The Hyperion Green Aircraft Project-Presentation Conference Paper - - PDF document

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267269349

The Hyperion Green Aircraft Project-Presentation

Conference Paper · January 2012

DOI: 10.13140/2.1.1868.0329

CITATIONS READS

102

2 authors, including: Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Indium-Antimonide Crystal Growth View project Convection in isopycnic/miscibility-gap liquids View project Jean N Koster University of Colorado Boulder

111 PUBLICATIONS 1,049 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jean N Koster on 23 October 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The Hyperion Green Aircraft Project

Jean Koster & Lydia McDowell University of Colorado Boulder

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

WH WHY HYPERION RION?

• Soci

ciety/ ety/ in indu dustry stry nee eeds ds

– NASA-ERA goals:

• Reduce fuel consumption, emissions, noise: higher efficiency

– Prepare workforce in global environment

• His

istor tory

– Senior students developed hybrid propulsion for aircraft – Boeing interest in “follow-the–sun” process – AIAA-ASM Meeting January 2010, Orlando:

• NASA: “Environmentally Responsible Aviation (ERA) Project”

– Boeing X48B prominently presented

• Focus on aviation alternative fuels, fuel savings, reduced noise

Purpose pose

Moti tivati tion

Image credit: NASA

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

Airport port Noi

• ise

se Cha hall llenge enge: : Aircraft noise regarded most significant hindrance to National Airspace System

3

Motiv ivation: ation: Reduce uce Noise

• Moti

tivati tion- Image credit: NASA

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

Fuel el Probl blem: em:

4

Motiv ivation: ation: Reduce uce Fuel l Burn n

• Moti

tivati tion-

In 2008 U.S. Commercial air burned 19.7 Billion Gallons D.O.D. burned an additional 4.6 Billion Gallons

Goals ls

[1]

+

250,000,000… Tons of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) Reduce NOx Emissions: 20% by 2015 50% by 2020 >50% beyond 2025

[1]

Reduce Fuel Burn: 33% by 2015 50% by 2020 >70% beyond 2025

[1]

11th Hyperion 1.0 First Year Fall 2010 – Spring 2011

5

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

Global al Team am

• Purp

rpose -

6

See: AIAA-2012-1223

FTS

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN 7

System em Confi figur gurati ation

• n
• Project

t Overvie verview-

• Flying Wing design led by Sydney Team
• Raked Wingtips & Vertical Stabilizers designed by Stuttgart Team
• Internal Structure Design, & Systems Integration by CU Team

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN 8

Aerodynami

• dynamic

c Analys ysis is

• Tech

chnology Ove verv rview-

L/D greater than 20 Statically stable Stall velocity less than 15 m/s Span efficiency (e) greater than 0.8 Wing loading less than 15 kg/m²

Aero rodyn dynamic mic Requirements uirements:

Aerodynamic testing was performed using multiple methods CFD 1/2 scale wind tunnel testing

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

• L/D

D grea eate ter r than an 20 CFD/W D/WTT

• Static

tical ally y stable ble Flig ights hts

• Stal

all l velo locity city less ss than an 15 15 m/s Calcu lculat ation

• n
• Span

an effi ficiency ciency (e) grea eate ter r than an 0.7 AVL AVL

• Wi

Wing g load ading ng less s than an 15 15 kg/m2 Calcu lculat ation

• n
• L/D

D ~1 ~18.5

• Stal

all l velo locity city ~15.7 m/s

– Not met due to increased weight of aircraft

9

Aerodynami

• dynamics

cs

• Aero

rodyna ynamic mics-

Requirem uirements ents Verifi ification ation

WTT – Wind Tunnel Testing

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

• Wind tunnel testing done in Sydney on ½ scale model

– No landing gear – Wing tips had no 6° cant angle due to manufacturing and time

• CFD analysis

lysis done e in Germany any

10

Aerodynami

• dynamic

c Results lts

• Aero

rodyna ynamic mics-

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

• Prototypes were a key for trim, weight

distribution and flight characteristics

• Helped develop methodology for wing

construction of full scale aircraft

Foam m Prototypes totypes

Half f Sca cale Construc tructi tion

• Constructed out of foam
• Hot wire cut along acrylic template
• Sanded to “perfection”
• Held together with rods and glue… and tape
• Monocoated for damage resistance and

aerodynamics Cheap models to tweak performance

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

• Neutr

tral al Point nt shift ft due to Prop p Wash

– Test done for freestream velocity of 20 m/s and 20x10 propeller at 8000 RPM – At α=4° neutral point moves from x = 0.638m to 0.599m

12

Aerodynami

• dynamic

c Results lts

• Aero

rodyna ynamic mics-

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN 13

Aerodynami

• dynamics

cs & St Structures uctures

• Tech

chnology Ove verv rview-

½ Scale Wind Tunnel Model Internal Structure Center Body/Integration Aerodynamic Validation CFD Validation Wing Integration/Assembly

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN 14

Manufacturing: ufacturing: Center ter Body

• Tech

chnology Ove verv rview-

Pro roject ject Goal al and d Objectives jectives

Distributed Manufacturing

• Negative molds milled

from CAD-data

• Fiberglass-foam-core skin

laminated by hand

• Integration of internal

structure from University

• f Colorado

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN 15

Glo lobal bal Inte ntegrat gration ion Ma Manufac nufacturi turing ng

IDT (Interface Dimension Template)

• Device used to ensure

German center body matches USA wings

Similar ideas used for wing manufacturing Winglet  Wing

• Inte

tegra rati tion-

Delocalized manufacturing increases integration risk!

Risk Mitigation

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN 16

Hybrid rid Gas-Elec Electr tric c Engine ine

• Hyb

ybri rid Propulsion-

Pro roject ject Goal al and d Objectives jectives

Design, build and test a hybrid propulsion system to be integrated into the aircraft Offset drive No control system Focus: Efficiency, proof of concept Coaxial drive Multiple flight mode control Focus: Reliability, operations Objective:

See: AIAA-2012-0147

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN 17

System em Concept ept of Operati rations

• ns
• ConOps-

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

Hybrid rid Engine ine System em Verifi ification cation

• Hyb

ybri rid Propulsion-

• Dy

Dynamomete mometer r testing ing

– System torque output data – Obtain power, RPM data – Satisfy Hyperion ConOps

• Therm

ermal al testing ing

– System fully enclosed for worst case scenario – Not exceed fiberglass softening point

Test Like You Fly

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

Hybrid rid Engine ine Testing ting Overvi view ew

• Hyb

ybri rid Propulsion-

Mechanical

Engine/Aircraft Integration

ICE & EM produce 2 hp each (4 hp total) Independent & Concurrent Engine Operations Software/Control

Control Logic Interface Operational engine control logic

System Operational Operational reliability through endurance testing

Software/electrical interface

Taxi/Flight Testing January-April 2012

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

Hybrid rid Engine ine Goal l Real aliz ization ation

• Hyb

ybri rid Propulsion-

• Hype

perio rion n 1.0 aircraft craft fli ligh ght, t, April ril 2011 2011

– Electric motor of ~ 10 hp

• Hybrid

rid engi gine ne flight ight test t - Janu nuar ary

– Stable aircraft: RASCAL

• Hype

perio rion n 2.0 taxi i test, st, March h

– Risk mitigation

• Hype

perio rion n 2.0 flig ight ht test, t, April il

– Maiden ICE flight – Maiden SOLSTICE HPS flight

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

• Elec

ectric tric propulsion pulsion

– Hybrid Engine fully bench tested, but not flight tested (maturity)

• R/C

/C Piloted loted

– Successful takeoff, cruise, and landing

System em Testi ting ng

• Maiden Test

st-

21

Hyperion 2.0 Second Year Continuation Fall 2011 – Spring 2012

22

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

Projec ject t Devel elopment

• pment
• Conti

tinued Devel velopmen ment-

Hyperion 1.0 2010-2011 Hyperion 2.0 2011-2012

• Hybrid engine

flight

• True BWB
• Static and

dynamic stability

• L/D
• Wind tunnel

testing

• CFD testing
• Successful flight
• Follow-the-Sun
• Wind tunnel

testing

• CFD testing
• Hybrid engine
• True BWB
• Prototype

manufacturing

• Autonomous

control

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

• Cen

enter ter bod

• dy

y structure ructure is herita ritage; ge; wing ng desi sign gn is new ew

• Proje
• ject

ct has as comple mpleted ted an n aero rodyna dynamics mics /stru ructure ctures s TRR R and nd a guidan idance ce and nd control ntrol PDR DR

– Wing structure redesign – Optimized aerodynamics – New landing gear – New control system – Better flight characteristics

HYPERION ERION 2. 2.0

HYPE PERION RION 2.0 Ove verv rview

• Aero

rodynamics Desig sign -

Aero/Structures CDR 25

Aerodynami

• dynamic

c Redes esign ign

1.5 m 1.6 m 17° 35°

• Composite center body and V-tail kept from previous model
• Wings redesigned for better aerodynamics at low Reynolds numbers
• Reduced total mass
• Same design cruise speed (30 m/s) and wing loading (10 kg/m2)

• Aero

rodynamics Desig sign -

Aero/Structures CDR 26

Aerodynami

• dynamic

c Redes esign ign – BWB BWB

Lift Distribution: Raked Wingtips Lift Distribution: Hyperion 2.0 Lift Distribution: Hyperion 1.0

CL/CLref (Lift/Span Loading )

• ------- CL

(Local Lift Coefficient)

• Stall occurs at

Centerbody/wing interface and wing tips.

• Flow separation
• Stall occurs at midwing

(BWB)

• (Approximately) Elliptical

lift distribution

• Aero

rodynamics Desig sign -

Aero/Structures CDR

• University of Stuttgart: 0.04m decrease in the neutral point’s x

location.

• Other UAV’s: (4% - 6%)MAC movement of NP towards nose.
• Estimated 0.05m (6%MAC) for Hyperion 2.0 model

– Static margin = 6% – CG x location = 0.71 m

• CFD and Prototypes will help determine refined CG location.

27

Propell peller er Downwash wnwash Cons nsiderations iderations

• Aero

rodynamics Desig sign -

Aero/Structures CDR

Wing ng Tips

28

Aerodynami

• dynamic

c Redes esign ign

Hyperion 1.0 Hyperion 2.0

• Aero

rodynamics Desig sign -

Aero/Structures CDR 29

Aero

• Design

gn – Wing Endings ngs

Stall occurs at midwing (BWB) However, lower CL

Lift Distribution: Raked Wingtips Lift Distribution: No Wing Endings

CL/CLref

(Lift/Span Loading )

• ------- CL

(Local Lift Coefficient)

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

• Wing

ngs s take ke on n similar lar structure ructure to cen enter ter bod

• dy

– Profile ribs instead of solid foam – Majority of wing supported by carbon and foam composite “C” spar – Still Interface with the same spars in fuselage – Laminated to create finished wing

Structural uctural Redes design ign

Wing Redesign

• Fibe

ber r glass ass skin

– High strength to weight ratio – 0.9 mm thickness

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

Most notabl able e changes nges are to mass and L/D /D

Airframe frame Summary mary

Summ mmary ry of Changes

Hyperion 1.0 Hyperion 2.0 0.85 ~1 16* ~18* 13.0 (29.2 mph) 13.2 m/s (29.5 mph) 17.9 (40.04 mph) 15.8 m/s (35.4 mph) 27 (60.4 mph) 30 m/s (67 mph) 1.648 m2 (17.74 ft2) 1.693 m2 (18.22 ft2) 3.0 m (9.84 ft) 3.2 m (10.5 ft) 20 kg (44.1lb) 16 kg (35 lb) 10.4 kg/m2 9.5 kg/m2 * AVL results

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

• Adding

ding aut utonom

• nomous
• us flight

ght capabili pabilities ties

– Engine control – Waypoint navigation – Multiple actuator control

• Comme

mmerci rcial al off f the e she helf lf autop topilo lot

– Piccolo – Brand currently used for research at the University – Brand adopted by military users – Proven FAA compliance

Autonomous

• nomous Flight

ght

• Autopi

topilot-

R/C R/C Autonomous

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

SIL and HIL

• Autopi

topilot-

• Software

tware in the Loop p (SiL SiL) ) Simulation mulation

– PC replaces autopilot and ground station – Tests control algorithms without risk to aircraft – Ideal training tool

• Hardware

ware in the Loop p (HiL HiL) ) Simulation mulation

– Piccolo Control Center directly interfaces with ground station and autopilot – Simulator communicates with the Piccolo in real time – Reduces likelihood of failure

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

• Successes

– Hyperion 1 conceived, designed, implemented and

• perated within 9 months by global team of students

– Flying wing geometry operated in controlled electric flight

• Still to come

– Hyperion 2 with blended wing body design – Autonomous flight – Hybrid propulsion flight

• Future

– Integrate industry sensor payloads – Opportunities to collaborate!

Concl clusions usions

• Conclusions-

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

Student dent Global bal Team

• Team-

Michaela Cui Tyler Drake Arthur Kreuter Gavin Kutil Brett Miller Corey Packard Marcus Rahimpour Gauravdev Soin Martin Arenz Holger Kurz David Pfeiffer Matthias Seitz Baris Tunali Jonas Schwengler Kai Lehmkuehler Matthew Anderson Joshua Barnes Byron Wilson Andrew McCloskey Derek Nasso Julie Price Eric Serani Tom Wiley Richard Zhao Kristen Brenner Corrina Gibson Nathan Jastram

35

Michael Johnson Eric Kenney Jeremy Klammer Lydia Mcdowell Boris Papazov Taylor Petersen Robert Whitehill

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN 36

Acknowledgements

• wledgements
• Acknowl

cknowledgemen ments ts-

A special thanks to…

Mike Kisska of Boeing Frank Doerner of Boeing Blaine Rawdon of Boeing Tom Hagen of Boeing

• Dr. Robert Liebeck of Boeing/USC

Steven Yahata of Boeing Norman Princen of Boeing Diane Dimeff of eSpace Brian Taylor of NASA Joseph Tanner of CU Trent Yang of RASEI

• Dr. Donna Gerren of CU
• Prof. Eric Frew of CU

Matt Rhode of CU Trudy Schwartz of CU

• Prof. Claus-Dieter Munz of Stuttgart
• Prof. Ewald Kraemer of Stuttgart
• Dr. KC Wong of Sydney
• Dr. Dries Verstraete of Sydney

Skip Miller of Skip Miller Models

James Mack of LASP (Pilot)

• QUESTIONS?-

2012 AIAA-ASM Nashville, TN

• Hyb

ybri rid Propulsion-

Hybrid rid Engine ine System em Archi hitecture tecture

2011 ASME Conference, Denver

Autonomous

• nomous Flight

ght

• Autopi

topilot-

Radio Piccolo SL Actuators

Hyperion Sensors Kalman Filter Ground Station Futaba PC

Autonomous Commands and Settings Piccolo Status and flight plan Uplink and Downlink

Radio Piccolo SL Actuators

Ability to change between R/C and autonomous modes:

– Downlinks air speed, telemetry, and position – Feedback of fuel flow rate data – Controls mode actuators, brakes, and throttle of hybrid engine