Investigations of Lift and Drag Performances on Neo-Ptero Micro UAV  Models

Noor Iswadi Ismail; Mahamad Hisyam Mahamad Basri; Hazim Sharudin; Zurriati Mohd Ali; Ahmad Aliff Ahmad Shariffuddin; Nik Izwan Kamel

Authors

Noor Iswadi Ismail Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Cawangan Pulau Pinang, Kampus Permatang Pauh, 13500 Permatang Pauh, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia
Mahamad Hisyam Mahamad Basri Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Cawangan Pulau Pinang, Kampus Permatang Pauh, 13500 Permatang Pauh, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia
Hazim Sharudin Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Masai, Johor, Malaysia
Zurriati Mohd Ali Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Masai, Johor, Malaysia
Ahmad Aliff Ahmad Shariffuddin IFCON Technology (M) Sdn. Bhd, Taman Industri Meranti Jaya, 47120 Puchong, Selangor, Malaysia
Nik Izwan Kamel Faculty of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, 26600 Pekan, Pahang, Malaysia

Keywords:

Aerodynamics, Micro-UAV, Lift coefficients, Drag coefficients, Vortex

Abstract

This paper presents the investigation and comparison of the lift and drag performances between the Neo-Ptero micro-UAV variant models based on the virtual wind tunnel method. Despite its successful development and flight stability, the lift and drag coefficients characteristics of the Neo-Ptero model variations are still unknown. Mark 1 has the original NACA 0012 wing configuration while the Mark 2 Neo-Ptero model is a new proposed model with asymmetric BE50 airfoil wing configuration. Computational aerodynamic analysis was performed and focused on certain lift and drag coefficient characteristics. Lift coefficient results showed that Mark 2 has better overall lift characteristics such as zero-lift angle, maximum lift magnitude, stall angle lift magnitude and percentage of lift increment. In contrast, the Mark 2 model experienced higher drag coefficient magnitude and a significantly higher percentage of drag than the Mark 1. Nevertheless, the lift-to-drag ratio magnitude for Mark 2 was greater than Mark 1 but limited at the early α region. Mark 2 had produced the maximum lift-to-drag ratio magnitude of 14.91 which is marginally better than Mark 1.