Public arend cdr_web

AREND Aircraft for Rhino and ENvironmental

Defense

Critical Design Review

July 15, 2014

Agenda 1. Introduction (5 mins): Laura

2. Background & Conops (10 mins): Lelanie

3. Systems Engineering (10 mins): Andrew/AJ

4. Project Management (10 mins): Laura

5. Subsystems (10 mins each) o Aaron/Chris (Embedded Systems/Control/Communication)

o Aaron (On-board Sensors)

o Break (10 mins)

o Andrew (Power/Propulsion)

o Lelanie (Fuselage)

o Johannes (Wings/tail/empennage)

o Matt (Testing & Integration)

4. Request for Actions: All

2 Overview Systems

Engineering Project

Management Subsystems Summary

Industry Advisors

CSIR Pretoria

NIST

Four Winds Interactive

Wildlife Protection Solutions

Denver Zoo

Center Wildlife Management

Blue Atmos LLC

First RF

Corp

Athena ISR

Airspace Guardian

Helios Torque Fusion

AMA Pilots

Sans Souci Enterprise

sUAS News

Many thanks to our advisors and contributors!

3

Laura Kruger Andrew Levine Aaron Buysse Nikhil Shetty Justin George Chris Womack AJ Gemer Christine Fanchiang

4

University of Pretoria (South Africa) Lelanie Smith Karl Grimsehl Sune Gerber Byron Coetser Michael Kruger Joachim Huyssen

Mayank Bhardwaj Matt Busby John Russo David Soucie Anna Rivas Neel Desai Cameron Brown Prasanta Achanta

University of Stuttgart (Germany) Johannes Schneider Tarik Özyurt Rick Lohmann Tim Baur Tim Wegmann

Team Members University of Colorado Boulder (United States)

Metropolia University (Finland) Joe Hotchkiss John Malangoni Balázs Kovács Nikita Korhonen

Joe Tanner (CU) Donna Gerren (CU) Alexandra Musk (CU) Laurent Dala (UP) Wouter Van Hoven (UP) Joe Hotchkiss (MU) Holger Kurz (US) Peter Middendorf (US) Dominique Bergmann (US) Claus Dieter-Munz (US)

5

Team Members Academic Advisors

Jason Coder David Novotny Jeffrey Guerrieri Molly Kainuma Rebecca McCloskey Brian Aucone Patrick Egan Richard Soto Eric Schmidt Rebecca Vandiver Philip Moffett Phelps Lane Dean Paschen Joe Pirozzoli Lee Jay Fingersh Jason Sand Luigi Moretti Will Fox

Tom Spendlove Charlie Lambert Marshall Lee Matt Bracken Tom McKinnon Brandon Lewis Amanda Harvey Christensen Flemming Dillon Jensen Barbara Bicknell Brett Anderson

Industry Advisors

Agenda 1. Introduction

2. Background & Conops

3. Systems Engineering

4. Project Management

5. Subsystems o Aaron/Chris (Embedded Systems/Control/Communication)







6 Overview

Systems Engineering

Project Management

Subsystems Summary

Project Objectives Find Poachers before they kill

within the 20,000km2 KNP

7

Project Objectives

8

Find Poachers before they kill

within the 20 000km2 KNP

8

9

80km

9 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Project Objectives

300km

Search Sectors with a Reach

of 30km (Diameter 60km)

Warning System using Ground Sensors

10 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Concept of Operations

Radio Repeater

Command Centre Search Sector

Search Footprint

Launch Station

Delivery Waypoint

Landing

1

2

3

4 Mission Segments:

1. Delivery

2. Arrival

3. Search

4. Return

Ground Station

Concept of Operations

11 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Search Segment

Sea

rch

H

eig

ht

12 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Design Objectives

13

Long Range

Far Reach

Quick response Vehicle

Low Noise

High Resolution Sensor

High Data Rate Transmission (*short-term)

(On-board Processing *long-term)

Autonomous Flight

13 Overview Systems

Engineering Project













14 Overview

Systems Engineering

Project Management

Subsystems Summary

Systems Overview

15

Top System Requirements:

AREND_001

The AREND aircraft system shall be capable of manual/radio flight control with autonomous capabilities. Compliance Criteria: Autonomous capabilities include; 1) auto-stabilization, 2) flight to pre-programmed waypoint destinations, 3) flight to dynamically updated waypoints.

AREND_002 The AREND aircraft system shall be capable of quickly delivering a payload to any location within its sector, silently performing a search pattern, returning to a landing area, and landing safely within the South African Park or Reserve.

AREND_003 The AREND aircraft structure shall be capable of supporting payload sensor packages within a fixed mass and volume. The allotted structure and volume shall be designed to accept a variety of payload packages, and particularly sized to support the largest expected payload.

AREND_004 The AREND payload shall include a gimbal-stabilized visual camera system, capable of capturing quality image data throughout the search pattern of the flight mission.

AREND_005

The AREND aircraft system shall protect all ground systems and aircraft structure and components during mission phases. Protection includes KNP environmental hazards, impacts upon landing, and g-loading from maneuvering and take-off. Compliance Criteria: 1) mission phases include; a) take-off, b) delivery, c) arrival, d) search, e) return, and f) landing. 2) environmental hazards are listed in the KNP Environmental Hazards Table, 3) the aircraft shall utilize skid landings in unpaved fields, 4) maximum G-load expectations are listed in Flight Mission Parameters Table.

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Systems Overview

16 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Systems Overview Data Flow

IMU Altimeter Accelerometer

17

Thermo-couples Voltage meas. State of Charge meas.

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Systems Approach

Balancing Payload: Design Constraints Component Selection & Mission Design

18

Short-term

Long-term

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Systems Approach

Balancing Aircraft: Design Constraints System Design & Total Mass

19 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Technical Risks C

on

seq

uen

ce

In-Flight Battery

Failure

Damage Aircraft/ Components Upon

Landing

Deferred Launch Method Design

Final Aircraft Exceeding

Budgeted Mass

Component Overheating

Harsh

Environment

Possibility

20 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Technical Risks

21

Risk Mitigation

1. Damage Aircraft/ Components Upon Landing Thorough stability analysis on landing skid design

Landing system design to keep aircraft above debris and from toppling over

Reinforced structure for nose gimbal and casing

2. Component Overheating Placement of heat sensitive components away from heat sources

Custom venting designed into fuselage to promote heat dissipation

3. Final Aircraft Exceeding Budgeted Mass 1. Overdesign the wing to handle ~20% more than the expected total aircraft mass

2. Overdesign the propulsion system to support higher thrust/power needs

3. Allow flexibility in duration/range of flight

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Systems Conclusion

22

*Component Masses that are not included; 1) Gimbal structure 2) Landing Skids 3) Variable payloads 4) Screws, bolts, adhesive 5) Wiring 6) Various adapters and mounting

surfaces

Budgeted Mass [kg]

Current Mass [kg]

Difference [kg]

% Over Budget

Total STRC 6.48 6.500 -0.020 0.31%

Total COMM 0.50 0.494 0.001 Good

Total EMBS 1.31 1.384 -0.079 6.04%

Total POWR 0.18 0.000 0.180 Good

Total PROP 7.47 7.462 0.008 Good

Total PYLD-A 1.80 0.701 1.099 Good

Margin 0.27 NA NA Good

Totals 18.00 16.54

39%

3%

9%

0%

45%

4%

PYLD-A Mass [kg]

Total STRC

Total COMM

Total EMBS

Total POWR

Total PROP

Total PYLD-A

Budgeted Mass [kg]

Current Mass [kg]

Difference [kg]

% Over Budget

Total STRC 5.76 6.500 -0.740 12.85%

Total COMM 0.44 0.494 -0.054 12.34%

Total EMBS 1.16 1.384 -0.224 19.29%

Total POWR 0.16 0.000 0.160 Good

Total PROP 6.64 7.462 -0.822 12.37%

Total PYLD-A 1.60 0.701 0.899 Good

Margin 0.24 NA NA Good

Totals 16.00 16.54

Overview Systems

Engineering Project













23 Overview

Systems Engineering

Project Management

Subsystems Summary

PM Overview • Team Structure

• Schedule

• Budget

• Risks

• Export Regulations

• Management Approach

24 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


AREND

University Advisors

Industry/ Agency

Advisors

AREND Global Team

25 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Academic Advisors & Leads

Jean Koster

CU Donna Gerren

CU Joe

Tanner CU

Laura Kruger

CU

Laurent Dala UP

John Monk

UP

Wouter van Hoven

UP Lelanie Smith

UP

Jon Malangoni

MU

Joe Hotchkiss

MU

Ewald Kraemer

US

Claus-Dieter Munz

US

Peter Middendorf

US

Dominique Bergmann

US

Holger Kurz US

26 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Vehicle Structure

•AJ Gemer

•Lelanie Smith

•Johannes Schneider

Power & Propulsion

•Andrew Levine

•John Russo

•Prasanta Achanta

ES/Control

•Aaron Buysse

•Chris Womack

•Myank Bhardwaj

•Neel Desai

•Cameron Brown

Sensors

•Nikhil Shetty

•Jon Malangoni

Testing & Integration

•Justin George

•Matt Busby

Systems Engineer: Andrew Levine

Industry Advisors

CFO: Phelps Lane

Project Manager: Laura Kruger

Academic Advisors

Deputy PM: Christine Fanchiang

27

CAD & Manufacture Engineer: AJ Gemer

Import/Export Regulations: Laura Kruger

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Schedule

28 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Major Milestones July Aug Sept Oct Nov Week 13-19 20-26 27-2 3-9 10-16 17-23 24-30 31-6 7-13 14-20 21-27 28-4 5-11 12-18 19-25 26-1 2-8 9-15

CDR

FRR Due

Flight Test Report Due

1st Hardware Shipment

Export/Import List Due

2nd Hardware Shipment

Manufacturing


Students Fly to SA

Final Demo and Design Report Due

Wings/Tail/Empennage

Fuselage

Power/Prop

Embedded Systems

Ground Support

Ground Sensor Network

Systems Engineering

Project Management

Contingency

Budget

6.7%

20.0%

20.0%

13.6%

4.7%

Total Cost Estimate: $31,000

29 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


10.0%

8.4%

6.9%

9.9%

Project Risks C

on

seq

uen

ce

Budget

Project Timeline

Global Testing Personnel

Regulations

Conflict

Possibility

30 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Project Risk Mitigation

31 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


• Project Timeline o Continuous communications

o Detailed design

• Budget o Begin second round of crowdfunding and pursue investment opportunities

o Approach companies for discounts

• Personnel o New semester can target more students

• Global Testing o Detailed test and integration plans

o Detailed Interface Control Documents

• Regulations Conflict o Vigilant and early ITAR/export control reviews

Import/Export

• Key team members receive online export/ITAR

training

• Coordinating with CU’s Office of Research Integrity

and Regulatory Compliance

32 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


STA Exception Checklist • Notify the consignee of the ECCN (Export Control

Classification Number) of each item shipped;

• Inform the consignee to submit the required consignee statement prior to export; and

• With each shipment, notify the consignee in writing that the shipment is made under STA

• Prior to departure, report the license exception STA transaction in the Automated Export System (AES) and include the appropriate AES license code C59 that designates that the shipment was made under License Exception STA.

• http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/aes

33 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/aes/




Management Approach

• Facilitate communications between team

• Engineering buildup (“grassroots”) cost estimating

• One procurement agent and budget revision

signoffs

• Continued fundraising and awareness campaigns

• Reduce shipment time lag by coordinating

fabrication, testing, & integration assignments

34 Overview Systems

Engineering Project








o Jon (Sensor Network)






35 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Subsystems

Embedded Systems (ES)/Control/Communications

On-Board Sensors

Power/Propulsion

Fuselage



36 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


ES/Comm Conclusion • On-board processor and autopilot support a

variety of inputs and outputs for additional

sensors

• Ground station software is user-friendly o Easy point-and-click control of UAV

o Displays telemetry and state of health data from batteries

• Communication system allows for long-

range streaming of HD video

37 Overview Systems

Engineering Project

Management ES/Control/

Comms Summary

Subsystems


On-Board Sensors

Power/Propulsion

Fuselage



38 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Sensors Overview

EO/IR field

Poachers

A combination of sensors • On the UAV

• Visual and IR cameras • RFID

• Ground sensor network

Ground Sensors ( ) Sensor Field ( )

39 Overview Systems

Engineering Project

Management Sensors Summary

Sensors Conclusion • The system is being designed keeping

in mind long term possible

technologies

• Overdesigning the aircraft for power,

mass and volume in order to

accommodate advancements in

technology

Overview Systems

Engineering Project

Management Sensors Summary

Subsystems


On-Board Sensors

Power/Propulsion

Fuselage



41 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Propulsion Overview

42 Overview Systems

Engineering Project

Management Power/Prop Summary

Propulsion Constraints Design Constraints: 1. Noise < 45 dB from the audio horizon (275 m, or ~900 ft) 2. Mechanical output power > 0.79 kW 3. Propulsion system mass (incl. batteries) ≤ 42.5% total aircraft

mass (7.47 kg for 18 kg aircraft or 6.64 kg for 16 kg aircraft) Minimum range of 90 km, must be less than 300 km

(ITAR) 4. Propulsion method not to be mounted in the nose

Camera gimbal constraint 5. Minimize the overall mass

Components & additional structural mass required

43 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Propulsion Performance

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

0 2000 4000 6000 8000

Mec

h. P

ow

er [

W]

RPMs

20x10 (2-Blade) Propeller

Req'd Power [W] Max Tacon Power

Theoretical Performance: 20x10, 2-Blade Max @4900 RPMs 0.95 kW Mech. Power Tip Speed ~38% Mach 1

44

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

RPMs


Stat. Thrust [N] Est. Speed [km/hr] Max Tacon RPM

80 km/hr 46 N Thrust

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Propulsion Performance Theoretical Performance: 16x13, 4-Blade Max @4820 RPMs 0.87 kW Mech. Power Tip Speed ~30% Mach 1

45

95 km/hr 32 N Thrust

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

Mec

h. P

ow

er [

W]

RPMs


Req'd Power [W] Max Tacon Power

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

RPMs


Stat. Thrust [N] Est. Speed [km/hr] Max Tacon RPM

*Likely prop stall characteristics that are not included in this analysis. Experimental testing required

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Propulsion Performance

Preliminary Noise Testing: 100% Throttle (averages)

300 ft => 60 dB (1 measurement) 200 ft => 53 dB (3 measurements) 100 ft => 61.25 dB (4 measurements) 50 ft => 67 dB (3 measurements)

50% Throttle (averages) 100 ft => 56 dB (3 measurements) 50 ft => 61 dB (5 measurements)

*Ambient Noise in Bush 45 dB

Further testing required to determine the static audio horizon for Tacon Bigfoot 160 w/ 20x10 APC (2-blade) prop (and other props).

46 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Propulsion Conclusion 1. Motor: Tacon Bigfoot 160 2. Open Propeller, Pusher Configuration 3. Theoretical Optimal Propeller;

16x13, 5-blade prop lowest tip speed (~30% Mach 1) while achieving performance needs

20x10 APC (2-blade); tip speed ~38% Mach 1

4. Pheonix Edge 100 ESC 5. 6S (22.2 V) Battery Pack

Capacity depends on propeller choice Current estimated capacity required = 41.25 Ah

*Further noise and propeller testing to achieve optimal configuration for mission needs

47 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Power Overview

48 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Power Constraints Design Constraints: 1. Flight Battery Pack (90 minutes or 90 km)

Propulsion Power Needs => ~1014 Wh (45.68 Ah) Embedded System Needs => ~220 Wh

2. Payload Battery Pack (90 minutes or 90 km) Payload System Needs => ~42 Wh (peak voltage of 9 V)

3. Backup Battery Pack required for failover and support immediate landing

4. State of health (SOH) sensors; Temp, state of charge (SOC), & voltage per battery

5. Voltage regulation for components

49

Voltage Requirements

Motor – 22 V Rx Hardware – 5 V Tx Hardware/Amp – 12 V

Backup GPS – 5 V Primary GPS – 3.6 V Autopilot – less than 7 V

CPU – 5 V IR camera – 5 V Vis Camera – 9 V

LVDS to HD-SDI converter – 6 to 9 V

Rx for Snoopy – 2.7 to 5.5 V

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Power Source(s)

50

1. Flight Battery Pack Desire Power 35C 8300mAh 6s 22.2V Li-Po Battery 1234 Wh needed => 7 batteries (~4% margin)

2. Payload Battery Pack Desire Power 35C 3300mAh 3s 11.1V Li-Po Battery 23.4 Wh needed => 1 battery (~36% margin)

3. Backup Battery Pack E-Flite 30C 2600mAh 6s 22.2V Li-Po Battery Provides ~57.7 Wh => ~10 min of 30% throttle for landing

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Power Monitoring

51

Still to be analyzed: 1. Identify sensors to measure voltage, current, and temperature and

provide raw data to Beagle Bone for transmission in telemetry. Current data to be processed to calculate remaining state of charge (SOC)

2. Issues

Not commercially available Current off-the-shelf products trigger LED or audio alert only (no raw

data) May need build from scratch or reverse engineer

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Power Distribution

Overview Systems

Engineering Power/Prop

Testing and Verification

Project Management

52

53

Power Distribution 9V

5V

22V

Current Sensor

Autopilot

9V BEC

5V BEC

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


54

Power Distribution Components required: 1. Current/Voltage Sensor

The AutoPilot Current and Voltage sensor board was recommended for replacing the Pixhawk power module.

Must be able to handle a 6S LiPo battery pack

2. 5V BEC/Voltage Regulator Powers the CPU, autopilot, IR camera, and backup GPS Must be able to output enough current to power servos

(powered by the autopilot).

3. 9v BEC/Voltage Regulator Powers the transmitter, visual camera, and the LVDS to HD-SCI

converter.

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Power Conclusion 1. Two independent primary battery packs;

Flight systems – 7 6S 8300 mAh LiPos Payload – 1 3S 3300 mAh LiPo

2. One backup battery pack Emergency landings only 1 6S 2600 mAh LiPo

3. Regulated voltage using 9V and 5V BECs Two 9V BECs Two 5V BECs

4. Battery SOC and health monitoring Still being worked

55 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Subsystems Embedded Systems (ES)/Control/Communications

On-Board Sensors

Sensor Network

Power/Propulsion

Fuselage



56 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Fuselage Design Requirements

Fuselage design shall:

o have the low possible drag characteristics[ CD < 0.035]

o be sufficiently sized to house the required payload

o be volumetrically efficient [Oval shape ideal]

o allow for sensor visibility [Nose cone = body of

revolution]

o have a durable and lightweight structure

o allow for easy modular mounting of sensors

o be easy to assemble, maintain, and manufacture

o be low cost

57 Overview Systems

Engineering Project

Management Fuselage Summary

Design Alternatives Open Propeller vs Integrated Propulsion Fuselage

Based on propulsion trade study the open propeller was selected

– specifically the pusher propeller on the aftbody of the fuselage

58

Previous Open Propeller Fuselage Examples

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Open pusher propeller configurations Low drag body (F2-49) sufficient to carry the payload

Clean aerodynamic shape to reduce noise

Propellers mounted the aftbody of the fuselage

Payload Layout

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Visual sensors in nose cone

Payload Layout

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Gimbal • Use a design load factor of 16 g’s (industry standard for

hard landings: no components allowed to yield

plastically for any less than 16 g’s)

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


• Gimbal will rotate

about two axes

(pitch and roll)

• Components

manufactured

from plate

aluminium.

To Be Decided

• Landing gear Concept: Skid Landing

• Emergency parachute landing is considered

• Connection to fuselage: take the gimbal out of the

load path of the spine.

• Damping shall be introduced to the gimbal-

fuselage interface to reduce the effects of

vibration.

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Subsystems


On-Board Sensors

Power/Propulsion

Fuselage



63 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Wings

Geometry Parameters

Aspect Ratio 12.7

Wing Area 2.134 m²

Wing Span 5.2m

Wing Load 91.93 N/m²

Wing Twist -1°

Airfoil Eppler E214

Dihedral 2°

Taper Ratio 0.4

Aerodynamic Parameters

Cl 0.5

Cd 0.013

Design Parameters

Cruise Speed 65 km/h

MTOW 20kg

Stall Speed 36 km/h

Re ~ 500000

Plain Flaps

Wing Shape

Plane Flaps

Ailerons

Overview Systems

Engineering Project

Management Wings/Tail Summary

Wings

Diagrams

Lift coefficient over drag coefficient

Lift distribution

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Tail / Empennage

Comments: - Design based on CG 0.2 m behind the leading edge of the wing

- Distance from wing leading edge to empennage neutral point l=3m

Geometry Parameters

Aspect Ratio 5

Angel (Roof) 110°

Empennage

Span

(half Tail)

0.768 m

Airfoil HT 14

horizontal stabilizer

volume 0.72

vertical stabilizer

volume 0.06

Static margin 5.7%

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Manufacturing and Materials

Mold material: SICA Block M615

Wings / Empennage:

• glass and carbon fiber

• kevlar (aramid fibers) for highly stressed areas (wing tip, leading edge, flap hinge)

Budget Need Uni Stuttgart

Mold material 2.200,00$

Mold manufacturing

(very unsure yet) 3.200,00$

just the machine hour rate for best surface and less handiwork

maybe possible to halve

fiberglass, gum…. 200,00$

carbon fiber tubes for empennage 130,00$

servos not yet known

5.730,00$

Budget available Uni Stuttgart 4.000,00$ approx.

Time Plan

42h first wings ( “junk” , OK for

testing)

Final wings

40h preparing molds

24h glass/carbon fiber lining

20h internal wing structure

10h wings finishing

empennage ~ 40h

~ 180h total

Budget Plan

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Control System

l-Tail

r-Flap l-Flap

r-Tail

FCU

r-aileron l-aileron

: servos

FCU : Flight Control Unit

- Control System Voltage: 6V

- Slow servos for Flaps

- Digital servos

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Subsystems


On-Board Sensors

Power/Propulsion

Fuselage



69 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Testing & Integration (T&I)

Objectives:

• Support global manufacturing and integration of

AREND system

• Accurately test the system’s ability to satisfy

requirements throughout integration phases

Establishing T&I Plan:

1. List design hardware and software

2. Identify where components will be purchased/built

3. Define integration and logistics plan

4. Define test plan from lowest level requirements

70 Overview Systems

Engineering Project

Management T&I Summary

Hardware/Software and

Their Locations

• 32 hardware/software

items across 4 universities

and 4 countries

• Locations determined by

ITAR restrictions, expertise

location, and testing needs

71 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Integration and Logistics Plan Integration done at 3 levels

Complete System

Ground System Flight System

Ground

Station

Power &

Propulsion

Aircraft

Structure

Comm. Sensors

Software Embedded

Systems

Detection

Alerts

Level 1: All components

sent to South Africa for final

test and integration

Level 2: Integrate all major

subsystems (parts may need

to be sent to other countries)

Level 3: Subsystems

integrated separately at

development location

72 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Test Plan Development

*(12)

PDR

CDR

TRR

AT

73

http://softwareandme.wordpress.com/2009/10/20/software-development-life-cycle/sdlc_v_model/

Implementation

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Test Plan Development • Defined from lowest level requirements

• Encompasses 34 unit/subsystem tests and 11 integrated and

operational tests

• Test plan designed to address: 1. Why/When is test needed?

2. Who is doing test?

3. What are the test objectives?

4. What is being tested?

5. Where is test conducted?

6. How will test objectives be met?

7. What are the reporting requirements?

74 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Test & Integration Plan

75

Fuselage Pretoria

Tail Stuttgart

Wings Stuttgart

Payload CU

Embedded

Systems CU

Power CU

Autopilot CU

Assembled

Aircraft Pretoria

Final Test

DateMajor Deadline -30 Major Deadline -25 Major Deadline -20 Major Deadline -15 Major Deadline

Phase # 1 2 3 4

Initial

Fabrication/

Assembly

Thermodynamic

Testing

Control Surface

Testing

Structural

Strength

Testing

Parts Sent

To South

Africa

Enitre Aircraft

Assembly

Structures

Fuselage

Tail

Wings

Complete

Incomplete

Final Test

DateMajor Deadline -30 Major Deadline -25 Major Deadline -20 Major Deadline -15 Major Deadline -10 Major Deadline -5 Major Deadline -5 Major Deadline

Phase # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Initial

Fabrication/

Assembly

Functional TestingPower Output &

Endur Testing

Thermodynamic

Testing (If Needed)

Vibration

Testing

Communication

TestResolution Test

Parts Sent

To South

Africa

Electronics

Payload

Power

Autopilot

Final Test

DateMajor Deadline -45 Major Deadline -40 Major Deadline -35 Major Deadline -30 Major Deadline -25 Major Deadline -20 Major Deadline

Phase # 1 2 3 4 5 6

Full Integration

Testing

Foam Model

Testing

Communication/

Ground Station

Testing

RC Test Flight Autopilot TestingOperational

TestingDemo Flight

AREND Test & Integration Plan (CAO: 10 Jul 2014)

8/17/2014

8/17/2014

8/12/2014

8/17/2014

10/9/2014

9/1/2014

11/3/201410/14/2014

8/27/2014

8/27/2014

8/22/2014

8/22/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

8/27/2014 8/27/20148/22/2014

Assembled

Aircraft

8/2/2014 8/7/2014

10/4/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

8/7/2014

8/7/2014

8/17/2014

9/29/20149/19/2014

8/2/2014

8/2/2014

8/12/2014

8/12/2014 8/17/2014

8/17/20148/12/2014

8/12/2014

8/2/2014

Embedded

Systems

8/2/2014

8/2/2014

8/2/2014

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Example Test & Integration Plan

76 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Final Test


Phase # 1 2 3 4

Initial

Fabrication/

Assembly

Thermodynamic

Testing

Control Surface

Testing

Structural

Strength

Testing

Parts Sent

To South

Africa

Enitre Aircraft

Assembly

Structures

Fuselage

Tail

Wings

Complete

Incomplete

Final Test


Phase # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Initial

Fabrication/

Assembly


Endur Testing

Thermodynamic

Testing (If Needed)

Vibration

Testing

Communication

TestResolution Test

Parts Sent

To South

Africa

Electronics

Payload

Power

Autopilot

Final Test


Phase # 1 2 3 4 5 6

Full Integration

Testing

Foam Model

Testing

Communication/

Ground Station

Testing


TestingDemo Flight


8/17/2014

8/17/2014

8/12/2014

8/17/2014

10/9/2014

9/1/2014

11/3/201410/14/2014

8/27/2014

8/27/2014

8/22/2014

8/22/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

8/27/2014 8/27/20148/22/2014

Assembled

Aircraft

8/2/2014 8/7/2014

10/4/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

8/7/2014

8/7/2014

8/17/2014

9/29/20149/19/2014

8/2/2014

8/2/2014

8/12/2014

8/12/2014 8/17/2014

8/17/20148/12/2014

8/12/2014

8/2/2014

Embedded

Systems

8/2/2014

8/2/2014

8/2/2014


77

Fuselage Pretoria

Tail Stuttgart

Wings Stuttgart

Payload CU

Embedded

Systems CU

Power CU

Autopilot CU

Assembled

Aircraft Pretoria

Assembled Aircraft Test List Phase Test ID Objective

1

1_AC_1 Aircraft fuselage, tail, wings, payload, embedded systems, power & power plant,

autopilot integration configuration check

1_AC_2 Flight Control Calibration and Testing - ensure flight control freedom of movement

and proper/expected deflections in response to control inputs

1_AC_3 Vibration Testing - Static engine run to Max/Cruise RPM to determine effect of

vibrations on equipment

1_AC_4 Aerodynamic Testing - verify C.G. location to determine longitudinal stability

1_AC_5 Thermo testing of integrated components

Overview Systems

Engineering Project



78

Final Test

Date Major Deadline -30 Major Deadline -25 Major Deadline -20 Major Deadline -15 Major Deadline -10 Major Deadline -5 Major Deadline Major Deadline +15

Phase # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Initial

Fabrication/

Assembly

Functional Testing Aerodynamic

Testing

Thermodynamic

Testing

Control Surface

Testing

Structural

Strength

Testing

Parts Sent

To South

Africa

Structure

Assembly

Entire Aircraft

Assembly

8/2/2014

8/17/2014

8/27/2014

9/1/2014

9/16/2014

8/2/2014

8/22/2014

8/27/2014

9/1/2014

9/16/2014

8/2/2014

8/22/2014

8/27/2014

9/1/2014

Final Test

Date Major Deadline -30 Major Deadline -25 Major Deadline -20 Major Deadline -15 Major Deadline -10 Major Deadline -5 Major Deadline -5 Major Deadline

Phase # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Initial

Fabrication/

Assembly

Functional Testing Power Output &

Endur Testing

Thermodynamic

Testing (If Needed)

Vibration

Testing

Communication

Test

Resolution Test

Parts Sent

To South

Africa

Electronics

Assembly

8/2/2014

8/12/2014

8/17/2014

8/22/2014

8/27/2014

8/27/2014

9/1/2014

8/2/2014

8/7/2014

8/12/2014

8/17/2014

8/22/2014

8/27/2014

9/1/2014

8/2/2014

8/12/2014

8/17/2014

8/22/2014

9/1/2014

8/2/2014

8/7/2014

8/17/2014

8/22/2014

8/27/2014

9/1/2014

Final Test

Date Major Deadline -45 Major Deadline -40 Major Deadline -35 Major Deadline -30 Major Deadline -25 Major Deadline -20

Major Deadline

Phase # 1 2 3 4 5 6

Full Integration

Testing

Foam Model

Testing

Communication/

Ground Station

Testing

RC Test Flight Autopilot Testing Operational Testing

Demo Flight

9/19/2014

9/29/2014

10/4/2014

10/9/2014

10/14/2014

11/3/2014

Fuselage Pretoria

Tail Stuttgart

Wings Stuttgart

Payload CU

Embedded

Systems CU

Power CU

Autopilot CU

Assembled Aircraft Test List Phase Test ID Objective

1

1_AC_1 Aircraft fuselage, tail, wings, payload, embedded systems, power & power plant,

autopilot integration configuration check

1_AC_2 Flight Control Calibration and Testing - ensure flight control freedom of movement

and proper/expected deflections in response to control inputs

1_AC_3 Vibration Testing - Static engine run to Max/Cruise RPM to determine effect of

vibrations on equipment

1_AC_4 Aerodynamic Testing - verify C.G. location to determine longitudinal stability

1_AC_5 Thermo testing of integrated components

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Final Test


Phase # 1 2 3 4

Initial

Fabrication/

Assembly

Thermodynamic

Testing

Control Surface

Testing

Structural

Strength

Testing

Parts Sent

To South

Africa

Enitre Aircraft

Assembly

Structures

Fuselage

Tail

Wings

Complete

Incomplete

Final Test


Phase # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Initial

Fabrication/

Assembly


Endur Testing

Thermodynamic

Testing (If Needed)

Vibration

Testing

Communication

TestResolution Test

Parts Sent

To South

Africa

Electronics

Payload

Power

Autopilot

Final Test


Phase # 1 2 3 4 5 6

Full Integration

Testing

Foam Model

Testing

Communication/

Ground Station

Testing


TestingDemo Flight


8/17/2014

8/17/2014

8/12/2014

8/17/2014

10/9/2014

9/1/2014

11/3/201410/14/2014

8/27/2014

8/27/2014

8/22/2014

8/22/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

8/27/2014 8/27/20148/22/2014

Assembled

Aircraft

8/2/2014 8/7/2014

10/4/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

9/1/2014

8/7/2014

8/7/2014

8/17/2014

9/29/20149/19/2014

8/2/2014

8/2/2014

8/12/2014

8/12/2014 8/17/2014

8/17/20148/12/2014

8/12/2014

8/2/2014

Embedded

Systems

8/2/2014

8/2/2014

8/2/2014


79

Fuselage Pretoria

Tail Stuttgart

Wings Stuttgart

Payload CU

Embedded

Systems CU

Power CU

Autopilot CU

Assembled

Aircraft Pretoria

Unit Testing

Integration Testing Operational Testing

Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Testing & Integration Conclusion

1. List design hardware and software

2. Identify where components will be

purchased/built

3. Define integration and logistics plan

4. Define test plan from lowest level

requirements

80 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


Agenda

1. Introduction











81 Overview

Systems Engineering

Project Management

Subsystems Summary

Next Steps

•Project definition

•Requirements

•Architectures

•Trade studies

Completed

•PDR

•Feasibility Studies

•Technology Selection

•CDR

Current •Manufacture

•Testing/Integration

•Final Design Report

Future

82 Overview Systems

Engineering Project


AREND is unique in several respects:

• UAS designed around sensors/mission objectives

• Implementation of input directly from anti-poaching

rangers

• Payload modularity for defined operations

• International collaboration providing students with

experience in global design and manufacturing

environment

83 Overview Systems

Engineering Project
