1

ACTIVE RESPONSE AIRCRAFT PROJECT FINAL PROPOSAL

Keith D. Caldwell

Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering, Arizona State University

FSE 100: Introduction to Engineering

Monday. Nov. 27, 2023 11:59 am MST!

 2

Abstract

During the past ten weeks in the FSE 100: Introduction to Engineering course, we have
been working on a final design project for a disaster relief aircraft. This report contains a com-
plete overview and summary of the work that was conducted during these weeks. Each week
came with its own challenge and particular area of interest, although I believe the final outcome
given the short time period was a positive one.

Introduction

First, let's define the problem. New Orleans, Louisiana, and its surrounding area are
prone to experiencing multiple natural disasters each year. These disasters can include hurri-
canes, earthquakes, tornadoes, and wildfires. These disasters usually cause significant destruction
and result in emergency situations. It is our belief that the response to these emergency situations
and disasters can be aided by the production of a “disaster relief aircraft”. Some specific exam-
ples would be: extinguishing a wildfire from the air using aircraft to deploy firefighting materi-
als, or rescuing stranded citizens who are unable to evacuate after a hurricane. Our intended pri-
mary stakeholders are emergency response personnel, and first responders, who work for gov-
ernment or non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that deal with natural disasters. First Re-
sponders risk their lives every day to help citizens. They need the best and most effective equip-
ment to get their jobs done safely and efficiently and agencies like the Red Cross, or the United
States Coast Guard could potentially have a use for our aerial solutions.

POV Statements

Example #1: A mother and her two children have been trapped on the roof of their house by the
rising water level and the damage caused by a recent hurricane. They need to be safely rescued
and evacuated by first responders.

User: Emergency Response Personnel

Need: To Rescue and Evacuate the stranded citizens.

Insight: First Responders may have trouble reaching the victims in order to evacuate them safely
due to the water levels and infrastructure destruction that can result from a bad hurricane.

Example #2: A recent wildfire has been ravaging the area and is heading toward a largely
populated area with many homes and businesses in its path.

User: Emergency Response Personnel

Need: To fight against the advance of the wildfire.

 3

Insight: Fighting a wildfire from the air may be safer and more effective than fighting it from the
ground.

Requirements

• Needs to be able to transport multiple passengers including livestock, wildlife, and people

• Needs to be adaptable to employ multiple tactical relief methods

• Needs to be reliable in harsh and unforgiving conditions to maintain high safety standards

• Needs to be able to respond quickly to rapidly evolving emergency situations

• Needs to be cost-effective and profitable for all parties.

Criteria

• What is the minimum response time of the aircraft?

• What is the maximum capacity for the transport of the aircraft?

• What is the durability and reliability of the aircraft?

• How many different natural disaster situations could the aircraft be utilized in?

• How much does this aircraft cost to manufacture, maintain, and operate?
 4

With our intended primary stakeholders and mission in mind we decided that the optimal
design would be an active response aircraft that we would use to respond to rescue situations that
involve civilians and animals. Our aircraft's primary mission is to evacuate these people from
dangerous areas to get them to safety.

Background

“New Orleans is a city more vulnerable than most when it comes to storm surges. There
are two main reasons for this. The first reason is New Orleans’ low elevation in relation to sea
level, the second reason is the lack of nature’s best defense against a storm surge; wetlands and
barrier islands.” [4]. Hurricanes and tropical storms have a more serious effect on the New Or-
leans area than most other locations and because of this, we decided to create our headquarters in
this area. Since we want to fly rescue missions this area seemed like a prime candidate because
of the likely need for air evacuation due to the low elevations and lack of wetlands or barrier is-
lands.

Currently, the market has many aircraft that specialize in evacuation missions such as the
H145 helicopter, which is a small dual-engine transport helicopter that has seen use in many
places including China [5]. There is also the Airbus C295, a mid-sized transport aircraft designed
by a Spanish aerospace company, which has been used for medical evacuation by The Spanish
Air Force in places like Madrid [7]. In the United States, we have seen the use of aircraft such as
the C-17, a large military transport aircraft, which “converts to provide aeromedical evacuation
to patients in a broad variety of conditions. The aircraft has played critical roles in various con-
tingencies, bringing warfighters to higher levels of care, bringing patients home to the U.S., and
aiding in humanitarian efforts to save the lives of those impacted by natural disasters.” [8]. When
it comes to adaptability our aircraft could also be used to help fight wildfires. In wildfire fire
fighting situations there has also been a lot of innovation and recent regulation. One example is
the planned transition to Flourine-Free Foam by the FAA for aerial firefighting aircraft [9]. We
believe that our aircraft could incorporate the best of all of these designs and thus fill a need in
the market while creating value for our shareholders.
 5

Design Overview

Our mid-sized active response aircraft is a dual jet-engined transport aircraft that has a
large cargo space with enough capacity to transport multiple passengers and a few mid to large-
size animals. It features a large cargo door over ten feet tall for easy loading and unloading and
seating for up to 25 people. Some of the important features of our aircraft include the automated
Defrost/Rain Wiper system and the large bay area for added cargo space. “Icing” is a very com-
mon issue that aircraft experience in low-temperature settings. This automatic system should
help reduce the workload for our pilots and make our machines easier to operate. The New Or-
leans area should allow our active response aircraft to respond to at least 8 hurricane rescue mis-
sions per year with a 6-week duration for each use. This adds up to a total of 48 weeks of use
during the year. Our aircraft also features two GE-90 (jet) engines with a hover feature to aid in
vertical rescue operations. Our aircraft has a payload capacity of 110 kN and a range of 7012 km.
It has an endurance of .64 hours and a cruise speed of 3049 m/s. The initial cost to manufacture
this design is 25.58 million USD. It has a yearly earning potential of 16 million USD per year
and a total aircraft life span of 3 years. The total lifetime worth of the design is estimated at 9.89
million USD, and the ROI is 38.7%. Both of these numbers are positive which means this project
does appear to be feasible.

Some of the major trade-offs we made when designing our aircraft involved cost and per-
formance. A big problem we ran into was the weight of our aircraft. As we made the payload size
larger, not only did the total cost of materials go up but different components like the wings
needed to be designed with increased strength to support it. A larger wing made of stronger mate-
rials tends to cost more but will give improved performance. Where we gained in lowering the
total cost of our aircraft we lost out on the total aircraft capacity. Another important trade-off we
made during the design process had to do with the aircraft use and cargo space setup. In order for
us to seat and transport a small amount of passengers while keeping the aircraft agile and fast we
became very limited in the amount of cargo items we could carry. The seating in the aircraft
takes up valuable cargo space that could be used for another purpose if we want it with another
design. An example of this would be leaving cargo space for a forklift or generator. In the end,
we decided to prioritize the speed and mobility of the aircraft and the comfort of our passengers
when we designed the interior of our Active Response Aircraft.
 6

3 View Engineering Drawing

 7

Aircraft Performance

The interior design of our active response aircraft has an estimated cargo capacity of
15,799 lbs. Our wing design had a chord length of 2 meters, a thickness-to-chord ratio of 0.05, a
Camber of 0.01, and a span length of 28 meters. With this wing design, we were able to achieve
a Lift-to-drag ratio of 216.65 with a total cost of $908.87. After inputting our parameters into our
simulator we were able to achieve a range of 7012 km and an endurance of .64 hours. The en-
durance numbers are a bit disappointing and resulted from an oversight in our wing design and
the total aircraft weight with fuel and cargo. We initially wanted to limit the total cost of our de-
sign so we engineered the components to be cheaper which placed them at the bottom limit of
the total possible performance. This means that our wing design is not really feasible. It would
need to be updated to be larger and use stronger materials to support the necessary operational
empty weight (OEW) and have a buffer for any future oversights.

Interior Design

1. Mission Profile 1 (Active Response Aircraft): For emergency response situations where time
is the biggest factor. This is a rapid-response aircraft that has the ability to evacuate people
from dire circumstances. For this profile, size and weight should be kept to a minimum, but it
should allow for cargo space of up to 25 people. A powerful propulsion system capable of al-
lowing the aircraft to reach high speeds with limited drag and the ability to make landings in
remote locations is a must. Also needs to have the ability to “hover” in place so that a non-
landing rescue can be performed. Range and endurance are less important factors so they can
 8

be sacrificed. We also want to minimize the amount of time from landing to re-takeoff so that
multiple rescues can be performed in a limited amount of time.

2. Mission Profile 2 (Search Aircraft): A search drone that has the ability to fly long
ranges and stay airborne for long periods of time. For this aircraft, the most important factor
would be endurance. This aircraft does not need to have much cargo capacity because its use is
strictly reconnaissance. It would carry cameras and tracking equipment. Speed is important,
but what's more important is the ability to have a stable flight with the use of night vision
cameras, radar, audio, thermal imaging…etc.

3. Mission Profile 3 (Large Payload Aircraft): An aircraft that has the ability to move
large payloads. These payloads could include cattle, animals, equipment, valuable property…
etc. The most important factor for this aircraft would be cargo capacity. We would also want a
large cargo space to allow the most room for our payload. Easy loading and unloading of cargo
is another important factor that needs to be prioritized. The speed of this aircraft is not impor-
tant so it can be minimized, while the range of this aircraft should be maximized.

Final Analysis:

The diagrams and table on the next pages depict the predicted estimated payload sizes as well as
the type of cargo for each of our 3 aircraft mission profiles. There is also a decision matrix and
an estimation of total aircraft dimensions. All of these data points were used to help determine
the best option going forward. After finishing with a total score of 4.4 from the decision matrix,
and with the understanding that the most important factors to our success are a rapid response
time and the ability to have the most adaptable aircraft that can be utilized in most situations. We
were able to determine that in our project the optimum solution would be the Active Response
Aircraft. While the Active Response Aircraft is the most expensive option it also will be the most
impactful.

Active Response Aircraft

• Estimated Cargo Capacity: 15,799 lbs

• Estimated Total Cabin Length: 25 feet
• Estimated Total Fuselage Length: 35 feet
• Estimated Total Fuselage Height: 12 feet
• Estimated Total Fuselage Width: 15 feet
9
 10

Search Aircraft

• Estimated Cargo Capacity: 112 lbs

• Estimated Total Cabin Length: 6 feet
• Estimated Total Fuselage Length: 8 feet
• Estimated Total Fuselage Height: 2 feet
• Estimated Total Fuselage Width: 2 feet
 11

Large Payload Aircraft

• Estimated Cargo Capacity: 184,250 lbs

• Estimated Total Cabin Length: 150 feet
• Estimated Total Fuselage Height: 25 feet
• Estimated Total Fuselage Length: 200 feet
• Estimated Total Fuselage Width: 20 feet
 12

Decision Matrix

Wing Design

For the wing design our goal was to utilize the wing simulator: Zhukovsky Aerofoil [10], to “ex-
plore how input parameters like chord length, maximum thickness-to-chord ratio, camber, angle
of attack, and span affect important performance characteristics of the wing such as lift and drag
coefficients.” [11] I chose 3 specific relationships to run experiments on in order to show the
most important factors in designing our aircraft’s wing. The relationships are Span (Input) vs.
Drag (Output), Camber (Input) vs Lift (Output), and Chord (Input) vs Lift (Output). Below I
have compiled multiple plots and graphics that show the results of these experiments. I was un-
able to make predictions of the results because I have no experience with airfoils.

I. Span Length (Input) vs. Drag (Output): For our first experiment we wanted to test the effect
that a change in span had on the drag coefficient. All other variables were left as constants and
remained unchanged during the experiment. The Span length was increased from the mini-
mum value of 1 meter to the maximum value of 90 meters in 1 meter increments. At each in-
dividual increment, the data points were recorded. The results are shown below with Figure A
and Figure B showing the airfoils at minimum and maximum values.

Constants used in the experiment:

Chord Length (meters): 2
 13

Max Thickness to Chord ratio: 0.16

Camber: 0.1
Angle of Attack (degrees) : 0

Minimum Span Length Maximum Span Length

Figure A Figure B

Plot 1

Table 1
 14

Results: In the first experiment we were able to determine that the wing span length was an ex-
ponential function when compared to the drag coefficient. The higher the span length went the
closer the drag coefficient got to zero but at a decreasing rate.

II.Camber (Input) vs Lift (Output): For our second experiment we wanted to test the effect
that a change in camber had on the lift coefficient. All other variables were left as constants
and remained unchanged during the experiment. The Camber value was increased from the
minimum value of 0 meters to the maximum value of 0.1 meters in 0.01 increments. At each
individual increment, the data points were recorded. The results are shown below with Figure
C and Figure D showing the airfoils at minimum and maximum values.

Constants used in the experiment:

Chord Length (meters): 2
Max Thickness to Chord ratio: 0.16
Span Length (meters): 20
Angle of Attack (degrees) : 0

Minimum Camber Maximum Camber

Figure C Figure D
 15

Table 2
Plot 2

Results: In the second experiment we were able to determine that the amount of camber when
compared to the lift coefficient is a linear function. The lift increases linearly as the camber in-
creases at a steady rate.

III.Chord Length (Input) vs Lift (Output): For our last experiment we wanted to test the effect
that a change in chord length had on the lift coefficient. All other variables were left as con-
stants and remained unchanged during the experiment. The Chord length was increased from
the minimum value of 1.5 meters to the maximum value of 4 meters in 0.1 increments. At each
individual increment, the data points were recorded. The results are shown below with Figure
E and Figure F showing the airfoils at minimum and maximum values.

Constants used in the experiment:

Camber: 0.1
Max Thickness to Chord ratio: 0.16
Span Length (meters): 20
Angle of Attack (degrees) : 0
 16

Minimum Chord Length Maximum Chord Length

Figure E Figure F

Plot 3

Table 3
 17

Results: In the final experiment we were able to determine that the chord length when compared
to the lift coefficient is a polynomial function. As the chord length increases the lift coefficient
decreases at a decreasing rate.
Wing Spar

With the wing spar design our goal was to utilize the Wing Structural Simulator [12], to create
three different wing structure proposals for the wing “spar” and to select the best option for our
project. Our wing shape data and the previous payload estimate of 15,799 lbs for our Active Re-
sponse Aircraft were both used in the models.

Payload Calculations
Estimated Payload from the previous experiment: 15,799 lbs
Estimated Payload with added buffer for takeoff integrity: 20,000 lbs
Estimated Payload converted to kN(kilo Newtons): 88.9644 kN

I. Design (Small): For our design, we wanted to test out a smaller wing design to see its effec-
tiveness and utility. The small cross-sectional area of the wing made it difficult to create a spar
with enough strength in the small space of the wing. This is why we went with steel as the
building material as it is one of the stronger materials. The circle also allowed us to fit into a
smaller total area but keep the required integrity. The smaller area also allowed us to reduce
the added weight that using steel would create. I think this design is a very reasonable design
and the deflection looks nominal.
 18

Automation

We wanted to utilize the use of sensors and systems to help our pilots, rescuers, and vic-
tims. With the understanding that our aircraft’s use is for natural disasters where the weather will
be severe in most cases, I wanted to design a system that would help combat the weather. After
brainstorming and coming up with some different options, we decided to with an Automatic De-
Icer/Rain Wiper system. A very common issue that aircraft experience in low-temperature situa-
tions is “Icing”. This problem can occur on the ground, and at elevation while in flight causing
the failure or malfunction of important systems. If the proposed system is successful then it will
automatically De-Ice the aircraft’s important components and give the pilot a clear view of the
terrain. I don’t currently see a way that the system could be misused but I do see the potential for
overuse. The system should utilize both infrared and thermal sensors. It should also have an
emergency shutoff and a cool-down function for safety. Below there are three UML Diagram
Models: Use Case, Sequence, and Activity. I used these UML Models to help represent our sys-
tem.

Use Case Diagram

 19

I. Use Case Diagram: In our use case diagram, we included four different potential actors: the
pilot, maintenance workers, birds, and the weather. Each of these actors has the potential to
have an effect on our system. The pilot will be able to manually use the system to help with
the aircraft's performance. The weather will affect the sensors and the physical equipment that
we use to create our system. It will have the ability to initiate an automatic start of the system's
de-icing and or windshield wiping functions. Maintenance workers will need to service and
repair our system to keep it functional and in optimal condition. Lastly, bird strikes are a
common occurrence in aviation and we need to think about the effect a collision or impact
could have on our de-icing/rain wiping system.

Sequence Diagram

II.Sequence Diagram: For our sequence diagram we wanted to show how our automated sys-
tem might operate in chronological order. Our initiating actor for our system would be the
weather. Either the presence of and ice or rain on our aircraft should automatically trigger the
system to turn on. The infrared sensors are used in conjunction with the thermal sensors to de-
tect rain and ice on the aircraft. After the positive condition is detected the computer will deci-
pher the signals and give a command to either turn on the de-icing or the wipers. Once the ice
melts or the rain stops the system should turn off.
 20

Activity Diagram

III.Activity Diagram: The activity diagram shows a logical order of decisions and actions that
should occur while our system is in operation. The Diagram starts with the detection of ice or
rain. If the system detects ice the the de-icer is activated. If it detects rain then the wipers are
activated. When the ice is melted or the rain subsides the system should automatically turn off.
There is also a 3-minute cool down to protect the system from overuse and a 5-minute timeout
to protect against an infinite loop of faulty detection.

Arduino Model

After creating the models for our aircraft's automated systems last week, our next challenge was
to create a working circuit and code to represent it. Our aircraft’s use is for natural disasters
where the weather will be severe in most cases, thus we decided to create an automated Defrost/
Rain Wiper system. “Icing” is a very common issue that aircraft experience in low-temperature
settings. This problem can occur on the ground, and at elevation while in flight causing the fail-
ure or malfunction of important flight systems. The circuit that we designed in Tinkercad features
an LED, slide switch, temperature sensor, ambient light sensor, push button, and servo motor.
The circuit will automatically start defrosting/windshield wiping when certain parameters are hit.
 21

For example, if the temperature is at or below zero degrees Celsius, and/or if the ambient light
sensor reads low ambient light levels, the system will automatically start. It also features a man-
ual start switch and an emergency stop button. This automatic system should help reduce the
workload for our pilots and make our machines easier to operate. Below is the automation dia-
gram and code we created for our defrost/windshield wiper system.

Circuit Diagram

I. Circuit Diagram: In our circuit diagram, you can see the different inputs and outputs that our
system has. Our inputs include an ambient light sensor, a slide switch, a push button, and a tem-
perature sensor. Our outputs consist of an LED and a servo motor that functions as the place-
holder for our wiper/defrost system. This design is a proof of concept design and we were limited
to the components available in our program. There is also a power supply at the top which is be-
ing used to power our Arduino Uno.

II.Results of Automation: I believe our proof of concept design was a success. The code runs
well and all of the components operate as expected. This circuit is a little different than our UML
model simply because we were limited by the type of components we had available in the Tin-
kercad program. I would have wanted to design a heater for the important aircraft components
and use tungsten wire for the windows. I would have also liked to attach wipers to our motor. For
 22

the sake of concept though I believe our model came out as well as could be expected though it
can always be improved.

Testing and Evaluation

After running through the automatic de-icer test procedure a couple of times by myself. I
was able to verify that the test procedure was successful in allowing the user to verify that the
automatic de-icer system was functioning properly. All steps resulted in a pass outcome. The re-
quirement for the test was that the apparent outside weather was able to be manipulated. The test
took about 2 minutes to complete.

This verification testing assignment helped me see the project through the eyes of a user.
Most of the time I’ve spent during the previous phases of the disaster relief project was spent
from the perspective of a designer. The perspective change actually helped shed light on how
certain features and or procedures need to be designed with the understanding that the user may
not have an in-depth knowledge of how the product or system works, and because of this we
need to make sure that the intended function can be recreated by a layperson.

Conclusions

The final design for our Disaster Relief Project turned out to be a mid-sized Active Re-
sponse Aircraft that we will use to transport and evacuate people from dangerous areas. It is a
dual jet-engined transport aircraft that has a large cargo space with enough capacity to accom-
modate multiple passengers and a few mid to large-size animals. It features a large cargo door
over ten feet tall for easy loading and unloading and seating for up to 25 people. One of the im-
portant features of our aircraft is an automated Defrost/Rain Wiper system. “Icing” is a very
common issue that aircraft experience in low-temperature settings. This automatic system should
help reduce the workload for our pilots and make our machines easier to operate.

The main purpose of our aircraft is to complete rescue and evac missions during hurri-
canes in the New Orleans area. For these missions, it will be important to have a medium-sized
aircraft that is agile and able to quickly get in and out of remote/hazardous places. Our aircraft
also features a large side loading bay door for rapid loading and unloading which is a design that
is usually only seen in small helicopter aircraft. It also has a vertical hover feature that will allow
us to make vertical rescue missions feasible. This design will help us quickly evacuate victims
from the disaster area. I believe our “Active Response Aircraft” design is our best option to ful-
fill our customer's needs and deliver the most value.

Going forward, we need to really take a look at the wing structure design. I believe we
need to revisit and redesign this portion of the project to add to our maximum payload size so
that we can carry an adequate amount of fuel on the aircraft. I want to increase the wing size and
strength. This will add to the total cost but I believe the added benefit of a longer endurance will
 23

be an overall improvement. I also want to get more information on the technology and perfor-
mance needed for a “hover in place” feature. Right now we are utilizing two jet engines to power
our aircraft but I don't believe that this will be sufficient to get the functionality of going from
stable flight to hovering in place. Working on these areas should close some loose ends and help
improve our final design even further.

In the end, I learned some valuable lessons during the entire duration of this project. One
of the main lessons I learned was in "over-engineering”. I spent too much time focused on mak-
ing a design that had the lowest cost with the best performance that when we got to the end, al-
though the design theoretically passed our performance standards initially, In practice it was sub-
optimal. I realized that engineering on the limit is not optimal unless you plan on spending a
long time refining your designs.
 24

Works Cited

[1] “Continuing and professional education: Login discovery,” Continuing and Professional Edu-
cation | Login Discovery, https://asuce.instructure.com/courses/5796/files/1132756?
wrap=1 (accessed Sep. 23, 2023).

[2] “Continuing and professional education: Login discovery,” Continuing and Professional Edu-
cation | Login Discovery, https://asuce.instructure.com/courses/5796/files/1132508?
wrap=1 (accessed Sep. 23, 2023).

[3] “Continuing and professional education: Login discovery,” Continuing and Professional Edu-
cation | Login Discovery, https://asuce.instructure.com/courses/5796/pages/disaster-re-
lief-project-description (accessed Sep. 23, 2023).

[4] “Environmental hazards storm surge induced flooding in New Orleans Chris Below, Chris
Dierich, Keith Erickson, and Rachel Kjos,” Why New Orleans is Vulnerable, https://peo-
ple.uwec.edu/jolhm/eh3/group7/WhyNOVulnerable.htm (accessed Sep. 25, 2023).

[5] Y. Li, Research on modular scheme of aviation emergency rescue ... - iopscience, https://iop-
science.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/2364/1/012030/meta (accessed Sep. 26,
2023).

[6] Goepel, Klaus D. “AHP Priority Calculator.” AHP Calculator - AHP-OS, bpmsg.com/ahp/
ahp-calc.php?n=5&t=AHP%2Bpriorities&c%5B0%5D=Aircraft%2BResponse%2B-
Time&c%5B1%5D=Aircraft%2BCapacity&c%5B2%5D=Aircraft%2BReliability&c%5
B3%5D=Aircraft%2BAdaptability&c%5B4%5D=Aircraft%2BCost. (Accessed 28 Nov.
2023).

[7] Aero Evacuation: lifesaving missions with military aircraft (2023) Airbus.com. Available at:
https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/stories/2023-05-aero-evacuation-lifesaving-mis-
sions-with-military-aircraft (Accessed: 28 November 2023).

[8] C-17 GLOBEMASTER III: AN AIRCRAFT AS VERSATILE AS AE CREWS, Air Force Med-
ical Service. Available at: https://www.airforcemedicine.af.mil/Platforms/C-17-Globe-
master-III-An-aircraft-as-versatile-as-AE-crews/ (Accessed: 28 November 2023).

[9] Aircraft Rescue and fire fighting (ARFF) (no date) Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF)
| Federal Aviation Administration. Available at: https://www.faa.gov/airports/air-
port_safety/aircraft_rescue_fire_fighting (Accessed: 28 November 2023).

[10] 8.8 Peer Assignment: Project Memo: Wing Shape. FSE 100 CANVAS MODULES. (n.d.).
https://asuce.instructure.com/courses/5796/assignments/84142

[11] Continuing and professional education: Login discovery. Continuing and Professional Edu-
cation | Login Discovery. (n.d.). https://asuce.instructure.com/courses/5796/pages/8-
dot-7-a-guide-to-using-the-wing-simulator?module_item_id=375022
 25

[12] Wing Simulator. Available at: https://static.edpl.us/courses/gfa/fse100/html5/airplane-struc-

tural-simulator/Structural_Simulator.html (Accessed: 16 October 2023).

[13] “Lucid App: UML Diagrams.” Lucid Visual Collaboration Suite: Log In, lucid.app/docu-
ments#/documents?folder_id=home. Accessed 24 Oct. 2023.
 Appendix 26

Arduino Code
27
 28

FAT Test Procedure

29