for the analysis has
aircraft, more quickly the aircraft accelerates, climb more been done in Ansys and xflr5. These software’s have helped
rapid, reaches higher maximum speed and sustain higher turn gather engineering data for the given model.
rates. As the aircrafts weight is constant throughout the flight,
the thrust to weight ratio is constant. A. Modeling
The designed model is the actual size of the aircraft not
the scale down model of the aircraft. The complete design,
the aero dynamic model and the structural model has been
done using CATIA V5.
Fig 14: Structure of the Aircraft
B. Aerofoil Analysis simulation outcomes of static pressure at angle of attack 0°

We can see from contours that there is a region of high with spalart Almaraz model. The pressure on the lower
pressure at the leading edge that is the Stagnation surface of the airfoil was greater than that of the incoming
points and region of low pressure on the upper surface of flow stream. The result it effectively “pushed” the airfoil
airfoil. We know from Bernoulli equation that whenever there upward, normal to the incoming flow stream.
is high velocity, we have low pressure and vice versa. The
Fig 15: Analysis of Airfoil at 0° & 11°

Fig 16: Flow Velocity Over the Airfoil
Fig 17: Pressure Contour of Airfoil Fig 19: Pressure Contour of flow over wing
Fig 18: Eddy Vorticity Flow Fig 20: Velocity Contour of Flow Over Wing
C. Wing Analysis The unmanned aerial vehicle CFD analysis has been
The focus is to study and to understand wing design. A done in Solid Works and ANSYS. To provide the aircraft an
standard 3D wing validation has been completed before the ideal design CFD analysis plays a vital role, qualitative and
designed wing analysis is performed. wing geometry has been quantitative information congregated which helped us to
modelled and full viscous flow has been calculated for the verify airfoil selection wing and fuselage design prior to the
velocity 8 m/sec at angles of attack 0 to 11 at the same time of consuming fabrication process. The lift, drag, stall
Reynolds number 3,12,000. The wing analysis has been done angle and lift to drag ratio have been determined.
with xflr5 software and CFD ANSYS.

Since shape and design of an aircraft influences aircraft V. CONCLUSIONS

handling and controls. From the CFD analysis we can observe
that the body is streamlined and has low drag with high lift. The conceptual, preliminary and detailed design phases
compared to other aircrafts with different wings. have been finished and finalized by performing all
engineering analysis. Since all the required data has been
achieved with all performance estimations, the model has
been fabricated. The following are brief overview of the
design.
 Dimension (L+B+H) 3ft3

 Empty weight =1.2 Kg
 Aerofoil S5010
 Wing Zimmerman
 Payload 0.4 Kg
Fig 21: Pressure Contour of Flow  Material Balsa, Plywood and Aluminum
The final model has achieved all the design objectives

of team and SAE ADC 2020 and won championship in the
event.
REFERENCES
[1]. A New Method for Design of Fixed Wing Micro Air

Vehicle, By Mostafa Hassanal Ian, Hamed Khaki and
Mehrdad Khosrawi, 2016, sage publication.
[2]. A CFD Study on Leading Edge Wing Surface
Modification of a Low Aspect Ratio Flying wing to
Improve Lift Performance by Dr. C. Ramprasadh and
V. Devanandh, 2015.
Fig 22: Velocity Contour of Flow [3]. Parametric Representation and Shape Optimization of
Flapping Micro Air Vehicle Wing By Eric C. Stewart,
D. Structural Analysis Mayuresh J. Patil, Robert A. Canfield and Richard D.
Structural analysis is the determines loads effecting the Snyder.
structure of the aircraft. Any structure subjected to external [4]. Aerodynamics of Low Aspect Ratio Wing at Low
loads, it tends to develop internal loads and displacement due Reynolds Numbers with Application to Micro Air
to deformation, these are determined through structural Vehicle Design and Optimization by Thomas J.
analysis. The main objective is to verify that ‘unsafe’ Mueller and Gabriel Torres.
structural failure does not occur. [5]. Estimation R/C Model Aerodynamic and Performance
Adapted from Dr. Leland M. Nicolai’s Write-up
(Technical Fellow, Lockheed Martin Aeronautical
Company) By Dr. Murat Vural.
[6]. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach by Daniel P.
Raymer, 1999 published by AIAA Inc (2,4,5&6 units
referred).
[7]. RC Model Aircraft Design by Andy Lennon,
publication by Air Age Media, 1996
[8]. Aerodynamic Design of VTOL Micro Air Vehicles by
Sergey Shkarayev, 2007.
[9]. Fundamentals of Model Airplane Building A New
Complete Course in Model Airplane Building for
Beginners Who Wish to Become Expert by Edwin T.
Hamilton.
[10]. Transformed X-48C files successfully by Tom
Koehler, Michael Braukus, Gray Creech,2012
published by NASA.
Fig 23: Structural Deflection of Aircraft
[11]. Vought Aircraft Heritage Foundation Retirees Finish
Vought V-173 "Flying Pancake" Following 8-Year
Restoration Effort by Russel Lee, 2012, published by
Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum.

Design and Analysis of A Micro Class UAV Integrating Zimmerman Configuration

Uploaded by

Design and Analysis of A Micro Class UAV Integrating Zimmerman Configuration

Uploaded by

Volume 9, Issue 3, March – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165 https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24MAR1051

Design and Analysis of a Micro Class UAV

Abstract:- This document describes the design and

Keywords:- UAV; Zimmerman; Lightweight. Fig 1: Vought V-173

I. INTRODUCTION B. Vought XF5U

IJISRT24MAR1051 www.ijisrt.com 1429

II. DESIGN PROCESS

To consider all the constraints of the competition and

Fig 3: Boeing X-48C

A. Weight Build Up will suffer by reducing its maneuverability. The take-off

Table 2: Weight Build-up of the aircraft

IJISRT24MAR1051 www.ijisrt.com 1430

 Wing Layout  Stability

 Airfoil Selection and Optimization

As per our design configuration of the unmanned aerial

 Airfoil which has maximum coefficient of lift CL max.

Table 3: Airfoils with Required Parameters

The final Airfoil selected for our design of the

Fig 5: S5010 Airfoil

IJISRT24MAR1051 www.ijisrt.com 1431

Table 5: Wing Parameters

 Design of Fuselage configuration, and other pertinent parameters. For instance, if

Fig 7: Design of FuselageTable

Table 6: Fuselage Data

IJISRT24MAR1051 www.ijisrt.com 1432

Fig 8: Pay Load Bay

D. Design of Tail Section

Fig 9: Design of Tail Section

 Vertical Tail Design Serving as a stabilizing element, the vertical stabilizer is a

Table 7: Tail Dimensions

IJISRT24MAR1051 www.ijisrt.com 1433

Table 8: Elevon Sizing

Ensuring proper alignment along a curved flight path is

Table 9: Rudder Sizing

Table 10: Drag Estimations

III. PERFORMANCE & STABILITY

Table 11: Servo Sizing

B. Take-Off Performance C. Level Turn

IJISRT24MAR1051 www.ijisrt.com 1434

Fig 12: Level Turn Performance

D. Stability it is recommended to maintain the CG of the aircraft at 25%

Fig 13: cg Location on the Mac

IJISRT24MAR1051 www.ijisrt.com 1435

E. Power Plant Performance IV. MODELING AND ANALYSIS

Fig 14: Structure of the Aircraft

B. Aerofoil Analysis simulation outcomes of static pressure at angle of attack 0°

Fig 15: Analysis of Airfoil at 0° & 11°

IJISRT24MAR1051 www.ijisrt.com 1436

Fig 16: Flow Velocity Over the Airfoil

IJISRT24MAR1051 www.ijisrt.com 1437

Since shape and design of an aircraft influences aircraft V. CONCLUSIONS

 Dimension (L+B+H) 3ft3

The final model has achieved all the design objectives

[1]. A New Method for Design of Fixed Wing Micro Air

IJISRT24MAR1051 www.ijisrt.com 1438

You might also like