Design, Development and Manufacture of a Search and Rescue Unmanned Aerial Vehicle

323 Pages·2007·9.09 MB·English

Design, Development and Manufacture of a Search and Rescue
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
Draft Report v 3.5
October 18, 2007

Executive Summary
The Search and Rescue Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) was designed, developed and manu-
factured by a group of eight undergraduate engineering students from the School of Mechanical
Engineering at The University of Adelaide. With backgrounds in Aerospace and Mechatronic
disciplines, thestudentsaimedtodevelopanautonomousUAVplatform, withgroundbasedcon-
trol and surveillance capabilities. Dubbed ’UAV iSOAR’ (UAV for intelligent Surveillance for
Outback Aerial Rescue) the design was driven towards a search and rescue mission profile, with
ultimate testing of the effectiveness of the platform to be conducted at the inaugural Australian
Research Centre for Aerospace Automation (ARCAA) 2007 UAV Outback Challenge - Search
and Rescue event.
The conceptual design of the airframe was derived using a classical approach, based on an exten-
sive feasibility and statistical analysis of the global UAV industry. Driven by controllability and
stability requirements, the airframe is of a conventional configuration, with a high wing, electric
propulsion system, proprietary control system, and internal and external payload carrying capa-
bilities. The aircraft is primarily constructed from composite materials with removable wings,
undercarriage and hatches, allowing access to internal components and easy transportation.
Theuseofanelectricpropulsionsystemallowedforareductioninthecomplexityofthedynamics
oftheaircraft,aswellasdevelopmenttimeoftheprototype. Theuseofabrushlesselectricmotor,
and lithium-polymer battery technology, was designed to provide the UAV with a cruise speed
of 90km/hr and an endurance in excess of 60 minutes, as dictated by the mission requirements.
The Micropilot 2028g proprietary autopilot system was integrated into the airframe to provide
straight and level autonomous flight. The system had the scope to automate the vehicle in all
regimesofflight, howeverintegrationproblemsresultedinthisnotbeingachievedbytheproject.
During in-flight tuning of the system, interference between the autopilot communication link
and RC receiver resulted in a crash, and a shift in the focus of work within the project towards
resolving this interference problem.
The internal payload of the aircraft consists of an analogue video camera, with 450TV lines of
resolution, and a field of view of 90 degrees. This camera was successfully used to stream live
video footage to a ground station, providing the necessary information for successful surveillance
missions.
An externally mounted payload system was designed and located on the aircraft’s undercarriage.
Through the use of two servo motors, the system successfully deployed a 600mL bottle of water,
i
and thus demonstrated the capability of the aircraft in deploying mission specific payloads to
designated targets.
The primary goals of this project were ambitious given the sequential order in which each goal
needed to be accomplished. However, the resourcefulness of the group meant that these goals
were able to be realised in full, even when unforseen problems arose. Several extended goals were
also specified, and these were particularly ambitious. All of these goals were partially achieved,
and the work completed by the project thus far provides a solid base for future work in the
development of a fully autonomous UAV system.
Acknowledgments
We the authors would like to acknowledge the contributions made by many people throughout
the course of this project. We would firstly like to thank the project supervisor, Dr. Maziar
Arjomandi, whose technical knowledge and advice was invaluable to the authors. His continu-
ous dedication to the project, countless hours spent in consultation and guidance dramatically
contributed to the success of the project.
The group would like to acknowledge the financial support received from The Sir Ross and Sir
Keith Smith Fund at the commencement of the project. Without the Smith Fund’s ongoing
support to the aerospace industry within South Australia, the project would never have come to
fruition.
ThegroupissincerelythankfulfortheadditionalfinancialsupportreceivedfromThalesAustralia
and The University of Adelaide Marketing Department. Thanks is further extended to Thales
Australia for the additional technical assistance they provided.
In addition to these primary project sponsors, in-kind contributions were received from Nupol
Composites, and J & H Williams Engineering. The authors would like to extend their sincere
thanks to Nupol Composites for the donation of materials received, to J & H Williams Engineer-
ing for the loan of their workshop facilities.
The group would also like to acknowledge the additional in-kind assistance received from the
following businesses:
• Fiber Glass International
• Foam Fast
• Alexander Sails
• Check it Out Graphics
• City Holden
The authors are extremely grateful to Mr. Max Fry who was instrumental in the manufacture
of the airframe. Max provided many in-kind hours to the project to meet short delivery times,
despite his own work commitments. Without Max’s generous assistance this plane would not
have been manufactured within the time frame of the project, and to such a high standard.
ii
iii
The authors are greatly indebted to Mike and Brenda Savill for generously donating their skills
and time to the piloting of the aircraft. Without Mike’s kind assistance and skill as a pilot, and
Brenda’s support, this project would not have got off the ground . In addition Mike and Brenda
foregoed their regular commitments to attended the ARCAA outback challenge for 3 days, for
which the group is sincerely thankful.
The mechanical workshop in the School of Mechanical Engineering must be thanked for their
efforts in the manufacturing of the foam wing core and fuselage plug. The authors would also
liketosincerelythankMr. SilvioDelesofromtheelectronicsworkshop, forhisongoingpatience,
advice and workmanship.
The authors would also like to thank all the other staff in The School of Mechanical Engineering
who have supported the project and have allowed many hours of work to take place resulting in
an extremely successful project.
Finally, the authors would like to deeply thank their friends and families. The successful results
of the project are a reflection of their support and understanding throughout the duration of the
project.
Smith Fund Acknowledgment and Disclaimer
ResearchundertakenforthisreporthasbeenassistedwithagrantfromtheSmithFind(www.smithfund.org.au).
The support is acknowledged and greatly appreciated.
TheSmithFundbyprovidingfundingforthisprojectdoesnotverifytheaccuracyofanyfindings
or any representation contained in it. Any reliance in any written report or information provided
to you should be based solely on your own assessment and conclusions.
The Smith fund does not accept any responsibility or liability from any person, company or
entity that may have relied on any written report or representations contained in this report if
that person, company or entity suffers any loss (financial or otherwise) as a result.
Disclaimer
We, the authors, declare that the material contained with this report is entirely our own, unless
specified otherwise.
...............................................
Nayan Avalakki
Date:
...............................................
Jonathan Bannister
Date:
...............................................
Benjamin Chartier
Date:
iv
v
...............................................
Travis Downie
Date:
...............................................
Brad Gibson
Date:
...............................................
Crystal Gottwald
Date:
...............................................
Peter Moncrieff
Date:
...............................................
Michael Williams
Date:
Contents
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Aim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Project Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2 Literature Review and Feasibility Study 4
2.1 Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2 Market Evaluation and Benchmarking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3 Statistical Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3.1 Analysed UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3.2 Parameters to be Analysed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4 ARCAA UAV Outback Challenge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.5 Mission Profile Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.6 System Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.6.1 Determination of Cruise Speed Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.6.2 Propulsion Concept Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.6.3 Launch and Recovery Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.6.4 Automation Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.6.5 Imagery Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.6.6 Communications Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.6.7 Deployable Payload Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.7 Summary of Design Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
vi
CONTENTS vii
3 Platform Conceptual Design 22
3.1 Configuration Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.2 Initial Concept Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3 Weight Estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4 Design Specifications and Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.5 Aircraft Preliminary Sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.6 Design Point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
3.7 Tail Plane Sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.8 Propulsion System Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.8.1 Specifications of Propulsion System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3.8.2 Motor Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3.8.3 Propeller Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
3.8.4 Battery Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.9 Material Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
3.10 Results of the Platform Conceptual Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4 Control System Concepts 53
4.1 Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.2 Control System Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.2.1 Off-The-Shelf versus Custom Built . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
4.2.2 Autopilot Market Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.2.3 Autopilot Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
5 Imaging Systems Conceptual Design 62
5.1 Operational Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5.2 Camera Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
5.2.1 Analogue Cameras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
5.2.2 Digital Cameras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
5.2.3 UAV and Airborne Cameras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
5.3 Defining Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
5.4 Comparison and Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
5.4.1 Digital & Analogue Camera Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
5.4.2 Available Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
5.5 Imaging Systems Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74