Design 1 was proposed by Yiqing Li. It is inspired by Russian Sukhoi Su-57 fighter aircraft, which aims to increase aerodynamic efficiency by extending the back wings. The design also takes safety into consideration by adding flat wings to ensure balance. Design 2 was proposed by Joe Verdone. The design focus on the priorities — cost and efficiency. It applies the streamlined bodies to reduce drag. To minimize cost, Joe also tries to minimize the size of the back wings. Design 3 is created by Emma Jonas and Chase Lambert. The design is influenced by the sample AEV, which is modified to produce less drag and experience minimal resistance.Design 4 is created by Yiqing Li. Design 4 is adapted from the structure of the common rocket, which aims to increase the speed when AEV travels by making the nose sharp, as opposed to being rounded.
Concept Screening & Scoring Matrix
The group applied the concept of screening and scoring and made two spreadsheets. The weight of each success criteria is as follows: stability (30%), energy consumption (20%), weight (15%), cost (15%), safety (10%), appearance (10%).
Stability is worth 30% since the stability is the key factor in the AEV completing the assignment correctly. The AEV need to be stable while running on the test track and able to turn without falling down.
Energy consumption is the second most important as the goal is to make the AEV aerodynamic and efficient.
Weight and cost are each worth 15% because it is easy to reduce the cost and weight by switching materials.
Safety and appearance are worth the minimum importance since all the designed are created to be safe and the appearance doesn’t affect the performance of the AEV, and performance and energy efficiency take precedence over appearance.
The concept screening matrix illustrates that Design A will be the primary design, and Design C and D will be combined for future discussion.The scoring matrix demonstrates that Design A and C receive the highest score and will continue to be modified and constructed.
Design Simulation For Grant Proposal
The designs the group decided for the AEV featured a pointed tip, rather than round, for faster travel based on the increase in aerodynamics. The tip of the AEV was also designed to be narrower than the sample AEV. This aspect will make the AEV lighter and make it easier for the AEV to travel. Adding wings to the AEV and adding weight to the front of the vehicle are two things that can be implemented to increase the functionality and production of the AEV.
Optional Design:
This is the design of the combination of all individual designs. The group created it as a backup design for Grant Proposal.
