CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION












1.1 General

Interest in unmanned-aerial-vehicles (UAVs) and micro-aerial-vehicles (MAVs) in
recent years has increased significantly. These aircraft are useful for applications ranging
from military to scientific research because of their ability to perform dangerous missions
without risking human life. Also because their payload can be much smaller than a pilot,
there are less limitations to how small they can become. At Brigham Young University (BYU)
in particular, small UAV research has exploded during the last few years. Faculty and
students work together on many small UAV projects. Research activities include developing
new airplanes for commercial use, participating in the annual Micro-Aerial-Vehicle
competition, and developing autonomous flight vehicle systems. It seems that interest in
small UAVs will continue to grow around the world as new applications will demand new
UAV solutions and designs. Airplanes come in all shapes and sizes. Before the emergence of
UAVs, airplane designers were constrained in how small they could go because of the
necessity to carry a human pilot onboard. By removing the pilot, and due to increasing UAV
component technology, UAV designs have decreased in size significantly. As time goes on,
smaller and smaller UAV solutions will become available. Indeed, the term small UAV
undoubtedly had a much different meaning just a few years ago than it does now.

Small, remotely operated aircraft present unique challenges and advantages to both
designer and pilot. Because of a drastically higher crash frequency, it seems that small UAVs
are more susceptible to dangerous and sometimes fatal instabilities than large airplanes.
This may be due in part to quicker design cycles and the lower stakes of small UAV crashes
relative to the high stakes of a large airplane crash. Perhaps designers are sometimes
more eager to get out and see if this thing flies, than they are to do the rigorous design
work necessary to ensure a stable and successful first flight. Often, experienced airplane
designers and pilots seem to develop an uncanny intuition for diagnosing and solving
problems with all kinds of airplane instabilities. The goal of this thesis research is to capture
the intuition and knowledge of such capable engineers and pilots, evaluate it quantitatively
and provide a simple tool to new, less-experienced designers. This tool will allow them to

improve their small UAV design methods to include considerations of both static and
dynamic stability.
Airplanes, including small UAVs, are a classic engineering example of design
tradeoffs. It often seems impossible to improve one aspect of performance without
degrading another. Accordingly, stability is one aspect of airplane performance that must be
balanced with all the others. There are two types of stability which are:

Static Stability
Static stability is an essential part of the basic airplane design process already included in
design methodologies.
Dynamic Stability
Dynamic stability will effect on performance and handling qualities is generally poorly
understood by new designers. This lack of understanding makes it difficult to include
dynamic stability into a typical design process.

An airplane that has positive dynamic stability does not automatically have
positive static stability. The designers may have elected to build in, for example, negative
static stability and positive dynamic stability in order to achieve their objective in
maneuverability. In other words, negative and positive dynamic and static stability may be
incorporated in any combination in any particular design of airplane.

An airplane may be inherently stable, that is, stable due to features incorporated in
the design, but may become unstable due to changes in the position of the center of gravity
(caused by consumption of fuel, improper disposition of the disposable load, etc.). Stability
may be (a) longitudinal, (b) lateral, or (c) directional, depending on whether the disturbance
has affected the airframe in the (a) pitching, (b) rolling, or (c) yawing plane.


Figure 1.2: Stability diagram

This research will provide relatively simple methods to approximate the static
behaviour and handling qualities of small UAVs while still in the design stage, similar to
analysis used in a conventional large aircraft design process. In the future, this will hopefully
become a powerful tool in the hands of small UAV designers at BYU and elsewhere. Perhaps
in the future it will be possible to avoid fatal crashes like that shown in Figure 1.1


Figure 1.1 Damage from small UAV crashes like this one often result from a lack of
designing for stability.

1.2 The Objective of This Study
The objective of this thesis research is to better understand aircraft static stability as it
applies to small UAVs and to develop a method for including static stability analysis into the
design process. This objective can be broken down into four sub-objectives which will be the
topics covered in this thesis:
Develop a mathematical model to predict the static stability of small UAVs based on
knowledge of the geometry and inertias of the airframe.
Verify the accuracy of the model using known airplane data.
Provide analysis of the driving design parameters and guidelines for small UAV
static stability.


1.3 Stability: A Requirement for All Airplanes
Among the significant but often-overlooked obstacles to powered flight overcome by
the Wright brothers was the question of how to build an airplane that was stable enough to
be controlled and manoeuvred by a pilot. It has been shown that the Wrights first powered
airplane in 1903 was so unstable that only the Wrights themselves could fly it, due to
extensive self-training on their previous glider versions in 1902. (Abzug, 3) As they and other
aviation pioneers took steps to solve the stability and controls problem, the capabilities and
performance of airplanes increased significantly. In the early days of flight, it was observed
that certain designs of airplanes were more stable and controllable than others, but it was
not until the 1930s that much theory existed to explain why. Much of the modern stability
and control theory and specifications were not developed until the 1960s or later. (Abzug,
33) Airplanes of all sizes must be capable of stable, trimmed flight in order to be controllable
by a human pilot and useful for various applications. Stable flight by a human pilot is
possible only if the airplane possesses static stability, a characteristic that requires
aerodynamic forces on the airplane to act in a direction that restores the plane to 12 a
trimmed condition after a disturbance. Dynamic stability requires that any oscillations in
aircraft motion that result from disturbances away from equilibrium flight conditions must

eventually dampen out and return to an equilibrium or trimmed condition. Certain
dynamic instabilities can be tolerated by a human pilot, depending mostly upon pilot skill
and experience. If computer-augmented feedback control is used even statically unstable
aircraft can be flown successfully. (Abzug, 312) Both static and dynamic stability
characteristics can be predicted while an airplane is still in the design stage of development.
Many companies such as DAR Corporation, whose theory will be used extensively in this
chapter, have developed software to do just that. (Roskam, I, 461) To do so, it is necessary
to have a precise knowledge of the geometric and inertial properties of the airframe. Static
stability is predicted using information about the airplane aerodynamic center and the
center of gravity as well as other geometric parameters. Dynamic stability is predicted using
the airframe geometric and inertial properties to calculate the natural frequencies, damping
ratios and time constants of the characteristic dynamic modes of the six degree-offreedom
aircraft model. The handling qualities of an airplane are said to be a measure of how well an
airplane is able to perform its designated mission. They are usually evaluated using flight
test data and pilot feedback on performance. Current military specifications relate levels of
acceptable aircraft handling qualities to the frequencies, damping ratios and time constants
of the dynamic modes.











1.4 Static Stability
An airplane possesses static stability if the aerodynamic forces and moments
introduced on the airframe as a result of it being disturbed from equilibrium tend to act in a
direction that will return the airplane to an equilibrium condition. Static stability is
analogous to a marble in a bowl. If the marble is disturbed from an equilibrium position at
the bottom of the bowl, gravitational forces at all other positions will tend to pull it back
towards the bottom. Aerodynamic forces and moments on a statically unstable aircraft will
tend to move it away from a trimmed flight condition when it is perturbed from equilibrium.
This condition is analogous to a marble on the top of a smooth hill or balancing a pendulum
upside down. This condition would be nearly impossible for a human pilot to control, but
could be possible if some form of feedback control is used. For a more complete overview of
static stability, readers should consult Anderson, Chapter 7, in the References section. Static
stability can be considered as a special case (steady-state) of the aircraft dynamics. It is
exhibited in both the decoupled longitudinal and lateral-directional axes. It will also become
clear that both longitudinal and lateral-directional static stability are a prerequisite for
dynamic stability.


1.4.1 Longitudinal Static Stability
Longitudinal static stability is essential to ensure that a human pilot can successfully fly an
airplane without stability augmentation. It depends mostly upon a parameter known as the
static margin, defined as the distance between the aircraft center of gravity and the neutral
point of the aircraft, normalized by the mean geometric chord, c , of the wing. An airplane
with longitudinal static stability must first possess a positive (nose-up) pitching moment
from the combination of the aerodynamic forces and moments on the wing and tail. For
flying wings, an airfoil with a natural positive pitching moment must be chosen or washout
and wing sweep must be combined to give the airplane a natural positive pitching moment.
If this condition is met, a positive static margin, defined as the center of gravity in front of
the neutral point, will ensure static stability. Static stability can be simply represented by

plotting the pitching moment of the aircraft about its center of gravity versus angle-of-
attack as shown in Figure 2.1.


Figure 1.1 A moment coefficient curve for an airplane possessing longitudinal static stability.
Any disturbance away from trim will result in aerodynamic forces and moments which will
act in a direction that will tend to return the plane to equilibrium.

A small static margin (center of gravity near the neutral point) will provide marginal static
stability and will be represented by a nearly flat line on the graph in Figure 2.1. A large static
margin will provide a steep line and can make an airplane feel nose-heavy. It may cause
the plane to be less controllable because it doesnt respond to control inputs. These
constraints on the static margin are presented in Figure 2.2. It is also important that the
static margin be chosen that will allow the plane to be trimmed at a reasonable angle of
attack.


Figure 1.2 Aircraft center of gravity envelope. The c.g. must fall within these limits set by the
stability and controllability of the aircraft. (Kimberlin, 2006).

To express longitudinal static stability in mathematical terms, we must first define
the aerodynamic centre,

. It is the longitudinal location along the centreline of the

aircraft measured from the leading edge of the wing about which the pitching moment is
constant over a range of angles-of-attack. It is also the point at which the lift effectively acts.

1.4.2 Lateral-Directional Static Stability
Similar to the longitudinal case, an UAV possesses directional (about the z-axis or
yaw-axis) static stability if a slight increase in sideslip results in a restoring yawing moment
as well as a restoring side force. This is sometimes called weathervane stability. Lateral
(about the x-axis or roll axis) static stability is expressed in terms of dihedral effect. If these
are negative, then the airplane will possess positive lateral stability and will exhibit a
negative rolling moment (left wing down) for a positive sideslip (nose left).

1.5 Dynamic Stability
An UAV possesses dynamic stability if the amplitudes of any oscillatory motions
induced by disturbances eventually decrease to zero relative to a steady-state flight
condition. This means that if an UAV experiences a small perturbation from trimmed flight,
it will eventually return to trim on its own. This is analogous to a marble in a bowl eventually
coming to rest at the bottom of the bowl. If the amplitude of oscillatory motion instead
tends to increase with time, the airplane is said to be dynamically unstable. Dynamic
instabilities are obviously undesirable, but certain mild dynamic instabilities can be
tolerated by a human pilot. If automatic controls are used, more severe dynamic instabilities
can also be tolerated. Graphical representations of dynamic stability and instability are
shown in Figures 1.3 and 1.4. To study dynamic stability, it is necessary to analyze the well-
known differential equations of UAV motion. For small perturbations, these equations can
be decoupled into longitudinal and lateral-directional portions, with 3 degrees of freedom in
each. Small perturbation theory also allows us to approximate the actual non-linear
equations as linear differential equations with constant coefficients while ignoring any less
significant non-linear aerodynamic effects. This greatly simplifies the analysis of the dynamic
modes of aircraft motion. However, it should also be explained that we will only consider
the static stability only in this study.



Figure 1.3 A graphical example of dynamically stable UAV motion relative to a steady-state
condition.




Figure 1.4 A graphical example of dynamically unstable UAV motion.



1.6 Longitudinal Dynamic Stability
The longitudinal dimensional stability derivatives represent the partial derivatives of
linear or angular acceleration due to either the displacement, velocity or acceleration
depicted by the subscript. The capital letters X, Y and Z represent derivatives of linear
accelerations in the corresponding directions while the capital letters L, M and N represent
derivatives of angular accelerations according to the conventions. The dimensional stability
derivatives are the dimensionalised form of the non-dimensional stability derivatives
depicted by the letter C with appropriate subscripts. Both can be derived experimentally or
analytically with a careful analysis of the airframe geometry and inertial properties. The
variables u, , and are the perturbed velocity, angle-of-attack and pitch attitude
respectively and represent the three longitudinal degrees of freedom. By taking the Laplace
transform of this system, the differential equations become simple polynomials in the s
variable and are transformed from the time domain into the frequency domain.









CHAPTER 2


CALCULATIONS












Table 2.1 AirTRAC UAV Parameter
NO PARAMETER VALUE
1 Distance from leading edge
to the chord of wing

2 Distance from leading edge
to the center of gravity

3 Wing root chord C
root
= 0.16013m
4 Wing tip chord C
tip
= 0.11952m
5 Mean chord length

6 Wing area

7 Wing aspect ratio

9.22
8 Wing lift curve slope

9 Wing taper ratio 0.7464
10 Tail area

11 Tail aspect ratio

6.706
12 Tail lift curve slope

2.407
13 Distance from chord of tail
to center of gravity

m
14 Tail efficiency
15 Tail volume ratio

0.427
16 Length of fuselage

17 Fuselage body side area

18 Distance from nose to cg

19 Maximum width fuselage

20 Vertical height of fuselage at
length of fuselage

21 Vertical height of fuselage at
length of fuselage

2.1 Pitching Moment

2.2 Longitudinal static stability
An equilibrium point can be stable, unstable or neutral stable. A stable equilibrium
point is characterized by and

. The criteria for longitudinal static stability can

be pictured as:

Figure 2.1 Moment coefficient curve with negative slope



Figure 2.2 Moment coefficient curve with negative slope
If the airplane is statically longitudinal stable, it has the initial tendency to return to its
equilibrium position.

For our analysis, the graph can be shown as:



Figure 2.3 C
Mcg
versus of the AirTRAC UAV

For the calculation of the trim angle it is given by:

Neutral Point and Static Margin Determination

To find the neutral point of the AirTRAC UAV, there is several assumption that have been
made:
i)

based on the center of gravity

based on the neutral point

y = -0.944x - 0.0147
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
-20 -10 0 10 20
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

o
f

m
o
m
e
n
t
,

C
m

Angle of attack,

Cm versus
TOTAL
wing
tail
Linear (TOTAL)

ii)

iii)

Figure 2.4 Effect of the location of the centre of gravity relative to the neutral point on
static stability



Then, equation of the neutral point is given as below:

Component Method Weight
(kg)
x(mm) Wx
(kgmm)
Statically Unstable
Neutral Stability
Statically Stable
trim

Fuselage Stinton 1.6 217.00 347.20
Wing Stinton 2.4 241.20 578.88
Payload Estimation 2.2 203.66 448.05
Tail Stinton 0.4 885.43 354.17
Fuel Estimation 3.4 275.05 935.17
Powerplant Stinton 4.0 107.64 430.56
Structure Stinton 5.4 276.89 1495.21
Equipment and
services
Stinton 0.6 208.27 124.96
Total 20.0 Total 4714.20

Figure 2.5 The final location of components of the AirTRAC UAV and the weight

Thus, based on the table above, we can calculate the location of the maximum,
minimum, forward and after centre of gravity. The location of maximum centre of gravity is
including the all components of AirTRAC UAV with the fuel in the tank

The location of minimum centre of gravity is including all components with empty fuel of
AirTRAC UAV

Next, the static margin is defined as below:

The neutral point is located at aft the centre of gravity,

. In other word, the

allowable margin in shifting the neutral point is between 0.236 m to 0.436 m measured
from the leading edge of the AirTRAC UAV.
















The pitching moment equation M, will determine the longitudinal static stability of
an aircraft. The changes of pitching moment with angle of attack will determine the
characteristics of the aircraft longitudinal stability. A longitudinal statically stable at

An aircraft has a good controllability if it can be trimmed at the positive angle of
attack, . For our aircraft by referring the equation of total coefficient of moment at center
gravity, the value of

which is less than zero. Thus it can be stated that our

aircraft is statically stable. Besides the value of Cm
o
is 0.0147 which is more than zero. It
made the aircraft can be trimmed at positive .

The location of centre of gravity is an important characteristic in order to determine
the aircraft stability while in preliminary design. In order to achieve a good longitudinal
stability, Centre of Gravity (CG) should be ahead of Neutral Point (NP), which is
Aerodynamic Centre (AC) of the whole aircraft. NP is the longitudinal location of CG when
the aircraft is neutrally stable. When CG is ahead of NP, the weight tends to correct the
upset thus lead to stable aircraft. While when the CG is behind NP, the weight worsens the
upset thus make the aircraft become unstable. NP is the most aft CG location.
During operation the CG location is not fixed. So that it is important to know the limit
and range of CG location. The determination of CG when

is important to estimate
the margin of aircraft longitudinal static stability.

is called stick fixed neutral point. For

our UAV, the value of X
NP
is 0.272. When X
CG
is at X
NP
, aircraft is neutral stable.
The location of centre of gravity closer to tail which means the aircraft has shorter
tail moment arm, causes the aircraft to destabilize. The longer the tail moment arm, the
higher the pitching moment due to pitch rate, q and change in angle of attack, . The
aircraft pitching moment due to angle of attack, M

changes with the location of CG and

aircraft aerodynamic centre. The closer is the CG to the AC, the aircraft will pitch at higher
angle of attack and it resulted in higher natural frequency. Not only it is significant in
longitudinal motion of the aircraft, but the tail moment arm also affects the yawing and
rolling moment of the aircraft due to yawing rate in lateral mode.


2.3 Lateral static stability

Since the UAV is used primarily for surveillance purposes, a higher degree of rolling
stability is required in order for the UAV to provide a clearer picture of the surroundings.
The higher the slope of the rolling moment curve, the higher degree of rolling stability the
UAV will possess.


The main contribution to an aircraft's lateral stability is the dihedral of the wings that will
create a restoring moment when the aircraft is disturbed about its lateral axis A dihedral of
6 degrees is introduced to enhance the rolling stability of the aircraft. The effect of dihedral
on

can be calculated as follows:

Since plain rectangular wings are used, the integration can be simplified to be:

The aircraft's lift curve slope can be calculated using the following equation:

)
(

In this calculation, fuselage contribution is neglected due to the fact that there is a
relatively large gap between the fuselage and the wings which will reduce the effect of
change in flow induced by the fuselage.



Figure 2.6 Lateral Stability

As shown in Figure 2.6, the negative value of

tells us that the aircraft is laterally stable.

2.4 Directional static stability

Contribution of wing and fuselage

There are two main contributions to the aircraft's directional stability, namely the fuselage
and the vertical tail. The fuselage's contribution to the yawing moment slope can be
determined as follows:

Where

is the empirical wing-body interference factor determined by the geometry of the

fuselage. The value of

can be determined from Figure 2.7 using the required geometric

parameters. The required parameters for determination of

are summarized in the table

below:

Table 2.2 Fuselage geometric parameter for determination of

0.5345

2.5658

1.19

1



Figure 2.7 Wing body interference factor

Referring to Figure 2.7, the value of

is determined to be approximately 0.005.

The value

is a correction factor that depends on the fuselage's Reynolds number,

Figure 2.8 Reynolds number correction factor

From figure 2.8 above, the value

is approximately 1.

Contribution of vertical tail
The vertical tail contribution to the fuselage's directional stability can be determined as
follows:

)

Where the term (

) can be estimated as follows:

= the distance parallel to the z axis from the wing root quarter chord to the fuselage
centerline
= the max fuselage depth

)







The total aircraft's yawing moment slope is the algebraic sum of each contribution.

1.8531rad
-1


For static directional stability, the slope of the yawing moment curve must always be
positive,

as shown in Figure 2.9 below.

Figure 2.9 Static directional stability

The positive value of the aircraft's yawing moment slope is 1.8531rad
-1
. It indicates that the
aircraft is directionally stable.










CHAPTER 3


HANDLING QUALITIES












3.1 Flying and Handling Qualities

The handling qualities of an airplane are said to be a measure of how well an
airplane is able to perform its designated mission. They are usually evaluated using flight
test data and pilot feedback on performance. Current military specifications relate levels of
acceptable aircraft handling qualities to the frequencies, damping ratios and time constants
of the dynamic modes. It is an obvious fact that an airplanes geometric and inertial
properties, among other factors, influence how well or how poorly it flies and how
effectively it is able to perform its intended mission. The handling qualities or flying
qualities of an airplane are a measure of airplane performance relative to its intended
mission and describe how well or poorly a particular airplane flies.

MIL-STD-1797A defines what is meant by the term handling qualities. Those
qualities or characteristics of the aircraft that govern the ease and precision with which a
pilot is able to perform the tasks required in support of an aircraft role. Another definition
from the Cooper-Harper Rating Scale defines handling qualities as those qualities or
characteristics of an aircraft that govern the ease and precision with which a pilot is able to
perform the tasks required in support of an aircraft role. (Hodgkinson, 7). An analysis of
handling qualities will include both qualitative and quantitative information about the pilots
ability to control the airplane. It includes analysis of how quickly an airplane responds to
various inputs as well as the control effort that must be exerted by the pilot. Handling
qualities are used to compare various aircraft designs and are based on both subjective pilot
opinion and objective flight data.





UAVs are unique in the sense that there are no set hard and fast rules for the
employment. Mission and role dictate the general design requirements and small size with
no human on-board makes the launch, recovery methods up to the imagination of the
designer. Thus it is very difficult to classify and define all the methods, however, the general
guidelines as given in are listed below. The mini UAVs / RPVs are considered to be a
different class and the UAVs are categorized as Table 1 according to the weight and
maneuverability levels. Similarly the flight phase categories and the levels of handling
qualities are also defined in Tables 2 and 3.

Table 1: Categories of UAVs
Class Category Mission examples
I Small Light Weight Mini RPVs
II Low maneuvarability Surveillance, Reconnaissance high
altitude
III Medium maneuvarability Surveillance, Reconnaissance low
altitude
IV Highly maneuverability UCAVs










Table 2: Flight phase categories
Category Definition Flight types


A
Requiring rapid maneuvering, precision
tracking, and/or precise flight path
control.
Reconnaissance, Target
Acquisition, Terrain Following,
In-flight refuelling etc


B
Requiring gradual maneuvers, without
precision tracking, although precise
flight path control may be required.
Climb, Cruise, Loiter, Decent,
Aerial Delivery, Emergency
climb and decent.


C
Launch Recovery Phase requiring rapid
maneuvering, precision tracking, or
precise flight path control.
Arresting Gear Landings, Net
Capture, Conventional take-off
and landing


D
Launch Recovery Phase requiring
gradual maneuvers, without precision
tracking, although precise flight path
control may be required.
Catapult take off, Approach,
Parachute Recovery, Approach
to recovery envelop













Table 3: Levels of flying qualities
Level Definition
I (A/M) (Normal System Operation) Flying qualities are clearly adequate to
accomplish mission flight phase
2 (A/M) (Degraded Mission) Flying qualities remain adequate to perform
mission flight phase with moderate degradation or increase in operator
work load, a degradation of mission effectiveness or both
3 (A/M) (Recoverability) Degraded qualities remains adequate to control the
vehicle with Category A phases terminated successfully and Categories
B, C, and D phases completed sufficiently to recover the vehicle
A: Automatic Control Mode
M: Manual Control Mode
Or RPV mode



















3.2 Cooper Harper Rating Scale

The dynamics and characteristics of the aircraft are related to the flying and handling
qualities. The natural frequency and damping ratio value influence on how easy or difficult
to control the aircraft. Cooper Harper rating scale is being used as a reference to give rating
for the aircraft. The rating scale gives from 1 to 10 that will influence the flying and handling
qualities to aircraft.


Figure 1: A modified form of Cooper Harper scale for UAV evaluation


3.3 Handling Qualities of UAV

Most of the military specifications are derived by setting limits on the natural
frequencies, damping ratios and time constants of the various dynamic modes. For instance,
in the longitudinal axes, the natural frequency and damping ratio of the Phugoid mode
describe what aircraft motions occur when the airplane seeks a stabilized airspeed
following a disturbance. Because the natural frequency of this characteristically slow mode
of oscillation is typically on the order of 50-100 seconds for large aircraft, a pilot is easily
able to control and compensate for unwanted motion. Therefore, no limits are placed on
the natural frequency of the phugoid mode.

However, Level 1 handling qualities require that the damping ratio be positive so as
to eventually cause any oscillation to die out over time. Negative damping ratios are
tolerated only at Level 3 because they indicate a tendency to become unstable if
uncorrected. Similar requirements, putting limits on the natural frequency and damping
ratio of the Dutch-roll mode as well as the time constants of the spiral and roll modes, exist
for the case of lateral-direction handling qualities. For the spiral mode, no specific limitation
is placed on the time constant because a slightly unstable spiral mode is typically
acceptable. However, lower limits on the time it takes for the bank angle to double from an
initial disturbance of 20 degrees are specified. For the case of a stable spiral mode, the bank
angle will actually decrease after a disturbance.






Table 4: Short period damping ratio limits
Level Category A and C Flight Phases Category B Flight Phases
Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
1 0.35 1.30 0.30 2.00
2 0.25 2.00 0.20 2.00
3 0.15* - 0.15* -


Table 5: Phugoid damping ratio limits
Phugoid mode
Level 1 > 0.04
Level 2 > 0
Level 3 T
2
> 55s

Table 6: Spiral mode (minimum time to double amplitude flying qualities
Class Category Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
I and IV A 12 s 12 s 4 s
B and C 20 s 12 s 4 s
II and III All 20 s 12 s 4 s


Table 7: Roll mode (maximum roll time constant) flying qualities (in seconds)
Class Category Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
I, IV
A
1.0 1.4
10
II, III 1.4 3.0
All B 1.4 3.0 10
I, IV
C
1.0 1.4
10
II, III 1.4 3.0



Table 8: Dutch roll flying qualities

Level

Category

Class

Min *
Min
n
*,
rad/s
Min
n
,
rad/s



1
A
I, IV 0.19 0.35 1.0
II, III 0.19 0.35 0.4
B All 0.08 0.15 0.4

C
I, II-C 0.08 0.15 1.0
IV
II-L, II 0.08 0.15 0.4
2 All All 0.02 0.15 0.4
3 All All 0.02 - 0.4

Where C and L denote carrier or land-based aircraft
*The governing damping requirement is that yielding the larger value of





















CHAPTER 4


DECLARATION OF APPROVAL












Declaration for Approval
With a detailed research had done, we had come out with a solid design for our proposed
UAV design for air traffic surveillance. The SolidWork drawing is a general idea picked from
our group members idea that had the greatest score. So we really hope with the data and
initial estimation that had been calculate will make you confident and let us proceed with this
design.
Proposed by:
____________________
(NUR FATIN MOHAMAD IDRIS)
_____________________
(MOHD ZAMRI MHD NASIR)
_____________________
(NUR HAZIQAH BAROM)
____________________
(AHMAD AMEER ABDULLAH)
____________________
(MUHAMMAD HAIKAL ABDUL JAMAL)


Approved by:

____________________
(EN MD NIZAM B DAHALAN)










CHAPTER 5


REFERENCES














1. Anderson, John D. Introduction to Flight Fourth Edition. McGraw-Hill International
Editions, 1999.
2. Nelson, Robert C. Flight Stability and Automatic Control - 2nd Edition . McGraw-Hill
International Edition, 1998
3. Anderson, John D. Aircraft Performance and Design. McGraw-Hill International Editions,
1999.
4. Raymer, Daniel P. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach 2nd Edition. American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,

5. Tang Shiao Loong, Infantry Section Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Flight Controls and
Testing National University of Singapore 2012