Micro Air Vehicle Wing Deployment System April 7, 2005 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Micro Air Vehicle Wing Deployment System April 7, 2005 PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 7442eb-MWExY



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Micro Air Vehicle Wing Deployment System April 7, 2005

Description:

... Simple deployment - Compact design - One rotating mechanism ... design that will allow for greater lift capabilities ... Presentation Author: – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:62
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 35
Provided by: FAMU153
Learn more at: http://www.eng.fsu.edu
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Micro Air Vehicle Wing Deployment System April 7, 2005


1
Micro Air Vehicle Wing Deployment SystemApril
7, 2005
MAVerick Solutions
Sponsored by Eglin AFB
Todd Adkins Leroy Cohen Jr. Adam Hollrith Brian
Moore
2
Objectives
  • Design and fabricate component technology that
    will provide a MAV the capability to
    collapse/fold all wing surfaces along the body of
    the fuselage
  • Assess current materials and technologies that
    will maximize subsystem performance and minimize
    size and weight (i.e. composites, plastic
    actuators)
  • Furnish final report documenting project
    objective, approach, results, budget analysis for
    hardware used, and conclusions

3
Specifications
4
Design Approach
  • Develop Wing Folding Configurations
  • Various paths of motion
  • Type of wing
  • Single
  • Bi-Wing
  • Develop Actuation Mechanism
  • Move Wings from Stowed to Deployed position
  • Minimal interference
  • Modular System
  • Contain all Mechanical and Structural components
  • Easily implemented into existing MAV Fuselage

5
Wing Concepts
  • Concept 1
  • Involves a pair of wings that fold along the
    sides of the fuselage
  • Pros
  • - Compact design
  • Cons
  • - Complicated deployment path
  • -  Multiple driving mechanisms
  • - Two separately moving wings

6
Wing Concepts
  • Concept 2
  • Involves a one-piece, rotating wing
  • Pros
  • - Simple deployment
  • -  Compact design
  • -  One rotating mechanism
  • - One-piece wing design
  • Cons
  • - Concentrated stress on single support
  • -  Possible interference with tail of MAV

7
Wing Concepts
  • Concept 3
  • Involves a bi-wing design that will allow for
    greater lift capabilities and improved glide
    slope
  • Pros
  • - Greater lift capabilities than concept 2
  • -  One-piece wing design
  • - Central rotating mechanism
  • Cons
  • - Possible wing interference
  • -  Greater weight

8
Wing Concepts
  • Concept 4
  • Comprised of a two-wing system that simply
    rotates into deployment
  • The wings overlap on the top of the vehicle
    fuselage while stowed
  • Pros
  • - Simple and quick deployment
  • - Compact design
  • Cons
  • Interference caused by
  • overlapping wings
  • - Two wing attachment points

9
Wing Concepts
  • Concept 5
  • Comprised of one central connection between the
    wings and the fuselage
  • Both wings will rotate from the same point
  • Pros
  • Central rotation point
  • Compact design
  • Simple and quick deployment  
  • Cons
  • Offset wings
  • Relatively more complex concentric shafts

10
Concept Matrix

Scale Factor (1-10) 10 - optimal
Concept 4
11
Deployment MechanismConcepts
  • Linkage System
  • Actuator
  • Servo Driven
  • Gear
  • Servo Driven

12
Actuator Deployment
13
Linkage Deployment
14
Gear Set Deployment
15
Design Analysis - Lift Drag
Lift Force (N) Vs. Velocity of MAV (mph)
  • Weight of MAV 1.961 N
  • To maintain flight, Lift Force must equal 1.961 N

16
Design Analysis - Lift Drag
Torque on wings (Ncm) vs. MAV Velocity (mph)
  • Maximum Torque on Wings
  • at Maximum Velocity (25 mph)
  • Twings 1.90 Ncm
  • Torque Provided by Servo
  • Tservo 2.94 Ncm
  • Final Comparison
  • Tshafts gt Twings

17
Design Analysis Linkages
18
Design Analysis Linkages
19
Gear Analysis
  • Number of Teeth
  • Gear Ratio
  • Diameter
  • Torque
  • Stresses
  • Bending
  • Safety Factors

20
Module Design
21
Module Design
22
Design Selection
  • Gear System
  • Efficient
  • Relatively Simple
  • Compact
  • Reliable

23
Specification Changes
  • Modify overall dimensions of Module

24
Fabrication Process
  • Module Components
  • Stock
  • Modified
  • Machined

25
Fabrication Process
26
Testing Results
  • Torque Test
  • Tested at max. torque requirement
  • Gears did not bind and shafts rotated smoothly
  • Rotational Timing
  • Servo moved to correct position in less than 1
    second

27
Testing Results
  • Stowing Test
  • Wing attachment arms and shafts bent severely
    when packaged in tube
  • Gears would bind and wings could not deploy
    properly

28
Design Modifications
  • Create new method for attaching wings to rotating
    shafts
  • Implement support bracket hinge system

Previous Design
Modified Design
29
Final Modified Assembly
30
Final Cost Analysis
31
Final Product
  • Successfully stowed in 3 tube
  • Deployed in less than 1 second
  • Final module weight of 28 g

32
Final Product
33
References
  • http//www.eflightdesigns.com/cgi-bin/products.cgi
    ?CAT23
  • http//www.nyblimp.com/superior/carbon-rods.htm
  • http//www.robotcombat.com/marketplace_carbonfiber
    .html
  • http//www.stevensaero.addr.com/e-flight_servos.ht
    ml
  • http//www.hobbypeople.net/gallery/877815.asp
  • http//www.nyltite.com/L20.html
  • https//sdp-si.com/eStore/

34
Special Thanks
  • Eglin Air Force Base
  • Edwardo Freeman
  • FAMU/FSU College of Engineering
  • Dr. Cesar Luongo
  • Dr. Patrick Hollis
  • Dan Braley
  • Keith Larson
About PowerShow.com