Journal of Transport System Engineering 3:1 (2016) 26–34

STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF UAV SEMI- Article history

Received
MONOQUE COMPOSITE WING 02 October 2016
Received in revised form
21 November 2016
M. R. A. Hutagalung, a A. A. Latif,a H. A. Israr,a* Accepted
07Disember 2016
a
Aeronautics Laboratory, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, *Corresponding author
81310 Skudai, Johor Darul Ta’zim. haris@mail.fkm.utm.my

GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT KEYWORDS

Finite Element Methods; Tsai-Hill Composite

Failure Theory; Tsai-Wu Composite Failure
Criterion; Schrenk’s Approximation Methods

INTRODUCTION

An unmanned aerial vehicle or also known as UAV

is an aircraft that does not require a human pilot
to be on board. UAVs can be flown either
ABSTRACT autonomously based on a pre-programmed flight
This paper presents an analysis through plan as well as through a more sophisticated
simulation study of the structural design of dynamic automation or by a pilot on the ground.
a composite UAV wing. The semi-monoque UAVs play an important role in many fields
structure consists of one main mono-spar, including the military as well as defence sector,
4 major ribs, carbon tubes and a flap. The global positioning, mapping as well as homeland
internal structures have been designed to security [1]. In contrast, there seems to be a boom
promote better flight and structural in the research of UAVs in terms of aerodynamics
and structures in the early 2000s, ever since its
performances. Wing loading calculations th
introduction in the early 19 century. This could
were done based on the parameters given explain that the UAV technology has matured over
under regulations of FAR Part 23: the years and manufacturing costs has become
Airworthiness Standards. From these wing economically feasible [2].
loading calculations, the value is then
imported into Finite Element Method Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), in
software, Abaqus for structural analysis. collaboration with Unmanned System Technology
Composite failure criteria that are used are Sdn. Bhd. (UST) is designing a medium range-
Tsai-Hill and Tsai-Wu. The final UAV wing lightweight UAV weighing 40 kilograms under the
design acquired a Tsai-Hill value of 0.1020 Consolidated Advanced Model for Aeronautical
Research (CAMAR) project as can be seen in Figure
and Tsai-Wu value of 0.09851, which are
1. Meanwhile, the wing structure is one of the
both less than 1, conclusively the most important aspects of the UAV. Without a
structures are safe to be fabricated and to proper wing design, the structural performance
be experimented with a wind tunnel for could be disturbed and optimum performance of
further validation. Through this study, it is the aerial vehicle could not be achieved. Structural
found that decreasing the number of performances of the wings must be studied to
layers and changing the orientations play a obtain maximum loading distribution before it
significant role in the strength and overall buckles or fails under flight loads [3]. In aviation, it
weight of the UAV wings as desired. can be seen that the structural components of a
UAV wing are similar to the ones that are on an
aircraft [4].

3:1 (2016) 26–34 | www.jtse.utm.my | eISSN 2289–9790 |

 Journal of Transport System Engineering 3:1 (2016) 26–34

and Lacy [9] describes the design and

implementation of a series of optimizations to
measure the static and dynamic characteristics of
a composite wing on a UAV. Jagdale et al. [10]
FRONT VIEW SIDE VIEW provides a multidisciplinary approach to study the
stresses developed during flight loads on a UAV
wing and also discusses methods to optimize the
composite layup as well as orientation of the UAV
wing structures.

Nevertheless, limited studies are found in the

TOP VIEW TRIMETRIC VIEW open literature which used FEM to fully design a
semi-monoque wing for small scale of UAV like
Figure 1: Four viewpoints of CAMAR UAV
CAMAR. Therefore, in this paper a structural
The UAV wing structural members are proposed to design of a semi-monoque composite wing using
carry a load and to oppose stresses acted upon it FEM for CAMAR UAV will be carried out and
[5]. A semi-monoque structure as shown in Figure discussed in the following sections.
2 has numerous amount of advantages against a
monocoque structure including the ability of the FINITE ELEMENT METHODS: A NUMERICAL
skin to transfer and distribute all the loadings from SOLUTION
the wings towards the internal structures to
withstand an extremely high amount of loading Structural analysis of CAMAR UAV wing in this
before negatively impacted over a period of time study have been carried out using Abaqus
[6]. software. Before developing the numerical
modelling, it is important to acknowledge the
suitable failure criterion that can be used to
simulate the performance of composite wing.
Moreover, the aerodynamics loadings that CAMAR
UAV will be experienced during flight also need to
be determined. This is important in order to
choose the appropriate materials, airfoil and wing
configurations.

Composite Failure Theory Criterion

Many airframe structures currently are comprising

more than 80% advanced composites due to its
Figure 2: Semi-monoque UAV fixed wing structural ideal weight to strength ratio [11].
components nomenclature [4]
Sodzi [12] describes the commonly used composite
Finite element method is a numerical solution failure criteria in aircraft structural analysis. The
towards a structural analysis problem. The main concern to study structural strength of the
application of computational mathematics can be composite UAV wing would be Tsai-Hill Maximum
used to solve UAV wing structural determination. Distortional Energy Theory and Tsai-Wu Strength
It is a more practical solution when compared to Tensor Theory.
experimental method due to the fact that it would
be more economically feasible and optimizations To further elaborate in detail, Tsai-Hill Maximum
can be performed according to desired iterations Distortional Energy Theory encompasses the
[7]. Numerous papers had been published metallic yielding theory of structures and assumes
regarding the finite element modelling (FEM) of a that there are interactions between stresses. In
UAV wing. This includes the paper presented by Tsai-Hill’s Theory, yielding occurs when:
Mazhar and Khan [8], who came up with the
approach towards the structural design (F1 2 − F1 F2 ) F2 2 F12 2
methodology for a UAV wing, through the use of + + =1
(FL Y )2 (FT Y )2 (FLT SU )2
Abaqus software, to study the stiffness and
strength of the said wing. Apart from that, Sullivan Whereby;

3:1 (2016) 26–34 | www.jtse.utm.my | eISSN 2289–9790 |

 Journal of Transport System Engineering 3:1 (2016) 26–34

F1 = FL UT or FL UC platform dimensions and twist distribution on both

F2 = FT UT or FT UC sides of the wings. A lifting line appears to exist as
F12 = FLT SU the linear line acts upon at 90-degree angle to the
T = Transverse direction. quarter chord line of the wing [14]. It is essential
Y = Yield stress or strain. to evaluate the wing loading distribution to
L = Longitudinal direction.
 understand the loading contributions over the
LT = Long transverse direction. wing surface. Mainly, wing loadings are
SU = Ultimate shear strain or stress. categorized as span-wise and also chord-wise lift
UT = Ultimate tension. distribution.
UC = Ultimate compression.

In addition, Tsai-Wu Strength Tensor Theory

applies when the composite panel is subjected to
transformation with interaction between the
stresses. Failure occurs when:

(F1 σ1 + F2 σ2 + F3 σ3 + F4 σ4 + F5 σ5 + F6 σ6 )
+
(F11 σ1 2 + F22 σ2 2 + F33 σ3 2 + F44 σ4 2 + F55 σ5 2
+ F66 σ6 2 )
+
(2F12 σ1 σ2 + 2F13 σ1 σ3 + 2F23 σ2 σ3 ) Figure 3: The lift distribution of a sweptback wing on a
≥ UAV [14]
1
Span-Wise Loading Distribution
It has to be known that the values for F11 , F12 and
F23 can be found whilst conducting the simulation. Perry [15] promotes that pure Schrenk’s Method is
While σ1 to σ6 are principle stresses throughout one of the ways to approximate the span-wise lift
the lamina. τ is denoted as shear strengths in three distribution. Basically, the plane of the wing is
planes of symmetry that are assumed to have the drawn with semi-span along the x-axis and chord
same magnitude on all planes. The coefficient of on the y-axis. Then, a quadrant of an ellipse,
the orthotropic Tsai-Wu failure criterion would be: whose area is equal to the area of the wing span is
drawn. Furthermore, a curve joining the midpoints
1 1 1 of the planform and the elliptical quadrant is
F1 = − F11 =
σ1T σ1C σ1T σ1C drawn to visualize the total lift distribution of the
1 1 1
F2 = − F22 = half-span wing as shown in Figure 4. The steps to
σ2T σ2C σ2Tσ2C
1 1 1 perform Schrenk’s Method is highlighted in the
F3 = − F33 =
σ3T σ3C σ3Tσ3C next passage:
1 1
F44 = F55 =
τ23 2 τ31 2
1 1. Divide the half span into 47 sections composed
F66 = F4 = F5 = F6 = 0
τ12 2 by fuselage, wing root, flap and wing tip.

Wing Loading Distribution 2. Calculate:

2
Perkins et al. [13] claims that the aerodynamics √1 − (2𝑦) for each station.
𝑏
forces and moments on the body of a UAV are due
to two basic sources, which are the pressure 3. Compute:
distribution and shear stress distribution over the 4𝑆√1−( 𝑏 )
2𝑦 2
body surface. For the simplicity of the problem, Cy = .
𝜋𝑏𝑐
shear stress distribution over the body surface is
neglected, which provides meaning that all loads 4. Calculate:
on the UAV are assumed to come from the lift 2𝑦 2
4𝑆√1−( 𝑏 ) 𝑐
forces generated over the wings as shown in Ccl = + .
2𝜋𝑏 2
Figure 3.
5. Calculate local section lift for unity:
In addition, the concept of a sweptback wing is to 𝑐𝑐𝑙
be represented by a flat plate with the identical (CL = 1) 𝑐𝑙 = 𝐶𝐿(𝑐𝑙𝑎) = 𝐶𝐿 .
c̅

3:1 (2016) 26–34 | www.jtse.utm.my | eISSN 2289–9790 |

 Journal of Transport System Engineering 3:1 (2016) 26–34

6. Calculate maximum local section lift: From the computations in Figure 5, the highest
𝑐𝑐𝑙 loading regardless at span-wise or chord-wise was
(CL = 1.364) 𝑐𝑙M𝑎𝑥 = 𝐶𝐿(𝑐𝑙𝑎) = 𝐶𝐿 .
c̅
chosen to be as the loading input. This is due to
7. Compute: the fact that it is of high concern that this wing
c(clmax)n+c(clmax)n+1 structure is able to withstand the highest load
(𝑐𝑐𝑙Max∆𝑦)𝑛 = 2 [𝑦n+1− 𝑦𝑛]. acted upon it whilst in flight. Knowing the
2
coefficient of pressure, length of chord, and
8. Calculate: percentage of area, thus the highest load acted on
c(clmax)n 𝑊
𝐿𝑛 = = ×𝑛× ×𝑔 wing is [1450*0.32]/(0.1*0.547) = 8140.35 Pa =
∑(cclmax𝚫y)n 2 2
8140.35 N/m to be used for Abaqus. It is
concluded that the chord-wise lift distribution with
2
8140.35 N/m is most significant when compared
2
to the span-wise lift distribution of 1452.40 N/m .

Manoeuvre Envelope And Gust Loading

Flight envelope (Figure 6) and gust loading (Figure

7) studies are crucial to obtain the wing loading
distribution in order to analyse the maximum
loading condition that can be endured by the UAV.
The variation of loadings that were calculated are
CL vs α, CD vs CL, CT vs CL, CZ A vs CL, CL X vs CL and
CL Z vs CL. Manoeuvre envelope or V-n diagram is
the limitation of the environment where it is
guaranteed for the UAV to be working as desired
at CGMax, CGMin, CGAft, and CGFwd.
Figure 4: Graph of span-wise lift distribution with
aileron effect

Chord-Wise Loading Distribution

Pressure distribution in the chord-wise direction is

computed using the software called “XFOIL”. XFOIL
is an interactive program for the design and
analysis of subsonic isolated aerofoils. Given the
coordinates specifying the shape of a 2-
dimensional aerofoil, the software can calculate
the pressure distribution on the surface of the
wings in chord-wise direction. The chord is divided Figure 6: Graph of manoeuvre envelope for maximum
into 23 divisions for simplicity of the case, with CG case
0.041m distance in between each division that
would make up x/c to 1, whereby c is 0.541m
which is the root chord.

Figure 7: Graph of gust envelope for maximum

CG condition

Figure 5: Pressure distribution in chord-wise direction

of the CAMAR UAV wing

3:1 (2016) 26–34 | www.jtse.utm.my | eISSN 2289–9790 |

 Journal of Transport System Engineering 3:1 (2016) 26–34

THE MODELLING OF THE UAV WING trailing edge ribs, carbon tubes, carbon support
and the wing skin as shown in Figure 9.
Through the use of Computer Aided Design (CAD)
The geometrical modelling of the wing structural
software, SolidWorks 2014, the CAMAR UAV wing
components was designed using SolidWorks 2014,
is designed. The design specification has prior
constraints for instance, the aerofoil of the wings and then the 3-dimensional model was imported
to Abaqus software for numerical simulation.
SD7062 and its wingspan have been pre-
However, since the wing was assumed to be
determined, thus reasonable measures are taken
symmetrical on both sides, the left side and the
to ensure the best optimum design was considered
to produce a UAV wing that could withstand the right side of the wing, only half of the wing span
model is used in the numerical analysis and this
loadings for a prolonged period of time throughout
have caused the reduction of computing time for
its life cycle. The essential parameters of CAMAR
UAV wing are listed in Table 1. To further optimize the analysis to be completed [16].
the structural design of the wing is by designing
the internal structures and configurations of the
wings.

Table 1: Essential Parameters of The UAV Wing

Components Characteristics Value
Wing Chord Length (Root) 0.55m
Chord Length (Tip) 0.39m
Length of Half Span 2.5m
Sweep Angle 24.95°
Anhedral Angle 1.61°
Wingspan, b 5.00m
Flap Chord Length (Root) 0.0914m
Chord Length (Tip) 0.0824m
Length of Flap 1.0256m Figure 9: The internal structures of the CAMAR UAV
wing
Aerofoil Selection
Material Selection
The shape of the aerofoil plays an enormous role
in the formation of the internal structures of the The major structural components of the wing were
UAV. This is due to the fact that the aerofoil made of composite materials, which provides a
decides the shape of the wing ribs. The aerofoil great strength to weight ratio to the overall
SD7062 (Figure 8) was pre-selected because of its structure of the UAV wing except for fasteners,
excellent performance for high payload UAVs at which provide support to attach the wings to the
high lift and low drag configurations with low to fuselage, bolts and also nuts. The main composite
high speed manoeuvres. The aerofoil has material used in the study would be carbon fibre
maximum thickness at 14% at quarter chord, with epoxy resin and carbon fibre braided with
maximum camber of 3.5% at 38.8% chord, stall epoxy resin as the matrix. The characteristics of
angle at 15°, maximum coefficient of lift, CLmax of the composite material is tabulated in Table 2 and
1.6680 and lift curve slope, CLα of 5.4010. Table3.

Table 2: Material properties of the CAMAR UAV

Material E1 E2 G12 V12 Ρ
(GPa) (GPa) (GPa) (Kg/m3)
Carbon Fibre
Fabric 70 70 5 0.1 1600
Figure 8: Shape of the SD 7062 aerofoil (With Epoxy)
Carbon Fibre
Braided 34 34 3 0.4 1550
Wing Configurations (With Epoxy)

The UAV wing design is a semi-monoque structure

As the baseline of the research, the laminate
thus it has internal structures that would help to
design used for the skin of the wing as well as the
damp the loadings towards the wing skin. The
flaps is carbon fibre fabric with stocking sequence
components that would account the internal
of [02, 45, -45, 01/2]s with 9 layers. The total
structures are a mono-spar, 5 leading edge ribs, 5
thickness of the component would be 0.002286m.

3:1 (2016) 26–34 | www.jtse.utm.my | eISSN 2289–9790 |

 Journal of Transport System Engineering 3:1 (2016) 26–34

Meanwhile, The laminate design used for the 5 effective as well as it could reduce computational
leading edge and 5 trailing edge ribs is 6 layers time and running costs in the long run. A total of
carbon fibre fabric with stacking sequence of [45, 289,642 elements were generated for the analysis.
0, 0]s . The total thickness of the component would
be 0.001524m.

Table 3: Elastic Properties of the composite materials

for Abaqus simulation
Material XT XC YT YC S
(MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
Carbon
Fibre Fabric
600 570 600 570 90
(With
Epoxy)
Carbon
Fibre
Braided
640 320 28.2 148.4 39.7
(With
Epoxy)
Figure 10: Meshing of the overall UAV wing assembly
Furthermore, the laminate design used for the
spar of the wing is also carbon fibre fabric with 15 Boundary Condition
layers of stacking sequence of [0, 45, 45, 0, 45, 0,
0, 45, 0, 0, 45, 0, 45, 45, 0]. Finally, the laminate The present work is aimed at utilizing the current
design used for tubes support of the wing is finite element method for investigating complex
carbon fibre braided with 6 layers stacking composite structure criteria of the wing structure.
sequence of [45, 0, 0]s. The total thickness of the With that, boundary conditions are necessary to
component would be 0.001524m. From these define how the site specific model interacts with
baseline values, optimizations have been the entire environmental process. It also reflects
performed to acquire the most desired the results of the simulation on the real world
configurations that will be beneficial towards the working condition. Without a proper boundary
ability for the UAV wing to execute to its preferred condition that is set onto the system, the reliability
functions as determined in the preliminary design. of the data would not be sufficient and valid for
the real world application [18]. The boundary
Meshing Of the UAV Wing Structural condition for the analysis is set on the points
where the UAV wing is attached to the fuselage at
Components
the point of assembly when they are already
interlocking with each other. The boundary
According to Lee, Y. [17], meshing is formed
condition that is set up is “Encastre” where the
through nodes, which are connected to form
fuselage is assumed to be stiff enough to handle all
elements such that no elements overlap and the
the loadings acted upon it after being transferred
entire object is covered. In Lee's method, a square
from the wings. The surface condition is set up in
grid with the same spacing as the desired element
Abaqus where it can only move along U3 while U1
size is superimposed on the object. The cells are
and U would be 0, and they cannot rotate around
visited in a columnar manner from left to right,
UR1, UR2, and UR3. As all degrees of freedom were
and within the same column, from bottom to top.
set to zero at root as shown in Figure 11.
Within a cell, the points are sorted in ascending x-
coordinates. Points having the same x-coordinate
are sorted in ascending y- coordinates. The points
are visited in turn. For each point, neighbouring
points are found so as to form the nodes of a good
quadrilateral failing which, a triangle is formed. All
of the components use the meshing generation
which are Quad-Dominated and automatic
structured meshing as shown in Figure 10.

Given the large scale of the mode and nature of

the structures, shell elements were used to
represent the components with S4R four-noded Figure 11: Boundary condition on the overall UAV wing
shell elements coded in Abaqus as it is highly assembly (Root)

3:1 (2016) 26–34 | www.jtse.utm.my | eISSN 2289–9790 |

 Journal of Transport System Engineering 3:1 (2016) 26–34

The wing loading of the system has been other parameters at play. The maximum deflection
calculated prior, whereby the span-wise loading is of the UAV wing design is recorded at 1.780 mm,
calculated through pure Schrenk method, and which happens at the wing tip as shown in Figure
chord-wise loading distribution is replicated on the 15. A high deflection means that it would disturb
body of the wing after the point of boundary the flight performance, thus reducing the battery
condition is set up on the system. The replication is management system of the UAV ending with a
done to the exact extent onto how the wings shorter range and shorter endurance. This is
would reflect during the loadings that have been indeed an equally good deflection value as the
calculated earlier including fuselage and flap effect deflection is 0.0712 % of the overall wing span.
in terms of pressure. As highlighted in red in Figure However, the deflection of the UAV wing is not
2
12, the loading value of 8140.35 N/m is uniformly limited during the pre-conceptual phase. Thus, this
distributed across the top half and bottom half of value is acceptable for the simulation as it is a stiff
the wing skin, with the direction going structure that could handle the loadings.
perpendicular outwards from the structure. The
main issues to be studied would be the composite
failure criterion, deflection and weight.

Figure 13: Tsai-hill failure criterion results

Figure 12: Loading Conditions On The Overall UAV

Wing Assembly

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

As mentioned earlier, Tsai-Hill and Tsai-Wu failure

criteria of composite structures are being focussed
as well as the deflection of the wing and finally the
mass of the UAV wing. From the first simulation,
the results have reached initial expectations and
objectives.

Figure 14: Tsai-wu failure criterion results

The baseline simulation provides Tsai-Hill value of
0.1806 (Figure 13) as well as Tsai-Wu value of
0.1734 (Figure 14). Both showed a promise that
the UAV wing is much capable of handling the
loadings acted upon it as both are less than 1,
which brings meaning that they do not fail. In fact,
it is expected that the point of which the
maximum value of implication towards the
strength of the system would happen, occur at the
root rib of the UAV wing, at the wing to fuselage
attachment mechanism.

If the UAV wing design is computed to be of high

deflection, thus optimizations are needed to be
Figure 15: Maximum deflection of CAMAR UAV wing
done to decrease this value alongside with the

3:1 (2016) 26–34 | www.jtse.utm.my | eISSN 2289–9790 |

 Journal of Transport System Engineering 3:1 (2016) 26–34

Weight plays a major role in the overall UAV wing the second optimization process, the Tsai-Hill
design. A less heavy wing would mean that the value maintains at 0.1020 (Figure 16) meanwhile
UAV could carry more payload and perform its the Tsai-Wu value increases to 0.09851 (Figure 17).
functions. The maximum weight of the UAV At the same time, the deflection surges to
obtained from the current design is 7.11195 0.8526mm (Figure 18) but the mass of the UAV
kilograms. Whereby, the UAV is just half the span. wing drops to just 6.7021 kilograms as plotted in
A full wingspan UAV that is a total up of 5 meters Figure 19.
long would be acquiring a total weight value of
14.2239 kilograms. 14.2239 kilograms weight of
the wings alone account of about 35.56% of the
overall weight of the UAV itself.

Optimizations

Based on the initial results, it is found that the UAV

wing design is strong enough to handle the
loadings acted upon it. Thus, to further strengthen
the structure, it would be required to increase the
thickness of the root rib so that it would contain
the loadings. It can be seen that introduction of
another 2 layers from 6 to 8 layers of carbon fibre
fabric with orientation of 0 degrees, the thickened
structure indeed affects the overall value of Tsai- Figure 17: Breakdown of Tsai-Wu values after
optimizations
Hill and Tsai-Wu of the UAV wing design. From the
first optimization process, the Tsai-Hill value
decreased to 0.1020 (Figure 16), while the Tsai-Wu
value decreased to 0.09847 (Figure 17). The
deflection is recorded to be declining at 0.8520
mm (Figure 18) but the overall mass of the UAV
wing has increased to 7.12677 kilograms as shown
in Figure 19.

Figure 18: Breakdown of deflection after optimizations

Figure 16: Breakdown of Tsai-Hill values after

optimizations

After further analysis and discussion, it is

concluded that the deflection values are of no
issue, but the weight needs to be reduced. It is
decided to reduce the thickness of the main spar,
which involves much of the mass properties
through analysis. From the number of 15 layers, it
was reduced to just 11 layers while maintaining Figure 19: Breakdown of mass values after
the same properties of the selected material. From optimizations

3:1 (2016) 26–34 | www.jtse.utm.my | eISSN 2289–9790 |

 Journal of Transport System Engineering 3:1 (2016) 26–34

CONCLUSION [3] Blyenburgh, P. 1999. UAVs: An overview. air & space

europe, Volume 1. 43-47
[4] Gudmundsson, S. 2013. General aviation aircraft
The aim of this study is to examine the structural
design. chapter 9: the anatomy of the aircraft wing,
design of a semi-monoque composite wing for Volume 1. Butterworth Heinemann. 301-398.
CAMAR UAV using numerical model. The [5] Ainsworth, J., Collier, C., Yarrington, P., Lucking, R.
developed model based on the desired design And Locke, J. 2010. Airframe wing-box preliminary
shows the capability to estimate the maximum design and weight prediction. Society of Allied
deflection, weight and the stiffness of the wing by Weight Engineers. SAWE. 40-41.
comparing with Tsai-Hill and Tsai-Wu criteria. In [6] Anderson, J. 2011. Fundamentals of aerodynamics.
addition, the developed model also allows the chapter 7: wing loading. McGraw-Hill Higher
th
Education, 5 Edition. 726-732.
optimization process of the CAMAR UAV wing
[7] Reytier, T., Bes, C., Marechal, P., Bianciardi, M. And
design to be done easily in order to have the best
Santgerma, A. 2012. Generation of correlated stress
configurations at the minimum weight. time histories from continuous turbulence power
spectral density for fatigue analysis of aircraft
The optimization of the thickening the root rib and structures. International Journal of Fatigue. 147-152.
reducing the thickness of the main spar is a [8] Mazhar, F. And Khan, A. 2010. Structural design of a
st
success in maintaining a good strength to weight uav wing using finite element method. 51
ratio as the UAV wing design is still stiff enough to AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural
conquer the loadings acted upon it. It can be seen Dynamics, And Materials Conference, AIAA 2010-
3099.
that after optimization have been done on the
[9] Sullivan, R., Rohani, M., Lacy, T. And Alday, N. 2006.
UAV wing, the value of Tsai Hill decreased to
Structural testing of an ultralight uav composite
0.1020, which is desired, and the value of Tsai-Wu th
wing. 47 AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures,
also decreased to 0.09851. On top of that, the Structural Dynamics, And Materials Conference, AIAA
value of deflection also decreased from 1.780 mm 2006-1870.
to 0.8526 mm. The slight decrease on both Tsai- [10] Jagdale, V., Stanford, B., Patil, A. And Ifju, P. 2009.
Wu and deflection values of the UAV wing design Multidisciplinary shape and layup optimization of a
is anticipated, as the justification is that the mass bendable composite uav wing. AIAA 2009-1067.
is managed to be decreased from 7.11195 [11] Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 2012.
Aviation maintenance technician handbook –
kilograms to 6.70721 kilograms. The decrease of
Airframe (FAA-H-8083-31), Volume 2. 10-34.
about 5.79714% is crucial towards the structural
[12] Sodzi, P. 2009. Damage tolerant wing-fuselage
property of the UAV. integration structural design. Cranfield University.
PhD Thesis. 122-127.
Nevertheless, the results obtained in this study is [13] Perkins, D. And Hage, E. 1949. Airplane
just an approximation. Thus, it is necessary to performance, stability and control. Chapter 4:
st
perform fabrication of the CAMAR UAV wing that Aircraft Performance. Wiley Publications. 1 Edition.
is designed and conduct experimental testing in 358-376.
order to validate the results obtained in this study. [14] Sforza, P. 2014. Commercial airplane design
principle. Appendix c: Airfoil and wing theory
analysis. Butterworth Heinemann. Volume 1. 447-
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 559.
[15] Perry, J. 1950. Aircraft structures. Chapter 3: Wing
st
The authors gratefully acknowledge the configurations. Dover Publications, Inc. 1 Edition.
Aeronautics Laboratory (Aerolab), Universiti 322-353.
[16] Schaeffer, D. And Golubitsky, M. 1979. Boundary
Teknologi Malaysia for the research facilities
conditions and mode jumping in the buckling of a
support and Ministry of Education, Malaysia for rectangular plate. Communications In Mathematical
the financial support through the FRGS grant, No. Physics. Spinger Publications. 209-236.
4F727. [17] Lee, Y. 1983. Automatic finite element generation
based on constructive solid geometry. Phd Thesis.
REFERENCES University of Leeds, United Kingdom.

[1] Jagdale, V., Viana, F., Haftka, R. And Ifju, P. 2009.

Conceptual design of a bendable uav wing
considering aerodynamic and structural
performance. AIAA 2010-2761.
[2] Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 2012.
Aviation maintenance technician handbook –
Airframe (FAA-H-8083-31), Volume 1, Aircraft
Structures. 46-48.

3:1 (2016) 26–34 | www.jtse.utm.my | eISSN 2289–9790 |