4/23 DBF Meeting Notes
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Matthew Woerly
Apr 24, 2012, 1:09:14 PM4/24/12
to DBF 2011-2012
The main purpose of yesterday's meeting was to discuss the possibility of working on the SAE aircraft design competition instead of the DBF competition. Some of the seniors emailed Professor Selig with this proposal. Professor Selig will be in charge of senior design in the fall, and he responded that he would prefer to continue with the DBF competition. The DBF competition tends to have a unique mission requirement each year that requires special design considerations, while each SAE competition changes only every three years and remains primarily a weight-lifting competition. This means that seniors next year will again have the choice of DBF or the AIAA paper competition.
We also discussed the scores, summary, and photos posted in the AIAA site here. Although two teams managed to complete the third mission, the officials decided not to award any scores for this mission. The winning team managed an incredibly low RAC of 1.74 lbs. The lightest plane was actually 1.72 lbs, but did not complete the second mission. However, most of the planes weights similar to our design around 3 lbs, ranging as high as 8.78 lbs.
Judging from the photos of the top three teams included with the scores, we suspect that the 20A current limit was not properly enforced. Although the rules are predictably vague about what the current limit applies to, the FAQ clarifies that "no single battery or motor can exceed the maximum current requirement". All 3 top teams flew designs with 1 motor. For the second two teams with weights similar to the horseshoe (>3 lb), this seems impossible. Even for the 1.72 lb plane, we doubt whether a 20A motor could provide enough power. The need for two motors was a key factor in our design, and using only one motor could have made our design significantly lighter.
When the reports are posted online we will have more information about their designs and will be able to make a better judgment.
As in the email that Curtis just sent, we are planning on trying to do a flight test today. We are meeting at the shop at 4 to decide if the weather looks good.
We also discussed the scores, summary, and photos posted in the AIAA site here. Although two teams managed to complete the third mission, the officials decided not to award any scores for this mission. The winning team managed an incredibly low RAC of 1.74 lbs. The lightest plane was actually 1.72 lbs, but did not complete the second mission. However, most of the planes weights similar to our design around 3 lbs, ranging as high as 8.78 lbs.
Judging from the photos of the top three teams included with the scores, we suspect that the 20A current limit was not properly enforced. Although the rules are predictably vague about what the current limit applies to, the FAQ clarifies that "no single battery or motor can exceed the maximum current requirement". All 3 top teams flew designs with 1 motor. For the second two teams with weights similar to the horseshoe (>3 lb), this seems impossible. Even for the 1.72 lb plane, we doubt whether a 20A motor could provide enough power. The need for two motors was a key factor in our design, and using only one motor could have made our design significantly lighter.
When the reports are posted online we will have more information about their designs and will be able to make a better judgment.
As in the email that Curtis just sent, we are planning on trying to do a flight test today. We are meeting at the shop at 4 to decide if the weather looks good.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages