2000/01 Rules and Vehicle Design

Summary:

The AIAA through the Applied Aerodynamics, Aircraft Design, Design Engineering and Flight Test Technical Committees and the AIAA Foundation invites all university students to participate in the Cessna/ONR Student Design/Build/Fly Competition. The contest will provide a real-world aircraft design experience for engineering students by giving them the opportunity to validate their analytic studies.

Student teams will design, fabricate, and demonstrate the flight capabilities of an unmanned, electric powered, radio controlled aircraft that can best meet the specified mission profile. The goal is a balanced design possessing good demonstrated flight handling qualities and practical and affordable manufacturing requirements while providing a high vehicle performance.

To encourage innovation and maintain a fresh design challenge for each new year, the design requirements and performance objectives will be updated for each new contest year. The changes will provide new design requirements and opportunities, while allowing for application of technology developed by the teams from prior years.

Cash prizes are $2500 for 1st, $1500 for 2nd and $1000 for 3rd place. The winning teams will be invited to present their designs at the 2001 Applied Aerodynamics Conference.

Judging:

For the 2000/01 contest year aircraft will be designed to complete multiple mission sorties within a timed flight period.

Each team must also submit a written Design Report, which is divided into two phases as noted in the documentation requirements section. A maximum of 100 points will be awarded for the team design report. (One score will be given accounting for both sections.) Scores for the written reports will be announced at the beginning of the fly-off.

Additionally each aircraft will have computed a Rated Aircraft Cost, reflecting the complexity/technology of the design.

The overall team score is a combination of the paper, cost and flight scores. The team with the highest overall team score will be declared the winner.

Contest Site:

Host for the competition will be the Office of Naval Research. The fly-off will be held in St Inigos Maryland, at Webster Field, which is a part of the Patuxent River Naval Base. Due to the contest being held on an active military base it will be necessary to have the teams submit the name, SSN, place and date of birth and citizenship of each team member on the entry form.

Team Requirements:

All team members (except for a pre-approved designated pilot) must be full time students at an accredited University or College and student members of the AIAA. The team must be composed of both under classmen and upper classmen, with at least 1/3 of the members being under classmen (Freshman, Sophomores or Juniors). The pilot must be an AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) member. Teams may use a non-university member for the pilot if desired. We will also provide qualified pilots on the contest day for any teams who are unable to have their pilot attend.

Reports:

The top scoring report from the past years competition will be available for reference on the contest web site. The team with the top scoring report from this years contest will be required to submit an electronic copy of their report following the competition, which will be placed on the contest web site for the next years competition.

Sponsorship:

Teams may solicit and accept sponsorship in the form of funds or materials and components from commercial organizations. All design, analysis and fabrication of the contest entry is the sole responsibility of the team members.

Schedule:

A completed entry form (electronic) is due to the contest administrator on or before 31 October 2000. Written reports for the PROPOSAL PHASE (5 copies), are due to the contest administrator by COB 13 March 2001. Written reports for the ADDENDUM PHASE (5 copies), are due to the contest administrator by COB 10 April 2001. Scores for the written reports will be announced at the beginning of the fly-off. The contest is scheduled for 20-22 April 2001.

Late submissions will not be judged. Teams who do not submit the required written reports will not be allowed to fly.

Please note that tech inspections will be available on Friday 20 April. Teams are encouraged to be prepared to have your plane inspected on Friday. Inspections will also be available on Saturday, but waiting until Saturday to go through tech may mean that your team will miss one or more rounds through the flight queue. If we have a full turnout you may not be able to get in your full 3 scoring flights unless you are "ready to fly" at every opportunity.

Communications:

The contest administration will maintain a World Wide Web site containing the latest information regarding the contest schedules, rules, and participating teams. The contest web site will also contain a list of potential suppliers for materials and equipment available to build an entry. The contest web site is located at:

http://www.aae.uiuc.edu/aiaadbf

All teams are required to provide two point-of-contact e-mail addresses with their contest application, one of which must be the teams advisor.

Questions regarding the contest, schedules, or rules interpretation may be sent to the contest administrator by e-mail at:

gregory.s.page@nrl.navy.mil

The contest administrator will provide copies of all questions received and their answers to all teams of record.

Written reports (only) should be sent to the chief of scoring at:

AIAA Design/Build/Fly Contest/Report Judging
Greg Page
ITT SES
2560 Huntington Ave
Alexandria VA 22303
Phone: 202-404-1251

Aircraft Requirements - General

Aircraft Requirements - Safety

All vehicles will undergo a safety inspection by a designated contest safety inspector prior to being allowed to make any competition or non-competition (i.e. practice) flight. All decisions of the safety inspector are final. Safety inspections will include the following as a minimum.

  1. Physical inspection of vehicle to insure structural integrity.
  2. Structural verification. All aircraft will be lifted with one lift point at each wing tip to verify adequate wing strength (this is "roughly" equivalent to a 2.5g load case) and to check for vehicle cg location. Teams must mark the expected empty and loaded cg locations on the exterior of the aircraft fuselage. Special provisions will be made at the time of the contest for aircraft whose cg does not fall within the wing tip chord. This test will be made with the aircraft filled to its maximum payload capacity by weight (Teams must inform the inspector and judges of their maximum design capacity and must make all flights within that capacity).
  3. Radio fail-safe check. All aircraft radios must have a fail-safe mode that is automatically selected during loss of transmit signal. The fail-safe will be demonstrated on the ground by switching off the transmit radio. During fail safe the aircraft receiver must select:
  4. All aircraft must have a mechanical motor arming system separate from the onboard radio Rx switch. This may be a mechanical switch rated for the maximum current draw which is accessible from outside the aircraft, or can be a removable link such as an automotive "blade" style fuse. The aircraft Rx should always be powered on and the Tx throttle verified to be "closed" before activating the motor arming switch.

Mission Profile:

For the 2000/01 DBF contest, teams will fly a mix of two different mission tasks. Teams may fly as many sorties as desired within the flight period, but must switch to the other mission task with each new sortie. Either mission task may be selected for the first sortie. Each sortie will be assigned a score based on the matrix, below. The Single Flight Score is the sum of the score(s) for the individual sorties flown during a single flight period. The best three (3) Single Flight Scores for each team obtained during the weekends flying will be summed for the team's Total Flight Score.

In the event that, due to time or facility limitations, it is not possible to allow all teams to have unlimited flight attempts, the contest committee reserves the right to ration and/or schedule flights. The maximum number of scoring flights may also be reduced. The exact determination of how to ration flights will be made on the contest day based on the number of entries, weather, and field conditions.

Each team's overall score will be computed from their Written Report Score, Total Flight Score, and the Rated Aircraft Cost using the formula:

SCORE = Written Report Score * Total Flight Score
Rated Aircraft Cost

Rated Aircraft Cost must be documented and included in the Addendum Report provided prior to the competition. (If not provided, a value of 100 will be used.)

Mission Task Matrix

No.

Score

Description

1

n

Heavy Payload Task

  • Carry 'n' pounds of steel 1 lap of the course.
  • Take-off within 200 ft (wheels off runway)
  • Minimum aircraft capacity is 5 lbs. Aircraft must fly at least the minimum capacity on each sortie of this type. Maximum aircraft capacity will be specified by the team at the initial technical inspection and may not be exceeded at any time during the competition. Maximum payload capacity may not be increased once the aircraft has received it's initial technical approval. The aircraft structural test will be conducted at each individual aircraft's maximum payload capacity.
  • All payload must be carried internally in a fully faired, fully closed structure.
  • Aircraft must complete a 360o turn in the direction opposite of the base and final turns on each downwind leg.

2

n/5

Light Payload Task

  • Carry 'n' tennis balls for 2 full laps of the course.
  • Take-off within 200 ft (wheels off runway)
  • Minimum aircraft capacity is 10 tennis balls. Aircraft must fly at least the minimum capacity on each sortie of this type. Maximum aircraft capacity is 100 tennis balls.
  • All payload must be carried internally in a fully faired, fully closed structure.
  • 360 degree turn on downwind is not required for this task.

Payload Notes:

Aircraft Cost Model

Rated Aircraft Cost, $ (Thousands) = (A*MEW + B*REP + C*MFHR)/1000

Coef.

Description

Value

A

Manufacturers Empty Weight Multiplier

$100 / lb.

B

Rated Engine Power Multiplier

$1 / watt

C

Manufacturing Cost Multiplier

$20 / hour

MEW

Manufacturers Empty Weight

Actual airframe weight, lb., without payload or batteries

REP

Rated Engine Power

# engines * Amp * 1.2 V/cell * # cells
"Amp" will be the value of the inline fuse from the battery to the controller. Maximum value is 40A, but a lower current fuse may be used, and REP adjusted accordingly.

MFHR

Manufacturing Man Hours

Prescribed assembly hours by WBS (Work Breakdown Structure).

MFHR = S WBS hours

WBS 1.0 Wing(s):
15 hr/wing.
+ 4 hr/sq. ft. Projected Area
+ 2 hr/strut or brace
+ 3 hr/control surface
Note: Winglets, end-plates, and biplane struts ARE included in the Projected Area calculation.

WBS 2.0 Fuselage and/or pods
5 hr/body.
4 hr/ft of length

WBS 3.0 Empenage
5 hr.(basic)
+ 5 hr./Vertical Surface
+ 10 hr./Horizontal Surface

WBS 4.0 Flight Systems
5 hr.(basic)
+ 2 hr./servo or controller

WBS 5.0 Propulsion Systems
5 hr./engine
+ 5 hr./propeller or fan

General Mission Specification and Notes:

Additional information is included in the FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions).

NEW for This Year

Design Report:

Each team will submit a judged design report as outlined below. The design report will be submitted in two sections. Submission dates are contained in the schedule section of this document. Reports must be bound (simple spiral bindings are sufficient and preferred, 3-ring binders are not allowed). Both the Proposal and Addendum reports must contain the same cover, title page, and table of contents. All information used for scoring must be in the outlined sections. Reports exceeding the total page limit will be scored as "1.0 of 100". Appendices may not be included.

All reports will be space and one half, 10 point Arial font. Tables will also be 10 point Arial font. Margins are 1 inch on all sides. All pages will be 8 1/2 x 11 inch, with the exception of the aircraft drawing package, which may be 11 x 17 inch.

Absolute maximum page count for the report is 50 pages for the Proposal phase report, and 10 pages for the Addendum phase report, including text, tables, figures, and table of contents (cover/title page is extra). Drawing package may not comprise more than 5 of the pages of the Proposal phase report page limit.

All figures must be either half (1/2) page or full (1) page format. No exceptions.

Please note that the judges will be using this same report outline for evaluating reports. ALL items listed will be expected to be present, easy to locate and identify and well documented in the report for a maximum score.

Design Report-PROPOSAL PHASE

  1. Executive Summary: (5 points): Provide a summary of the development of your design. This should be a narrative description highlighting the major areas in the development process for your final configuration and a broad description of the range of design alternatives investigated. Include an overview of the design tools used for each phase of the design development: conceptual design, preliminary design, and detailed design.
  2. Management Summary (5 points): Describe the architecture of the design team. Provide a list of design personnel and assignment areas. Document the management structures used for personnel assignments, schedule control, and configuration control. Include a (single) milestone chart showing planned and actual timing of major elements of the design process, including as a minimum the conceptual design stage, preliminary design stage, detailed design stage, and report preparation periods.
  3. Conceptual Design (20 points): Document the alternative concepts investigated during the conceptual design stage. Detail the design parameters investigated, and why each was felt to be important. Describe and document the numerical figures of merit (FOM's) used to screen competing concepts, and the mission feature each FOM was selected to support. Include the values for Rated Aircraft Cost assigned to each concept during the FOM screening process. Numerical data need not be extensive at this stage, but should include as a minimum a final ranking chart giving the quantitative value of each design for each FOM, the FOM importance factors or ranking, and an explanation of the features that produced the final configuration selection.
  4. Preliminary Design (20 points): Document the design parameter and sizing trades investigated during the preliminary design stage. Detail the design parameters investigated, and why each was felt to be important. Describe the FOM's used and the mission or design feature each FOM supports. Describe the analytic methods used during the preliminary design stage, the expected accuracy and why each was selected for this design phase. Numerical data will be more extensive at this stage, and should include as a minimum configuration and sizing parameter values sufficient to justify the selection of the final value chosen for each of the major design and sizing parameters. Include a summary of the key features that distinguish the final configuration.
  5. Detail Design (20 points): Final performance data should be provided for the design, including take off performance, handling qualities and g load capability, range and endurance, and payload fraction. Component selection and systems architecture should be included in this section. The Drawing Package must contain as a minimum a 3-view drawing of the design in sufficient detail to indicate aircraft size and configuration, primary structure component size and location, and location of propulsion and flight control system components.
  6. Manufacturing Plan (10 points): Document the process selected for manufacture of major components and assemblies of the final design. Detail the manufacturing processes investigated, and describe the FOM's used (including but not limited to: availability, required skill levels and cost) to screen competing concepts. Describe the analytic methods (cost, skill matrix, scheduling time lines) used to select the final set of manufacturing processes. Include a manufacturing milestone chart showing scheduled event timings.
  7. Design Report-ADDENDUM PHASE

  8. Lessons Learned (10 points): Document any areas where the final contest aircraft differs from the PROPOSAL design. Also identify areas for improvement in the next design and manufacturing process implementation.
  9. Aircraft Cost (10 points) Document your final competition aircraft's Rated Aircraft Cost using the contest supplied cost models. Provide a table indicating values for each airframe dependent parameter in the cost model. Provide a table listing manufacturing hours broken down by the supplied WBS structure.

Sample of Judges Scoring Worksheet

Executive Summary (5 points)

Summary of development of the design

Highlights major areas in the development process for final configuration

Describes range of design alternatives investigated

Overview of the design tools used in each phase

Format, completeness, readability

Management Summary (5 points)

Architecture of the design team

List of design personnel and assignments areas

Documents personnel assignments, schedule control, and configuration control

Milestone chart showing planned and actual timing of major elements

Format. Completeness, Readability

Conceptual Design(20 points)

Documents alternative concepts investigated

Design parameters investigated and why important

Figures of merit used, mission feature of each FOM

Discussion of Rated Aircraft Cost for each concept

Final ranking chart of each design for each FOM

Features that produced the final configuration selection

Format, completeness, readability

Preliminary Design (20 points)

Design parameters investigated and why important

Figures of merit used, mission feature of each FOM

Analytic methods used, expected accuracy, and why selected

Configuration/sizing data

Features that produced the final configuration selection

Format, completeness, readability

Detail Design (20 points)

Performance data (takeoff, handling qualities, range, endurance, payload)

Component selection and systems architecture

Drawing package (3-view, dimensions, structure, systems layout)

Innovative configuration solutions, manufacturing process, cost reduction

Format, completeness, readability

Manufacturing Plan (10 points)

Process selected for major component manufacture

Manufacturing process investigated and FOM's used

Analytic methods (cost, skill matrix, scheduling)

Innovative configuration solutions, manufacturing process, cost reduction

Format, completeness, readability

ADDENDUM

Lessons Learned (10 points)

Aircraft differences from the PROPOSAL design & Justification

Areas for improvement in the next design and manufacturing process

Time and cost required to implement change/improvement realized

Format, completeness, readability

Aircraft Cost (10 points)

Documentation of Rated Aircraft Cost

Format, completeness, readability


[Top] [AIAA Student Design/Build/Fly Competition homepage] [AIAA Homepage]