Introduction To Aircraft | AERO2376

The Design & Construction of a

Glider

Student Name: Taj-Sharif-Nasr Cooper

Student ID: s4090908
Date: 08/06/2024
Word Count: 3138
 Table of Contents
Introduction To Aircraft | AERO2376 _______________________________________________ 1
I. Introduction ______________________________________________________________ 3
II. Mission Requirements _____________________________________________________ 3
III. Aircraft Configurations ______________________________________________________ 3
IV. Wing & Fuselage Design ____________________________________________________ 5
VI. Conclusion ________________________________________________________________ 9
VII. References _______________________________________________________________ 10
 I. Introduction
This report documents the process and outcomes in the completion of the ‘Design & Build a Glider’
assessment task from the ‘Introduction to Aircraft’ course. A lightweight glider will be constructed
fulfilling numerous mission requirements which will be accomplished through the applications of
aircraft principles discussed in the Introduction to Aircraft course along with inspiration drawn from
existing glider designs. Where its design process, construction, and performance analysis will be
thoroughly covered here.

II. Mission Requirements

The design, construction, and performance analysis of the homebuilt glider will be centered around the
following mission requirements:

• Fly in a stable manner with passive stability

- By considering the glider’s center of gravity, wing configuration, and overall aerodynamics, the
glider should be able to maintain a stable flight path without active control inputs.

• Demonstrate a constant and predictable glide

- Calculating and researching optimal angle of attack, wing planforms, aspect ratio, center of gravity,
and other wing characteristics to optimize the lift-to-drag ratio will be key to maintaining a steady
glide slope.

• Be able to perform a turning maneuver where the aircraft is hand-launched and perform a 360 turn back
to the location of launch.
- To achieve this, it is essential to maintain appropriate yaw stability and control authority, ensuring
the tail dimensions and assembly are well-balanced and necessary rudder surface deflection is
implemented to maintain the banking and a 360 turn.

III. Aircraft Configurations

The foremost crucial step towards achieving the mission requirements and constructing a lightweight
glider is the choice material. Once this was chosen the aircraft configuration could then account for the
constraints and limitations posed by the material at hand. After research and analyzing similarly scaled
projects it was nominated down to three materials that is cardboard, foam board, and balsa wood. Foam
board was ultimately chosen due to its availability, ease of manipulation using available tools, and
balance of weight and structural integrity, making it ideal for constructing the fuselage wings, and other
components of the glider.

A. Wing Configuration
Vertical Wing Location
- The wings for the glider were selected to have a high-wing placement, as it offers increased ground
clearance which reduces the risk of the wings being damaged during landing and eases the aircraft’s
ability to be hand launched, unlike a low-wing design. This configuration also offers enhanced
structural stability as it allows the wings to be mounted as a single piece cantilevered over the top
of the fuselage, relieving some of the stress from the wings onto the body of the aircraft itself. Its
cantilevered placement also allows the wings to be simply attached above the fuselage using
multiple rubber bands, making it easy to test multiple wing design iterations and replacing it in the
case it gets damaged without having to alter the aircraft itself, not possible with a mid-wing design.
This placement also provides additional stability to the aircraft due to the pendulum effect [1],
whereby the center of mass is located below the wing which passively stabilizes the aircraft as it’ll
have a tendency to self-correct during flight.

Vertical Wing Angle

- Additionally, a dihedral angle was incorporated into the wings to passively provide lateral stability
[1] through an upward angle from the root to the tip which produces a stabilizing rolling moment
 when the glider is disturbed from level flight returning it to its equilibrium. This is a common
configuration featured in almost all aircraft, especially gliders.

Wing Planform
- The wings were chosen to be tapered on both leading and trailing edges which proves to be
structurally efficient and a reduction in the aircraft’s overall drag including induced drag caused by
wingtip vortices [2]. It also allows for a higher aspect ratio to be applied, thereby increasing the lift-
to-drag ratio which is a crucial component in achieving a longer and more efficient glide ratio for
gliders. Alternative wing designs such as an elliptical wing were too complicated to construct and
other designs simply weren’t as optimal for a glider, hence the prevalence of tapered wings in most
real-world glider aircrafts.

B. Wing Aerofoil Profile

A simple flat plate aerofoil was chosen solely due to its ease of manufacturability and widely available
data on its flight characteristics. Especially its lift curve which displays the relationship between the
angle of attack and the coefficient of lift, understanding this allows us to determine an optimum angle
of attack that maximizes the potential lift generated by the wings. More efficient and ideal aerofoil
profiles were considered especially those that promoted laminar airflow, which provide much lower
drag at an intermediate range of angle of attack, hence the prevalence in real world gliders. Specifically,
the Selig S3021 aerofoil, designed especially for low Reynold numbers which our scale glider would
fall under. However, attempting to replicate the precise shape of this profile proved hard as the foam
bard that was sourced wasn’t ideal for this application and the tools such as cutter knife simply weren’t
able to consistently replicate the shape across the entire wing. Other simpler but efficient aerofoils were
also considered but ran into the exact same problem. Settling with a flat plate seemed to be the foul-
proof option.

C. Control Surfaces
It was ultimately decided that the wings would be designed without typical control surfaces such as
ailerons, as the rudder and elevators should deem sufficient for the required maneuvers as per mission
requirements, in hopes of reducing the complexity of the aircraft.

D. Empennage Configuration
Empennage Structure
- The conventional tail structure was determined for the glider, in likeness to the high-wing layout
allows it to easily be rubber banded above the aircraft’s fuselage for changes in design iteration and
ease of replaceability in the case the component is damaged without needing to alter the aircraft
itself. Even though a T-tail configuration offers improved control authority the modularity of the
conventional tail was chosen over the marginal improvements in the latter.

Empennage Planform
- The leading edges of both the horizontal and vertical tail surfaces incorporated tapered leading
edges to reduce drag whilst the trailing edges were kept flat to maximize control authority, keeping
an optimum balance between effective control and aerodynamic efficiency.

E. Fuselage Configuration
Fuselage Structure and Shape
- The fuselage was designed to have a larger front section to provide enough structural support for
the wings and mimic the appearance of real-world gliders gradually tapering towards the tail as
there isn’t as a structural strain, saving additional weight. It maintains a thin smooth silhouette,
minimizing cross-sectional area and avoiding sharp edges to reduce drag and ensure smooth airflow
improving stability.
 IV. Wing & Fuselage Design
Now that the configuration of various components of the glider have been determined, calculations are
necessary to derive the optimal dimensions of the wing, empennage, and fuselage of the aircraft based
on assumed values and aerodynamic principles to ensure it is capable of achieving the mission
requirements. The calculations will be performed in chronological order from Wing area > Wing
Dimensions > Tail Area > Tail Dimensions > Fuselage Dimensions, as each component will utilize
values derived from preceding calculated components.

A. Wing Area
To derive the aircraft’s wing area the lift equation is used and is then algebraically rearranged to solve
for the wing area (𝑆), expressed by the formula:

1 𝐿
𝐿 = 2 𝜌𝑆𝐶𝐿 → 𝑆 = 1
𝐶𝐿 ×2𝜌𝑣 2

In order to find the values required further calculations are necessary and multiple assumptions are to
be established. The first assumption is to consider lift (𝐿) being equivalent to the aircraft’s total weight
(𝑊). Reasoned by the fact that in level flight, the lift generated by the wings is expected to balance the
aircraft's weight to maintain altitude.

To determine weight, the approximate amount of material required were measured on a kitchen scale
which measured to around 250 grams, the addition of implementing a safety of 20% increased this value
to 300 grams, where the weight in newtons is then calculated below:

𝑊 =𝑚×𝑔 𝑊 = 0.3 × 9.81 𝑊 = 2.943𝑁

Now given that the gradient (𝑎) of a lift curve slope has an approximate value of 0.109 according to
thin wing theory and choosing a target angle of attack (𝛼) of 7 degrees, selected as it is within an
optimal range on the lift curve slope for a flat plate airfoil to produce maximum lift. We can calculate
an assumption of the lift coefficient (𝐶𝐿 ) which is formulated by:

𝐶𝐿 = 𝑎 ⋅ 𝛼 𝐶𝐿 = 0.109 ⋅ 7 𝐶𝐿 = 0.763

Next is to approximate a value for the velocity (𝑣). An experiment was conducted, whereby a scrunched
paper was thrown with an amount of force alike to throwing a hand glider. Measuring the distance (𝑑)
of ground impact of the paper to its thrower of 6m and determining time as the amount of time (𝑡) it
took for the thrown projectile to hit the ground which was found to be 1s. The velocity can be calculated
using the formulae below:

𝑑 6
𝑣= 𝑣 = 1 𝑣 = 6𝑚𝑠 −1
𝑡

Another assumption is presuming an air density (𝜌) of 1.255 kg/m³. Utilizing the International Standard
Atmosphere air density at sea level.

Given Assumptions, where:

- 𝐿 = 𝑊 = 2.943𝑁 - 𝐴𝑅 = 8
- 𝜌 = 1.225 kg/ m³ - Flat Plate Aerofoil
- 𝑣 = 6𝑚𝑠 −1 - 𝛼 = 7°
- 𝐶𝐿 = 0.763
 𝐿 2.943
𝑆= 1 𝑆= 1 𝑆 = 0.164𝑚2
𝐶𝐿 ×2𝜌𝑣 2 0.763×2×1.225×62

B. Wing Dimensions
By deriving the wing area (𝑆), it is now possible to calculate other dimensions of wing such as the
wingspan and chords of the wing.

Using the aspect ratio (𝐴𝑅) formula where a value of 8 will be chosen as a higher aspect ratio provides
a superior lift-to-drag ratio [2], refraining choosing a value too high to maintain ease of
manufacturability and structural stability. We can solve for the wingspan (𝑏):

𝑏2
𝐴𝑅 = 𝑏 = √𝐴𝑅 × 𝑆 𝑏 = √8 × 0.164 𝑏 = 1.145𝑚
𝑆

With the calculated wingspan value, the chord can now be derived, though since this is a tapered wing
planform this will labeled as the average chord (𝐶𝑎𝑣𝑔 ):

𝑆 0.164
(𝐶𝑎𝑣𝑔 ) = 𝑏 (𝐶𝑎𝑣𝑔 ) = 1.145 (𝐶𝑎𝑣𝑔 ) = 0.143𝑚

Using the average chord an ideal root (𝐶𝑟 ) and tip (𝐶𝑡 ) chord scaled by a chosen taper ratio (𝜆) of 0.5
can be calculated. Which has been selected as it's the closest rounded ratio to the optimal taper ratio
value of 0.4 [3] without being too complicated to manufacture and manage structure wise, which is said
to have a minimum induced drag coefficient and maximum Oswald efficiency factor. Formulated by
[4]:

2𝑆 2⋅0.164
𝐶𝑟 = 𝑏(1+𝜆) 𝐶𝑟 = 1.145⋅(1+0.5) 𝐶𝑟 = 0.191𝑚

𝐶𝑡 = 𝜆𝐶𝑟 𝐶𝑡 = 0.5 ⋅ 0.191 𝐶𝑡 = 0.96𝑚

C. Tail Dimensions
Next in order are the tail dimensions. Since the tail section of an aircraft is calculated in proportion to
its wing section a lot of the above calculated values will be utilized here.

Horizontal Tail Area

An optimal horizontal tail area (𝑆ℎ ) is said to consist of 25% of the wing area, whereby:

𝑆ℎ = 0.25 × 𝑆 𝑆ℎ = 0.25 × 0.164 𝑆ℎ = 0.041𝑚2

Vertical Tail Area

A similar approach is used to calculate an optimal vertical tail area (𝑆𝑣 ) though it is instead 12.5% of
the wing area, whereby:

𝑆𝑣 = 0.125 × 𝑆 𝑆𝑣 = 0.125 × 0.164 𝑆𝑣 = 0.0205𝑚2

Horizontal Tail Dimensions

For the horizontal tail the same taper ratio of 0.5 will be utilized. However, a much lower aspect ratio
value of 5 will be used as an aspect ratio of 4 – 5 seem to be the common ranges implemented in aircrafts
[5]. Similar procedures as the wings will be used here to calculate the horizontal tail wingspan (𝑏ℎ ),
chord (𝑐𝑎𝑣𝑔, ℎ ), tapered root (𝑐𝑟, ℎ ), and tip chords (𝑐𝑡, ℎ ), whereby:

𝑏ℎ = √𝐴𝑅ℎ × 𝑆ℎ 𝑏ℎ = √5 × 0.041 𝑏ℎ = 0.453𝑚

 𝑆 0.041
𝑐𝑎𝑣𝑔, ℎ = 𝑏ℎ 𝑐𝑎𝑣𝑔, ℎ = 0.453 𝑐𝑎𝑣𝑔, ℎ = 0.091𝑚
ℎ

2𝑆ℎ 2×0.041
𝑐𝑟, ℎ = 𝑏 𝑐𝑟, ℎ = 0.453(1+0.5) 𝑐𝑟, ℎ = 0.121𝑚
ℎ (1+𝜆)

𝑐𝑡, ℎ = 𝜆 × 𝑐𝑟, ℎ 𝑐𝑡, ℎ = 0.5 × 0.121 𝑐𝑡, ℎ = 0.061𝑚

Vertical Tail Dimensions

The vertical tail will also incorporate the same taper ratio of 0.5. However, its aspect ratio will be
derived utilizing the relationship below, whereby:

𝑏𝑣2 0.2022
𝐴𝑅𝑣 = 𝐴𝑅𝑣 = 𝐴𝑅𝑣 ≈ 2
𝑆𝑣 0.205

Using the aspect ratio to then calculate the vertical tail wingspan (𝑏𝑣 ), chord (𝑐𝑎𝑣𝑔, 𝑣 ), tapered root
(𝑐𝑟, 𝑣 ), and tip chords (𝑐𝑡, 𝑣 ), whereby:

𝑏𝑣 = √𝐴𝑅𝑣 × 𝑆𝑣 𝑏𝑣 = √2 × 0.0205 𝑏𝑣 = 0.202𝑚

𝑆 0.0205
𝑐𝑎𝑣𝑔, 𝑣 = 𝑏𝑣 𝑐𝑎𝑣𝑔, 𝑣 = 𝑐𝑎𝑣𝑔, 𝑣 = 0.101
𝑣 0.202

2𝑆𝑣 2×0.0205
𝑐𝑟, 𝑣 = 𝑏 𝑐𝑟, 𝑣 = 0.202(1+0.5) 𝑐𝑟, 𝑣 = 0.135𝑚
𝑣 (1+𝜆)

𝑐𝑡, 𝑣 = 𝜆 × 𝑐𝑟, 𝑣 𝑐𝑡, 𝑣 = 0.5 × 0.135 𝑐𝑡, 𝑣 = 0.068𝑚

Fuselage Dimensions
Lastly the dimensions of the length of the fuselage (𝐹𝑙 ) will be calculated based on the optimal
recommendation of it being approximately 75% of the wingspan (𝑏) and the corresponding fuselage’s
height (𝐹ℎ ) being 15% of the fuselage’s length (𝐹𝑙 ).

𝐹𝑙 = 0.75 × 𝑏 𝐹𝑙 = 0.75 × 1.145 𝐹𝑙 = 0.859𝑚

𝐹ℎ = 0.15 × 𝐹𝑙 𝐹ℎ = 0.15 × 0.86 𝐹ℎ = 0.129𝑚

D. Manufacturing & Assembly

Using common materials and fabrication methods allows a construction of a lightweight and relatively
durable aircraft. Using the blueprint as shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2 as reference, the materials and
methodology are as follows:

Materials & Equipment

- 3x 5mm Foam Board, each measuring 500 x 770mm -Hot glue gun with sufficient hot glue sticks
- Wooden chopstick - 6x Rubber Bands
- Exacto Knife - Ruler
- Blu Tack - Pencil

Manufacturing & Assembly Instructions

1. Use the ruler to measure out the dimensions of the fuselage and outline in approximation to the
shape shown in Figure 2 onto the foamboard
2. Cut out three identical pieces using the Exacto knife following the drawn outline
3. Stack and align the three fuselage pieces using hot glue to bond them together
4. Using the ruler measure and outline the wing on the foamboard according to calculated dimensions
and cut it out
5. 15cm from the root chord on each side of the wing make a partial cut, ensuring the cut doesn’t go
entirely through the bottom leaving the paper layer on the bottom intact
6. Bend each cut side upwards to a 10-degree angle to form a dihedral and apply hot glue between the
gaps to secure the angle
7. Using the ruler measure and outline the horizontal tail and vertical tails on the foam board and cut
them out
8. For the vertical tail outline a rectangular rudder area that maximizes area without compromising
structural integrity, cut it out ensuring it doesn’t cut through the paper on a chosen side depending on
desired turn direction
9. Deflect the rudder to desired turn rate and add Blu Tack between the gaps to maintain the deflection
10. Hot glue the vertical tail aligning it onto the midsection of the horizontal tail
11. Secure the wing to the fuselage with three rubber bands, and place Blu Tack between the wing and
the fuselage to set a 7-degree angle of attack
12. Secure the tail assembly to the fuselage using three rubber bands

Figure 1: Top View of Glider Blueprint

Source: Primary

Figure 2: Side View of Glider Blueprint

Source: Primary
V. Stability & Performance Analysis
To understand and analyze the glider’s stability characteristics, maneuverability issues, and the
performance of the glider under these conditions, the fundamental forces and moments acting on the
aircraft during its flight must be identified and discussed.

In order to fulfill the mission requirement, the aircraft was given a rightward rudder deflection. This
caused the aircraft to fly in a continuous right bank, under which it experienced several forces and
moments. As the aircraft was launched, lift was generated by the wings acting upwards opposing the
weight force acting downward on the glider due to gravity in constant magnitude and direction,
maintaining flight. As the aircraft’s rudder deflection was directed to the right, a yawing moment was
induced in a rightward direction, causing a difference in air movement along the glider’s left and right
wing, decreasing lift on that side and creating a rolling moment to the right. Consequently, a tilted lift
vector was produced resulting in both a vertical component opposing gravity and a horizontal
component that drove the glider to turn further.

During the flight, drag force opposite to the glider’s flight path was produced, exacerbated as the bank
angle deepens due to higher induced drag from an increased angle of attack and additional wing loading.
The combination of increased drag and diminished lift from the reduced lift vector caused the aircraft
to experience a pitch down moment, as the center of gravity is positioned slightly forward of the center
of lift causing a nose down tendency during flight. As a result, the glider continually lost altitude
ultimately making contact with the ground.

During its flight several issues arose in terms of stability characteristics and maneuverability:
- Excessive bank angle: Over deflection of the rudder caused the glider to enter an excessively steep
bank angle, causing it to stall.
- Moderate Glide Time: The glide time was insufficient to complete a 360-degree, which necessitated
a compromise of a sharper rudder deflection in expense of glide time and stability.
- Pitch Down Issue: The glider’s elevators were unable to compensate for the pitch down during its
steep banking.

Upwards of 30 test flights were conducted and smaller scaled prototypes were created, continually
analyzing and adjusting components to increase flight performance and stability. Though improved, the
issues above were never fully diminished, and it was concluded to likely be systemic issues with the
aircraft.

VI. Conclusion
A comprehensive analysis into the design of the glider including considerations relating to both aero
dynamics and structure has highlighted issues with performance, particularly during maneuver
scenarios such as sustained right banking. Numerous verification and validation processes were
conducted including prototype testing and flight trials which flagged up areas in which the aircraft could
be improved - notably in control surface effectiveness and weight distribution. Improving aerodynamic
efficiency, optimizing control surfaces, and refining the balance between maneuverability and stability
would further ensure it meets all mission requirements.

Acknowledgement towards Nina Rossette Rosales for assisting me in illustrating Figure 1 and Figure
2.
VII. References
[1] U S Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Pilot’s
Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, FAA-H-8083-25C. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma:
United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Airman
Testing Standards Branch, 2023.

[2] U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration, Glider flying
handbook, FAA-H-8083-13A. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: United States Department of
Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Airman Testing Standards Branch, 2013.

[3] Y. Eraslan, I. Guzelbey, and M. Doğru, “Effects of Taper Ratio on Aircraft Wing
Aerodynamic Parameters: A Comperative Study,” presented at the International
Mediterranean Science and Engineering Congress, Oct. 2018. Accessed: May 31, 2024.
[Online]. Available:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328916565_Effects_of_Taper_Ratio_on_Aircraft_
Wing_Aerodynamic_Parameters_A_Comperative_Study

[4] D. P. Raymer, Aircraft design : a conceptual approach, 6th ed. Reston, Va: American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc, 2018. Accessed: May 30, 2024. [Online].
Available:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326798586_Aircraft_Design_A_Conceptual_Appro
ach_Sixth_Edition

[5] M. H. Sadraey, Aircraft design : a systems engineering approach. Chichester, West

Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, 2012. Accessed: May 27, 2024. [Online]. Available:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781118352700