Decision-Support Tool for Designing Small Package...

Decision-Support Tool for Designing

Small Package Delivery Aerial Vehicles

Ali, Ashruf

Ballou, Nathan

McDougall, Brad

Valle, Jorge

Department of Systems Engineering and Operations Research

Center for Air Transportation Systems Research

Sponsor

Payload

Increased

Total Weight More

Power

Bigger

Battery

Bigger

Frame

Supporters

Lance Sherry, CATSR

Bo Pollet, Aurora Flight Sciences

Ranga Nuggehalli, UPS

Matthew Bieschke, NEXA Capital

Tradeoff Cycle

Agenda

• Context

• Gap Analysis

• Stakeholder Analysis

• Problem / Need / Vision

• Requirements

• Decision-Support Tool

• DoE-Validation

• Project Management



2

Decision Support Tool for Designing SPDAV

Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Now

• UAS market as a whole is dominated by Military applications, and is largely fixed wing.

• The current market for Multi-Rotor UAS is niche and consists mostly of hobbyists.

• This is largely because the FAA has yet to integrate UAS being used for commercial purposes into our NAS.

• Once the integration occurs we see a major potential for growth.



3


Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Future



Source: Volpe, National Transportation Systems Center

4


Time

Growth Potential There are many areas that could thrive when Commercial UAS are

integrated into NAS:



Where we see the biggest potential for growth is in

package delivery.

5


E-commerce Growth



Source: US Census Bureau, Annual Retail Trade Survey

R² = 0.9292

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billio

n U

SD

Years

Ecommerce Growth in the US

6


E-commerce vs. Total Retail



Source: US Department of Commerce

7




Retail Sales being Delivered by:

USPS, UPS, FedEx

Source: Courier Express & Postal Observer

8


Shipment and Logistics

Between UPS and FedEx roughly 25 million packages

were handled every day in 2012, with the revenue being

roughly $90 billion for the year.

Strictly due to the volume of packages handled, this could

be a huge market for Multi-Rotor UAS.



9


Package Delivery Market Application

Shipment/Logistic Transportation or delivery of mail and

small packages.

Retail Rapid delivery for non brick & mortar

purchases.

Food Rapid food delivery.

Maintenance Rapid parts delivery to inaccessible

locations

Medical Bring aid to remote location.



Those currently tasked with designing a multi-

rotor platform are not Design Engineers.

10


Firsthand Account

Our design team visited a UPS Sorting Facility on September

12th, 2014 in Sparks, Maryland.

We were given a tour of the facility during it’s busiest hours and

then spoke with Operations Research staff.

We witnessed this knowledge gap happen during our tour of the

facility:

• Loss of profit due to missloads.

• Multi-Rotor UAS a possible solution.

• Despite having an application for a Multi-Rotor SPDAV, their

specialty is Logistics not UAS design.



11


Why Unmanned Multi-Rotor Aircraft?

• Small

• Easy piloting

• Attainable

• Inexpensive

• Agile

• VTOL



13


Agenda

• Context

• Gap Analysis



• Requirements


• DoE-Validation




14


Gap Analysis

There is a market wide knowledge gap pertaining to

performance and mission suitability of Multi-Rotor Aircraft.

Due to the newness of the technology, there are no

resources/heuristics for making an informed purchase.



Knowledge Gap

Payload

More

Power

Bigger

Battery

Tradeoff Cycle Increased

Total Weight

Bigger

Frame

15


Agenda

• Context

• Gap Analysis



• Requirements


• DoE-Validation




16


Stakeholder Analysis Class Stakeholder Goals Tensions

Prim

ary

1. End User

2. UAS/UAS Parts

Manufacturers

1. Design Engineers

1. Receive a configuration

recommendation based on

their own requirements.

2. Maximize profit through sale

of product.

3. Build a reliable multi-rotor

aircraft.

1. Issues with rules/regulations

implemented by the FAA that they

must follow.

2. Possible loss of profit by end users

using the Decision-Support Tool.

FAA rules/regulations restricting

market growth.

3. Possible loss of profit if DST is

implemented.

Se

co

nda

ry/ Te

rtia

ry

1. Citizens

2. Low-Altitude Air Traffic

3. FAA

1. To have the availability of

the benefits from

commercial UAS while

maintaining a safe

environment.

2. Maintain a safe airspace to

travel in and minimize all

possible risks.

1. To keep the NAS safe and

well regulated.

1. Issues with rules/regulations for

Commercial UAS may arise between

them and the FAA.

2. Safety concerns with the air traffic

may be had with the FAA.

3. Being held accountable for any

issues that arise with the

rules/regulations.



17


Interactions: Win-Win

DST-SPDAV

End User

UAS Manufactures

FAA

Citizens

Air Traffic



Enable end users to select

the right multi-rotor aircraft.

More accurately inform

design decisions

New regulations and

feedback will help to

improve the DST.

By providing the best

multi-rotor aircraft, safety

and reliability increase.

More commercial

opportunities

18


Agenda

• Context

• Gap Analysis



• Requirements


• DoE-Validation




19


Problem Statement

Users of Multi-Rotor UAS, for small package

delivery, are not experts on their design and do

not understand the tradeoffs in utility.



Payload

More

Power

Bigger

Battery

Tradeoff Cycle Increased

Total Weight

Bigger

Frame

20


Need Statement

• Commercial UAS will be integrated into the NAS in the

immediate future.

• The majority of UAS consumers don’t have the time,

energy, or resources to study the design requirements.

• Consumers have very specific requirements with a market

that has very little information.



21


Vision Statement

Design a decision-support tool that considers

an end user’s requirements and determines the

most effective Multi-Rotor Aerial Vehicle for

their particular application.



22


Agenda

• Context

• Gap Analysis



• Requirements


• DoE-Validation




23




Mission Requirements

• The DST-SPDAV shall provide a different configurations

of a multi rotor aircraft that will be able to carry a payload

for a certain distance over a given flight profile.

• The DST-SPDAV shall provide a configuration of a multi

rotor aircraft that is reliable, operates at a high

performance and it is within the end user’s budget.

24




Functional Requirements

• The DST-SPDAV shall eliminate different combination of

components based on a basic power capability check.

• The DST-SPDAV shall evaluate each outputted

configuration of the dynamic model in order to find the

best configuration that has the highest utility as defined

by the end user.

25


Functional Requirements



26


Input Requirements

Inputs Definition

Endurance Minimum flight distance with a given

payload.

Payload Minimum payload weight over a given

distance.

Flight Profile Flight characteristics to be evaluated

by the decision support tool.

Weights for Objective Function

Values given by the end user which

represent the importance of

performance, reliability and cost.



27


Multi-Rotor Aircraft Components Configuration Parts

Propellers

Motors

Battery

Frame (Chassis)

Electronic Speed Controller

(ESC)

Microcontroller



28


Agenda

• Context

• Gap Analysis



• Requirements


• DoE-Validation




29


Simulation Flow



30


Components Involving in Power

Model and their Properties:

Batteries Motors Propellers

Capacity (mAh) Kv (rpm/v) Size

Output Voltage Weight Prop Constant

Max Discharge Max Current Power Factor

Weight Size Weight

Size Max Voltage



31


Power Consumption equations:

Motor gives the most effective rpm to hover given a battery voltage

Final thrust produced by a propeller based on momentum theory

2

_*5.0* VoltsBatteryKvrpm

22

2

3/1

PDT

𝑃 = 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 ∗ 𝑟𝑝𝑚𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑊

𝐷 = 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑟 𝐷𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 (𝑚)

𝜌 = density of air (1.225kg/𝑚3)

𝑇 = 𝑇ℎ𝑟𝑢𝑠𝑡 (𝑁)



Hover occurs when thrust

equals vehicle weight

32


Simulation Flow



33


Dynamic Simulation Flow Chart

34


Coordinate Systems Inertial and Body Frame

Vertical Center of Mass



The atmospheric model is the MATLAB

aerospace toolbox implementation of the

ISA atmospheric model for altitudes below

20000 m [ISO standards document].

Source: Parker, Accurate Modeling and Robot Hovering Control for a Quad-rotor

VTOL Aircraft, 2010

35


Motor Dynamics

For steady state

Kirchoff’s voltage law and Newton’s

second law

Rewritten with simplifications

Source: Movellan, DC Motors, 2010



36


Momentum Theory (MT): Hover

Uniform Inflow Model Conservation of Mass

Final Equations

Source: Leishman, Principles of Helicopter Aerodynamics, 2002



37


Blade Element Theory (BET)



38



Final Force and Moment Equations

Source: Martinez, Modelling of the Flight Dynamic of a Quadrotor Helicopter, 2007



39


Simple Solids Model

40


Estimated profile

for use in the

aerodynamic and

inertial models.



Aerodynamic Model

Cross-sectional Area

General Drag Equation

Presented Area Approximation

Orientation Based Drag Equation

Final Forces

Source: Mansson, Model-based Design Development and Control of a

Wind Resistant Multirotor UAV, 2014



41


Geometry and Moments of Inertia

For each component

Rotation Matrix

Parallel axis theorem

Modeled as simple solids

Source: Mansson, Model-based

Design Development and Control of a

Wind Resistant Multirotor UAV, 2014



42


6-DoF Kinematics Newton-Euler Formalism

Velocities and Inertial Tensor

Final Equations

Source: Mansson, Model-based Design Development and Control of

a Wind Resistant Multirotor UAV, 2014



43


Example Configuration (Hexa)

44


Approximately 1.5m

from tip-to-tip

Flight Profile

-Solid: Flight with payload

-Dashed: Return flight w/o payload

-Speed: 80% throttle

-Altitude:100m

Distance

Battery: 10,000mAh

Propeller: 16in APC profile

Motor: Hengli 5134

ESC: 40amp Department of Systems Engineering and Operations Research


Altitude

Example Output (Hexa)



45


Example Output (Octo)



46

Simulation Flow



47


Utility Model

Utility=(P_Weight)*(Performance)+(R_Weight)*(Reliability)



48


Performance

• Weight is given from end-user

• Performance value is the integral

under the Performance Curve.

• The performance utility is the product

of the Performance Weight and

Performance Value.

Reliability

• Weight is given from end-user

• Reliability Value is dependent upon

the rotor configuration.

• The reliability utility is the product of

the Reliability Weight and the

Reliability Value.

Once the Utility is measured for the top ten outputs from the model, we will show

the tradeoff between Utility and Cost as well the configuration of the Multi-Rotor

Aerial Vehicle for each output.

Agenda

• Context

• Gap Analysis



• Requirements


• DoE-Validation




49


Validation Process Stage Test

Pre-Check Check for basic functionality by inputting a

pre-existing configuration into our simulation

and compare our results to the

manufacturer’s data.

Static Flight Profile (Hover) Hold aircraft at a #ft hover and measure the

total hover time and the motor’s

current/voltage

Dynamic Flight Profile

(Battery and aircraft trajectories)

Fly aircraft along an average flight plan and

measure the total flight time, the motor’s

current/voltage, and aircraft position.



Confirmed for power

model to 10% error

Confirmed for power

model to 10% error

50


Hardware

Christopher Vo

• President of DC Area Drone User Group

• IrixMedia LLC-Custom UAV Engineering & Research

Company

Data Output Requirements of Multi-Rotor UAS:

• Current and voltage for each motor

• Accelerometer and position data

• Microcontroller output log



51


Agenda

• Context

• Gap Analysis



• Requirements


• DoE-Validation




52




Work Breakdown Structure

DST-SPDA

MANAGEMENT

Group Meeting

Sponsor Meeting

Project Schedule

Weekly Accomplishment

Budget

Research

Stakeholders

Context

Problem Statement

Gathered Statistics

Design

Solution

Alternatives

Risks

Mitigation

Model

CONOPS

Context

Problem Statement

Need Statement

Stakeholder Analysis

Mission Requirements

Requirements

Originating

Functional

Performance

Derived

Simulation

Power Consumption

Model

Dynamic Models

Monte Carlo

Analysis

Sensitivity

Utility/Cost

Trade off

Deliverables

Initial Plan

Final Plan

Final Proposal

Final Presentation

Conferences

53


Project Plan



54




55


Risk Analysis



56


Mitigation Plan



57




Budget

58


$-

$10,000.00

$20,000.00

$30,000.00

$40,000.00

$50,000.00

$60,000.00

$70,000.00

$80,000.00

$90,000.00

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10Week 11Week 12Week 13

Planned Value vs Actual Cost vs Earned Value

PV

AC

EV



Budget

59


$-

$10,000.00

$20,000.00

$30,000.00

$40,000.00

$50,000.00

$60,000.00

$70,000.00

$80,000.00

$90,000.00

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10Week 11Week 12Week 13

Planned Value vs PV Worst Case vs PV Best Case vs Actual Cost

PV

PVWC

PVBC

AC



Budget

60


0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10 Week 11 Week 12 Week 13

CPI vs SPI

CPI

SPI

Questions?



61


62

Backup Slides

Limitations Induced Velocity at Different Working States


Momentum Theory: Forward Flight

Conservation of Mass

Final Equations


MT - Coaxial Rotors

Conservation of Mass

Source: Leishman, Aerodynamic Optimization of a Coaxial Prorotor, 2002

Solving for Inflow Ratio

Thrust Coefficients

Solved for Inflow Ratio

Source: Martinez, Modelling of the Flight Dynamic of a Quadrotor Helicopter, 2007

Controller Design

Source: Hartman, Quadrotor Control Simulation, 2014

Decision-Support Tool for Designing Small Package...

Documents

Transcript of Decision-Support Tool for Designing Small Package...