Tutors Sean Tuling

UFMFFK-15-2 Flight (2020/21)
Flight Coursework Specification – RESIT
Flight Performance and Stability
Submission Date 3 AUG 2021 at 14h00
Marks Weighting 100% of module
Submission Method Electronic via BB
Deliverables & Format Engineering report
Grade & Feedback: 20 AUG 2020
Group Sizing Individual
Tutors Sean Tuling, Vilius Portapas
Issue Version & Date 1.0, 17 JUN 2020
1. Resit Introductory Notes
The coursework specification documents the requirements for the resit period
(assessment period 3) for the academic year 2020/2021. Depending on your resit
circumstances different criteria apply.
Failure Codes #RA, #RB : Different options exist for this failure code depending on
what why you have failed either component. FOR ALL CASES CONSULT WITH THE
MODULE LEADER FOR YOUR MOST APPROPRIATE OPTION. These will range
from attendance of the missed final viva from the first sit, submission of an individual
sub-report from the first sit, to completion of the engineering report meeting the
requirements specified in the subsequent sections of this specification.
Failure Codes #RALL, #F : Completion of the engineering report meeting the
requirements specified in the subsequent sections of this specification.
IF IN DOUBT, CONSULT WITH THE MODULE FOR YOUR MOST APPROPRIATE
OPTION 2. Learning Outcomes
Following the successful completion of this coursework you will be able to
1. Analyse the performance and static stability of an aircraft
2. Determine the characteristics of the dynamic primary modes of an aircraft
3. Operate a flight simulation package
4. Process flight test data
Secondary learning outcomes are report writing and programming skills development.
Even though the reporting component only accounts for a small portion of the overall
mark report writing is a requisite skill for engineers. For almost all industry deliverables
and assessment methods the duty remains on the author(s) to demonstrate they have
met the specifications and to communicate their competence. Your ability to
communicate clearly and effectively will affect your grade.
3. Background/Context
Successful design of aircraft require the analysis of the performance and stability of
the aircraft so that the design process can meet operational and regulatory
requirements. Part of the design of the aircraft is normally driven by key performance
requirements such as climb and range, whilst stability and manoeuverability tend to
be driven by acceptable handling requirements.
4. EV-97-O Observation Platform Design
Your company has taken on the task to assess whether the requirement to use the
EV-97 light aircraft as an observation platform, designated the EV-97-O, is feasible
from a performance and static stability perspective. The ‘passenger’ will operate the
observation pack when a flight requires this functionality, though the aircraft is required
to be operated on other missions without employing the observation pack.
Additionally, the aircraft may be operated when the observation pack is removed for
maintenance, but the upgraded engine and wing modifications remain. The modified
design is intended to maximise the range/endurance. No structural analysis shall be considered. The standard EV-97 using the Rotax 912ULS is to be upgraded using the
components in Table 1.
Table 1. EV-97-O upgrade components
Component Weight
[kg]
(x,y,z)** c.g.
from datum
[m]
Rotax 915 141hp engine ∆ 28* (0.5,0,0)
Wing-tip extensions extending the wingspan by 1m
(wing chord is the same as original aircraft)
5 (0.225,0,0)
Observation payload pack 24 (-2.0,0,0)
* The weight is the difference between the original engine and the upgraded engine
* x is defined positive in the forward direction from the perspective of the pilot. A
positive value indicates the component is forward of the datum.
The propeller efficiency characteristics are a function of advance ratio described as
follows:-
= 3.7567 + 1.343
ଶ − 15.02
ଷ
where
=

and is the forward velocity, is the rotational velocity in rps and is the diameter of
the propeller.
The thrust coefficient is
் = 0.04013 + 0.05058 − 0.2031
ଶ
The thrust is related to the thrust coefficient by
= ଶ
ସ்5. Requirements
You are required to
1. Analyse the theoretical performance of the EV-97-O for the various flight
phases in the context of the design process, including take-off, climb, cruise,
descent and landing.
2. Analyse the weight and balance of the EV-97-O
3. Analyse the longitudinal stick-fixed and stick-free static stability of the EV-97-O
4. Analyse the primary dynamic modes for the standard EV-97 aircraft (NOT the
EV-97-0) using the following methods:-
a. Analytical (characteristic roots/eigenvalues)
b. Numerical models in the time domain
c. Flight Test
5. Perform the flight simulation laboratory by acquiring and processing flight testlike data for the PA-28 using simulations from the X-Plane simulator
The performance of the EV-97-O shall be determined using theoretical methods. More
accurate performance estimates may be determined using graphical and/or numerical
methods. The aerodynamic characteristics of the EV-97-O shall be estimated from
the EV-97 POH with appropriate adjustments for the intended modifications.
The flight test data shall be provided, and are obtained from actual flight tests.
The characteristic parameters (characteristic roots or eigenvalues) in terms of
damping, natural frequency and/or time constant of each mode shall be compared for
the three methods (analytical, LEOM and flight test) for the following primary dynamic
modes of the EV-97:-
 Phugoid
 Roll subsidence (not required for LEOM)
 Dutch roll (no required for LEOM)
For the analytical methods, only the approximate and simplified methods are required
to be implemented. Use of the non-dimensional form is required. Time domain comparisons may be
performed if this enhances your results.
The mandatory numerical model to be used for assessing the dynamic stability of the
EV-97 is the small disturbance linearised equations of motion model in the form of the
windows executable program leom.exe.
For the X-Plane simulations for the PA-28, more than one loading should be assessed.
6. Submission/Report Information
The submission deadline is on 3 AUG 2021, at 2 pm. Submissions shall be individual.
Your submission will be run through SafeAssign to help assess originality.
Your engineering report shall contain the detailed calculations of the results in an
Appendix so that you can demonstrate verification of your results. No computer code
shall be used in the report. Without the verified calculations, no marks can be awarded
for any work no matter how correct the results may appear to be.
Your submission will be graded according to the marking criteria listed at the end of
this specification. Note that you can only be graded on what has been submitted and
the quality of the communication.
The report shall be written so that it can be understood by a graduate BEng Aerospace
Engineering graduate.
No computer code shall be read, consulted or referred to when grading the report i.e.
computer code is not documentation.
Screen shots of Excel spreadsheets and Matlab code are not acceptable for reports.
Correct formatting of inputs, equations and results are expected. No project management or personal reflection shall be graded.
6.1. Submission Requirements and Files
The engineering report shall be submitted in PDF format as a single file.
6.2. Limitations
The report shall be limited to 3000 words excluding front matter, references,
appendices, tables and equations. Whilst the use of appendices can reduce word
count, the report shall be self-standing without the appendices.
The report shall have a font size of no smaller than 11pt, line spacing of no less than
1.3 and be full justified.
6.3. Plagiarism, Collusion, Contract Cheating, Falsification
and Fabrication
Please note that plagiarism, collusion, contract cheating, falsification and fabrication
are assessment offences. Ensure you are familiar with this policy (see
http://www2.uwe.ac.uk/services/Marketing/aboutus/pdf/Policies/Assessment_offences_policy.pdf)
At the time of writing, the policy lists some (but not exclusively) examples of plagiarism
as
“Copying from another person’s work without the use of quotation marks;
“Copying from another person’s work without referencing/acknowledgement of the
sources;
“Summarising another person’s work by simply changing a few words or altering the
order of presentation, without acknowledgement;
“Paraphrasing material from a source without acknowledging the original author;
“Presenting concepts or designs that have been created by others without
acknowledging the original source; “Copying another student’s work with or without their knowledge or agreement (this
may also be deemed as collusion);
“Using computer code created by another person without appropriate referencing;
“Downloading material from the web and submitting it as your own work;”
7. Hints, Additional Details, Tips and FAQs
Assessing the performance and stability of an aircraft is an analytical exercise.
Therefore critical analysis and reflection of the results is expected. Quantifiable and
scientific insight will help showcase your critical analysis and investigative abilities.
Your grade shall be determined by what you communicate. Ensure that your figures
and tables are captioned correctly. Captions for figures are located at the bottom of
the figure and at the top for tables. Remember to number your equations and always
refer to any figure, table and equation in the text, and ensure that you don’t forward
reference sections, figures, tables and equations. Engineering reports are always
written in past tense, passive third person.
7.1. Tips for Increasing Quality
The following are highly desirable requirements which will increase the quality of your
estimates provided all the basic requirements have been met – so don’t attempt to do
the additional work if you have not met the mandatory requirements. They are listed
in order of desirability or priority.
For performance:-
1. Estimate the performance of the EV-97-O using graphical methods
2. Stick force gradient
For dynamic stability:-
1. Estimation of the roll subsidence and Dutch roll parameters using LEOM
2. Estimation of the characteristics parameters of the EV-97 using the quartic
method 8. Tips for Successful Completion
Focus on ensuring your calculations and methods are correct for the mandatory tasks
before attempting tasks that will increase the quality of your estimates i.e. get the
basics right. Marking Criteria
The grade will be determined using the following marking criteria:-
Assessment Element Weighting <40% 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70-79% 80%+ Mark
Performance 20% Incorrect assumptions,
methodology and/or
calculations.
Insufficient evidence
and verification.
Some incorrect
assumptions,
methodology or
calculations. Limited
evidence and
verification. Limited
justification.
Correct and justified
assumptions,
methodology and
verified calculations,
Satisfactory
documented evidence.
Correct and justified
assumptions, methodology
and verified calculations.
Limited cross-checking
calculations/analysis
Detailed evidence of correct
and justified assumptions,
methodology and verified
calculations. Satisfactory
cross-checking
calculations/analysis.
Detailed evidence of correct
and justified assumptions,
methodology and verified
calculations.
Comprehensive crosschecking
calculations/analysis.
Static Stability 15%
Analytical Methods 10%
Stability Derivatives 5%
LEOM 5%
X-Plane Simulator 5%
Flight Test 10%
Observations, Results &
Discussion 20%
No or little processing
of data. No or little
comparison between
models. Little or no
analysis of results
Limited processing of
data. Limited
comparison between
models. Basic analysis
of results but limited in
extent.
Adequate processing of
data. Adequate
comparison between
models. Limited use of
statistics. Basic
analysis of results
across all aspects.
Above average processing
of data. Above average
comparison between
models. Adequate use of
statistics. Adequate
analysis of results. Limited
identification of physical
reasons for results
Comprehensive processing
of data. Comprehensive
comparison between
models. Satisfactory use of
statistics. Comprehensive
analysis of results.
Adequate identification of
physical reasons for results.
Comprehensive processing
of data. Comprehensive
comparison between
models. Comprehensive
use of statistics. Critical
analysis of results.
Extensive identification of
physical reasons for results.
Abstract & Conclusions 5%
Conclusions are not
drawn and neither
project
accomplishments
summarised. Irrelevant
recommendations.
Basic conclusions are
drawn and limited
project
accomplishments
summarised.
Evaluation evident but
not consistent or
thorough.
Basic conclusions are
drawn and limited
project
accomplishments
summarised. Consistent
evidence of evaluation.
Satisfactory conclusions
are drawn and satisfactory
project accomplishments
summarised.
Recommendations
emanate from analysis of
work
Conclusions are drawn and
project accomplishments
summarised with
satisfactory reflective
stance. Recommendations
emanate from reasonably
critical analysis of work
Comprehensive conclusions
are drawn and project
accomplishments
summarised with relevant,
extensive significant and
detailed reflective stance.
Recommendations emanate
from critical analysis of work
Report Presentation
(Language, Graphs,
Formatting etc)
2.5%
Poor attempt to
communicate activity
Generally acceptable
communication but
some limitations
Satisfactory
communication and
presentation
Clear and concise
communication and
abstract, with effective
signposting of ideas in
most parts
Effective, appropriate and
professional communication
and presentation
Excellent communication
and presentation throughout
Referencing 2.5%
Limited or irrelevant
referencing
Inappropriate
referencing and/or
incomplete list of
references
Mostly appropriate
referencing and
incomplete list of
references in UWE
Harvard style
Mostly appropriate
referencing and mostly
complete list of references
in Harvard style
Appropriate referencing and
complete list of references
in UWE Harvard style
Appropriate referencing,
complete list of references
in UWE Harvard style, and
appropriate bibliography