DEVELOPMENT OF FIXED WING VTOL UAV.

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 10 Issue: 01 | Jan 2023 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2023, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.529 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 656
DEVELOPMENT OF FIXED WING VTOL UAV.
Ketan R. Mhaske1, Ashish K.M Singh2, Krishna B. Jadhav3, Dr. Sunil V. Dingare4,
1U.G Student, Dept. of Aerospace Engineering, MIT School of Engineering, Pune India,
2U.G Student, Dept. of Aerospace Engineering, MIT School of Engineering, Pune India,
3Assistant Professor, Dept. of Aerospace Engineering, MIT School of Engineering, Pune India,
4Head of Dept. of Aerospace Engineering, MIT School of Engineering, Pune India.
----------------------------------------------------------------------***-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract: Modern unmanned aerial vehicles have grown mature enough to be applied to countless applications.
However, they have limitations based on flight ranges and manoeuvrability. Conventional fixed-wing UAVs can fly
long distances, but they need runways or open spaces for takeoff. On the other hand, the most popular multi-rotor
have extremely manoeuvrable characteristics, but their slower speeds and relative higher power consumption
mean that they cannot be used for long-distance flights. VTOL UAVs have the manoeuvrability of Multi-Rotor UAVs
while having the speed to cover greater distances. In this project, we propose a hybrid VTOL UAV with these
advantages. There is a detailed discussion of the design methodologies and manufacturing process, followed by
several flight tests to validate the concept. There is a challenge associated with fixed-wing UAVs, which often
cannot operate effectively in confined airspace. As a result, UAVs are usually required to operate at low speeds
and altitudes in an urban setting where runway usage is impossible. Fixed-wing VTOL is a promising trend that
may help resolve this issue. During this project, we will present the design and calculations of a VTOL fixed-wing
UAV using the Dual System or Extra Propulsion system for VTOL & In every aspect of VTOL UAV design,
implementation, onboard equipment integration, and ground station support. Furthermore, with the appropriate
controller, the VTOL UAV can achieve full autonomous in an outdoor environment.
[1] Keywords —Airfoil, Angle of attack, Aspect Ratio, Computational Fluid Dynamics, NACA, Fixed wing, UAV, VTOL
I. INTRODUCTION
VTOL Fixed-Wing UAVs combine the benefits of multi-
rotor platforms with fixed-wing drones and transition
between the two modes during flight. The ability to
vertically take off and land, without the need for a
launcher or runway, means these drones can be operated
in almost any location. Modern UAVs available on the
market are mature enough to cover countless areas of
application. UAVs have their limitations in terms of flight
range and manoeuvrability. Conventional fixed-wing
UAVs can fly long distances, but require runways or open
spaces to take off. On the flip side, the most popular multi-
rotor UAVs are extremely manoeuvrable, but cannot be
used for long-haul flights due to their slower speeds and
relatively higher power consumption. This project
suggests the implementation of a hybrid VTOL UAV that
has the manoeuvring advantage of a multi-rotor UAV,
while they can travel fast to cover greater distances.
Pros Cons Typical Uses
Multi-
Rotor
Accessibility
Ease of use
VTOL & hover
flight
Short flight
time Small
payload
capacity
Aerial
photography
and Video
Aerial
Inspection
Good camera
control
Can operate in
a confined
area
Fixed-
Wing
Long
Endurance
Large area
coverage
Fast flight
speed
Launch and
recovery
needs a lot
of space
No VTOL/
hover
Harder to
fly, more
training
needed
Expensive
Aerial Mapping,
Pipeline and
Power line
inspection
Table.1. Comparison between Multi rotor & fixed wing.
II. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
Conceptual design is an early phase of the design process,
in which the broad outlines of function and form of
something are articulated.
During the conceptual design phase of a new aircraft,
designers will evaluate a large number of different

concepts, searching for the one that meets the
requirements in the best way. This means that they need
to iteratively cycle through sketching a concept, analyze it
and evaluate and compare its performances.
Conceptual Design is a step-by-step process, we start with
mission requirements as per requirement weight
estimation is done for the mission. Weight estimation is
an iterative process depending upon ‘Geometric
Constraints’, ’Airfoil Selection and ‘Performance
parameter’ once the configuration is selected, then the
empirical estimation of stability and performance is done
and based on that power plant selection is done.
A. Weight Estimation
Conceptual Design Calculations:
Table.2. Weight Estimation.
Weight estimation is important because it is basic for
mission requirements. Most of the item weights can be
decided by doing a market survey, like for payload,
battery, avionics and motor whereas for frame weight it is
an assumption. After weight estimation, we can move to
the next step which is airfoil selection now we know the
weight so we need an airfoil which can produce enough
weight as a wing.
B. Airfoil Selection
For the selection of airfoil first, we have to decide the
cruise velocity after deciding velocity then we calculate
the Reynolds number to get airfoil data so for this we
decided on a range of velocity which is 15 m/s to 30 m/s
after calculating these velocities we get a range of
Reynolds number which is shown below.
The Reynolds number is calculated from:
Where:
v = velocity of the fluid
l = The characteristics length, the chord width of an airfoil
= The density of the fluid
= The dynamic viscosity of the fluid
= The Kinematic viscosity of the fluid
Reynolds Number range at 120 m altitude for velocity
15m/s & 30 m/s is 300,000 to 600,000.
Now after getting the range of Reynolds number, we have
to choose some good lift generating airfoils.
We had 4 options for the airfoil
Fig.1. NACA 4415
Fig.2. NACA 2412
Fig.3. S1223
Fig.4. NACA 23012
All the above airfoils have good performance in the
selected range of Reynolds number but comparing them
together in XFLR-5.

Fig.5.CL vs alpha graph
Fig.6.CL vs CD graph
fits the requirement.
So, we choose NACA 4415 to work on. The main reason
for choosing this airfoil is the same lift as NACA 4412 but
more thickness so it is beneficial for spar attachment due
to more thickness our spar will be greater so it will give
more reinforcement and support.
C. Calculations
MTOW = 8 Kg, V = 16.66 m/s, ,
S = 0.58
Choosing AR = 9
b = 2.28 m
c = 0.25 m
Fig.8. 2D Sketch of Wing
Tail Sizing by Volume Method
Fig.7.CL/ CD vs alpha graph
Hence, from the above graph, we can say that NACA 4412

we are taking a V tail in this design so because of that we
are adding both the vertical and horizontal tail areas to
get desired surface area.
Choosing AR for tail = 4
b = 0.5 m
Fig.9. Tail semi span.
For V tail angle calculation
Fig.10.V-tail angle between 2 tail span.
III. PRELIMINARY DESIGN
Sr no Parameters Value
1 VTOL T/W Ratio 2.0
2 FF T/W Ratio 0.5
3 Wingspan 2.28 m
4 Mean Chord Length 0.25 m
5 Root Chord 0.29 m
6 Tip Chord 0.22 m
7 Taper Ratio 0.75
8 Cruise velocity 16.66 m/s
9 Wing Surface Area
10 Maximum Takeoff weight 8 Kg
11 Horizontal tail area
12 Vertical tail area 0.0626
13 V- tail Angle
14 HT volume coefficient 0.50
15 VT volume coefficient 0.04
Table.3. Finalized Parameters for analysis
Designing the wing on XFLR-5 to get the coefficient of lift
and coefficient of drag, to know whether the values will
be efficient or not. The value of CL we got from XFLR-5 is
around 0.66 at 2.5 AOA.

Fig.11.Wing Analysis in XFLR-5.
To validate this result, we also did a CFD analysis on
Fluent. For CFD analysis in fluent, we start with designing
the wing and then an enclosure around the wing, the
dimension of the enclosure is 2.5b in front and 5b behind.
Fig.12.Wing Geometry in Design Modeller.
Moving towards meshing, element size of 50 mm. the
orthogonal quality around minimum 1.39e-2 and
maximum 0.9915. The total element count is around0.78
million.
Fig.13.Meshing of Wing in Ansys.
Table.4.Details of Mesh.
The Numerical setup for simulation was the K-epsilon
turbulence model. The velocity was 16.667 m/s and the
operating pressure of 101325 Pa. The P-V coupling was
selected to be SIMPLE with the second order. The
simulation was around for 800 iterations. For results,
pressure contour was observed on the wing and velocity
contour around the wing and coefficient of lift graph.
Fig.14 Pressure Contours.

Fig.15. Velocity Contours
Fig.16. Coefficient of Lift Graph
The value of the coefficient of lift we got from CFD
analysis was 0.60, which has around a 6% error with
respect to the XFLR-5 result. Hence, we can say our result
is validated.
Fig.17. Fuselage Side View.
After the results for the coefficient of lift are validated. We
can move towards designing the model on Solidworks
software.
Fig.18. Final Fixed Wing CAD Model.
IV. DETAIL DESIGN
Here, making the model more streamlined and efficient is
the goal and adding the booms for VTOL motors. After the
CAD Modelling, we move towards CFD analysis.
Fig.19. Fixed-wing VTOL Top View
Fig.20. Fixed-Wing VTOL Isometric View.

The domain for the model was 5b in front 10b behind the
model and 10b around. After the enclosure is ready, we
start with the meshing of the whole model. We start with
the surface mesh for the UAV and then the volume mesh
of the enclosure domain. The mesh quality for mesh was
Min 8.71e-3 Max 0.999. The skewness was contained
under 0.95, and the growth rate was 1.2 to ensure smooth
transition.
Solver setup on fluent
General
Solver Pressure-Based
Time Steady
Energy Equations Off
Model Spalart-Allmaras
Curvature Correction On
Table.5
Method Solution
P-V Coupling SIMPLE
Pseudo-Transient Off
Warped Face Gradient Correction Off
High Order Term Relaxation Off
Table.6.
For results, pressure contour was observed on the UAV
and velocity contour around the UAV and coefficient of lift
graph.
Fig.21. Coefficient of Lift Graph
Fig.22. Pressure Contour
Fig.23. Pressure Contour top view
Fig.24. Pressure Contour Side view.
V. CONCLUSION
Here we can conclude that using this methodology, we
designed fixed wing VTOL UAV and further analyzing we
got appreciative values for coeffient of lift and pressure
contour suggesting the methodology was correct and
simple to use. By modifying the needs accordingly, we can
move forward for its prototyping and after a successful
flight test of the prototype we are good to go for the final
product manufacturing process.
VI. REFERENCES
[2] Watcharapol saengphet, chalothornT humthae,
Conceptual design of fixed wing-vtol UAV for AED
transport, Suranaree University of Technology.
[3] Symon reza, samsul Mahmood, Performance
analysis and comparison of high lift airfoil for low-speed

unmanned aerial vehicle, National Institute of Technology
Jamshedpur.
[4] Haowei gu, ximin lyu, zexiang li, shaojie shen, fu
zhang Development and experimental verification of a
hybrid vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) unmanned
aerial vehicle (UAV).
[5] Mayurkumar kevadiya, Hemish A. Vaidya, “2d
analysis of NACA 4412 airfoil,” Government College of
Engineering, Valsad, Gujarat, India.
[6] D.F. Finger, C. Braun, C. bil, The Impact of Electric
Propulsion on the Performance of VTOL UAVs
[7] Maxim Tyan1, Nhu Van Nguyen2, Sangho Kim1,
and Jae-Woo Lee1, “Comprehensive preliminary
sizing/resizing method for a fixed wing – VTOL electric
UAV,” Kounkuk University.
[8] Yucel Orkut Aktas , Ugur Ozdemir , Yasin Dereli ,
Ahmed Farabi Tarhan , Aykut Cetin , Aslihan Vuruskan ,
Burak Yuksek , Hande Cengiz , Serkan Basdemir , Mesut
Ucar , Murat Genctav , Adil Yukselen , Ibrahim Ozkol ,
Metin Orhan Kaya , Gokhan Inalhan, “A Low-Cost
Prototyping Approach for Design Analysis and Flight
Testing of the TURAC VTOL UAV” .
[9] Özgür Dündar, Mesut Bilici, Tarık Ünler,“ Design
and performance analyses of a fixed wing battery VTOL
UAV.
[10] Karkera yathish, siddalingappa pk, sheldon
mascarenhas, Chinthan dsouza & hitesh bali, “The design
and development of transitional UAV configuration.”
[11] Lance W. Traub, “Range and Endurance
Estimates for Battery-Powered Aircraft,” Embry-Riddle
Aeronautical University, Prescott, Arizona.

DEVELOPMENT OF FIXED WING VTOL UAV.

More Related Content

Similar to DEVELOPMENT OF FIXED WING VTOL UAV. (20)

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

DEVELOPMENT OF FIXED WING VTOL UAV.