Pigeon Post - The Modern Homing Pigeon L3Harris

Team: Lance Ford, Spencer Kimball, Sage Mathews, Alex Mcfarland, Joseph Lamb, Kevin Naegle

Sponsor: L3Harris

Project Description

Build a lightweight, modular, fixed wing, autonomous drone to return data storage devices from a frontline combat situation. The drone must be impervious to jamming and should automatically orient itself and return to its home base.

Requirment Target Threshold Predicted Performance
Cost $300 $500 $300
Field Training Time 30 min 60 min 30 min
Base Support Training Time 120 min 180 min 100 min
Reusable 30 Flights 5 Flights 30 Flights
Sound level from 300 ft 30 dB 45 dB 30 dB
Fly in Crosswinds 20 mph 10 mph 20 mph
GPS Location Error 2 m 15 m 2.5 m
Obstacle Avoidance 20 m 10 m 20 m
Travel Distance 80 miles 20 miles 21.1 - 29.0 miles
Weight 2 pounds 5 pounds 2.65 pounds
Airspeed 60 mph 20 mph 45 – 50 mph
Calibration Time 30 sec 120 sec 64 sec
Horizontal Distance to Altitude 100 meters 200 meters 239 meters
Package Volume 5 L 9 L 4.9 L
Steps to Launch 5 steps 8 steps 7 steps

Highlighted Customer Restraints/Requirements target

  • The device shall weigh less than 2 pounds
  • The device shall be capable of flying 60 mph for a distance of 80 miles
  • The device shall be modular and fit into a 5L volume
  • The device shall employ obstacle avoidance
  • The device shall cost under 300$

Design Description

  • Initial calculations were made using USU MachUp to size the wings needed to create the needed lift for the drone.
  • This lift was then confirmed using a 3D printed airfoil and a wind tunnel 
  • Next different battery, propeller, and motor combinations were tested to find the optimum combination for the required thrust and minimum power consumption. 
  • Aircraft geometry was designed around these parameters.
  • Autopilot system was selected and researched in parallel
MachUp model
Wingspan (in) Speed (mph) Drag of Wing (lb) Lift (lb)
26" 40 .16 1.71
26" 45 .20 2.16
26" 50 .24 2.67
26" 55 .30 3.23
30" 40 .17 2.04
30" 45 .21 2.57
30" 50 .26 3.18
30" 55 .31 3.85
36" 40 .17 2.53
36" 45 .22 3.20
36" 50 .27 3.95
36" 55 .33 4.78
Prototype
Motor Propeller Battery Throttle % Thrust (lb) Efficiency (kgf/W) Current (A)
Xing 2207 2450KV 5x5 3s 60 0.51002 0.001358 14.488
Xing 2207 2450KV 5x5 3s 100 0.77653 0.001295 23.586
Xing 2207 2450KV 5x5 4s 60 0.80718 0.001115 20.316
Xing 2207 2450KV 5x5 4s 100      
Xing 2207 2450KV 6x4 3s 60 1.02584 0.002680 14.999
Xing 2207 2450KV 6x4 3s 100      
Xing 2207 2450KV 6x4 4s 60 1.35160 0.002129 17.925
Xing 2207 2450KV 6x4 4s 100      
Readytosky RS2205 2300KV 5x5 3S 60 0.26599 0.001884 5.489
Readytosky RS2205 2300KV 5x5 3S 100 0.47347 0.001756 10.704
Readytosky RS2205 2300KV 5x5 4S 60 0.45940 0.001584 8.112
Readytosky RS2205 2300KV 5x5 4S 100 0.77734 0.001363 16.168
Readytosky RS2205 2300KV 6x4 3S 60 0.54583 0.003757 5.698
Readytosky RS2205 2300KV 6x4 3S 100 0.93318 0.003256 11.490
Readytosky RS2205 2300KV 6x4 4S 60 0.93418 0.003075 8.541
Readytosky RS2205 2300KV 6x4 4S 100 1.45405 0.002393 17.357
Readytosky RS2205 2300KV 7x6 3S 60 0.69651 0.002646 10.558
Readytosky RS2205 2300KV 7x6 3S 100      
controller
modeled prototype

Performance Review

Hardware Team

Hardware Team
  • Implementation was split into a hardware build team and a software team.
  • The Hardware build team built an experimental plane to test flight characteristics and optimized its design.
  • The  Software build team bought a foam plane to research and test the autopilot software on.
  • Both teams went through multiple test iterations to arrive at the final design.
  • Nearly 10 different test flight days were conducted
  • These Iterations led to upgrades in wing design to feature a composite material and calibration of the autopilot software used.

Software Team

Software Team

Conclusion

Accomplishments:

  • Analysis, testing, and manufacture of an efficient modular drone.
  • Creation of an autonomous control system.

Lessons Learned:

  • Defining requirements early is important to the success of a project.
  • Smaller, low risk tests should be performed more often than higher risk tests.
  • Tests should be designed in a way that they do not rely on weather if possible.

Recommended Future Work:

  • Design/implement a more efficient fixed-wing flight control system.
  • Implement obstacle detection.
  • Integrate concurrent design paths