Proceedings of ICTACEM 2017

International Conference on Theoretical, Applied, Computational and Experimental Mechanics

December 28-30, 2017, IIT Kharagpur, India
ICTACEM-2017/365

A comparative evaluation of actuation methods for telescopic

span extension of HALE UAV
Tanvi Prakash a*, Hemashree Kakar b and Rajkumar S. Pant c
a
Ph. D. Candidate, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, India
b
Research Intern, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, India
c
Professor, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, India

ABSTRACT
High Altitude Long Endurance Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (HALE UAVs) are used largely for surveillance and
weather monitoring. They loiter at altitudes between 15 and 20 km with on-station endurance more than 24 hours at a
stretch. In a previous study, the feasibility of increase in endurance of such a UAV by up to three hours using telescopic
span extensions was studied. The loss of fuel space and addition of weight of mechanisms and structures was included
in that study. The present paper attempts a refined estimate of the space and weight penalties arising due to the
actuation mechanisms for telescopic span extension, using three actuation systems, viz., pneumatic, hydraulic and
electromechanical.
Keywords: HALE UAV, Telescopic Span Extension, Morphing Aircraft

1. INTRODUCTION
High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE) aircraft are a category of aircraft which operate in the
stratosphere at altitudes greater than 15 km and for durations longer than 24 hours.

One of the most popular and successful HALE aircraft of the present times is Northrop Grumman
RQ4-A Global Hawk, shown in Fig. 1, which is operated by the US Air Force for aerial
surveillance.

Figure 1. RQ4-A Global Hawk HALE UAV

*
Further author information: (Send correspondence to T.P./R.S.P.)
T.P.: E-mail: tanvi.prakash@iitb.ac.in
R.S.P.: E-mail: rkpant@aero.iitb.ac.in, Telephone: +91 22 2576 7127, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai – 400076.
The key mission feature of a HALE aircraft is to fly out of the reach of interception and adverse
tropospheric weather conditions, without any interference with the commercial air traffic. In
addition, surveillance payloads mounted on HALE aircraft have the advantage of altitude. Being
situated at a greater height, payloads such as Synthetic Aperture RADAR (SAR) and electro-optic
sensors are able to cover larger swathes of land in a single frame of data, without compromising
narrow angle field-of-view. As a result of this, the mission roles that have been contrived for HALE
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) are of long duration. A representative HALE UAV mission is
shown in Fig. 2.

Figure 2. Representative Mission profile for RQ4-A

The principle design objectives of HALE aircraft have been to maximise their on-station
endurance. Several methods have been adopted for this, and the focus has largely been on improved
propulsion, including non- conventional propulsions systems such as hydrogen power, solar power
and hybrid systems and even air-to-air refuelling.

For this study, the RQ4-A Global Hawk was chosen as the baseline aircraft, with specifications
listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Specifications of RQ4-A Global Hawk

Parameter Value
Payload 907 kg
Loiter Altitude 16.8 km
Cruise Mach Number 0.60
Specific Fuel Consumption in Cruise 0.6 /hr
Range in Cruise segment 1200 nm
On-station Endurance 24 hrs
Wing Aerofoil LRN 1015
Wing Aspect Ratio 25
Design Lift Coefficient during Loiter 1.0
The aim of the study is to investigate the efficacy of span extension morphing to increase the
duration of loiter phase by at least 15%, i.e., 28 hours instead of 24 hours.

One of the methods of boosting endurance that has been briefly explored is to improve the lift-to-
drag ratio in loiter using telescopic span morphing1,2. Most studies of this nature have been on
electric UAVs. In the case of larger aircraft having wing fuel tanks such as HALE UAV3, telescopic
span extension leads to a loss of fuel tank capacity in the wing to accommodate the span extensions.

In a previous study4 the benefits gained by carrying out telescopic span morphing have been
studied, as discussed in the next section.

2. TELESCOPIC SPAN MORPHING

Telescopic span extension is carried out in order to enhance the loiter endurance of the aircraft.
Three effects are factored in to check the benefit of span extension, viz., increased lift-to-drag ratio
due to greater aspect ratio of morphed wing, increased empty weight due to additional structures
and mechanisms and reduced available fuel volume due to loss of wing internal volume.

A single stage extension scheme is used, as illustrated in Fig. 3.

Figure 3. Conceptual Layout of Single Stage Telescopic Span Morphing Mechanism (a) Retracted (b) Extended

The extending tip (1) is constructed of the same composite material as the main wing. A linear
actuator (2+3) is fixed at one end on the main wing and on the extending tip at the other end, such
that it causes extraction of the extending tip as shown. Bearings are mounted along the interface
between the main wing and the extending tip along the line of sliding contact (4). The stages are
mutually connected via the spars which slide on each other via linear roller bearings. The empty
weight increases due to several factors, including the additional weight of the span extensions and
the actuation mechanism. Apart from this, there is a net increase in wing root bending moment,
since the aerodynamic loads on the span extension have now been added. The wing is resized to
account for this additional load and its weight estimated. Further, the horizontal tail is also resized
to maintain the same static stability5. This leads to an increase in empty weight fraction and hence,
an adverse effect on the endurance.

An upper bound on the maximum attainable span extension is imposed based on two conditions.
The first condition is the wing leading edge sweep angle should be maintained uniform throughout
the wing right up until the extension tip. The second is the lower limit on the tip chord of the wing
due to the practical consideration of mounting of tip-lights and lightning protection mechanism.
The wing-tip contains navigation lights, strobe lights and a static discharge wick assembly, the
housing for which occupies a finite volume with definite length, breadth and height. Based on this,
the maximum allowable value of span extension is determined as 5.33 m. With this span extension,
the lift-to-drag ratio is increased from 36 to 43, which greatly improves Loiter performance of the
aircraft. The fuel volume lost is equivalent to the volume occupied by the span extension housed
inside the wing.

The present work also proposes a compact multi-stage telescopic extension as shown in Fig. 4.

Figure 4. Multi-stage Telescopic Span Extension

The stages are of equal length and the number of stages is defined by the specific mechanism
chosen. The weight of all the stages combined is assumed to be equal to the single-stage case.
Additionally, it is proposed that the order in which the stages are deployed is not important. The
rate of deployment has been found to be an important parameter in the performance of morphing
wings. Ajaj et al.6 have proposed linear actuation rates of 2.6 m/s and 5.16 m/s for a MALE UAV
with asymmetric span morphing. To account for the change in time constant of the roll divergence
mode of the UAV, a higher rate was recommended. However, in the case of symmetric span
extension, no drastic effect on flight dynamics is expected other than a change in tail trim to
account for the increase in lift. Data on span-wise actuation rates for variable-sweep wing aircraft
is presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Span-wise Actuation Times for Variable Sweep Aircraft
Parameter ↓ Aircraft → B1 Lancer7 F3 Tornado8 F14 Tomcat9 Bell X510
Sweep angle range (degrees) 15 to 67.5 25 to 67 20 to 68 20 to 60
Actuation time range (s) 58 to 68 7 3 to 9 20
Span-wise extension - half-span (m) 9.000 2.655 3.985 1.85
Span-wise actuation speed - min (m/s) 0.155 0.379 1.328 0.093
Span-wise actuation speed - max (m/s) 0.132 NA 0.443 NA

From this, the average span-wise actuation speed is found to be 0.25 m/s. Although not stringently
enforced, this is the linear speed requirement placed on the actuation system.

3. ESTIMATION OF LOADS AND ACTUATOR SIZING

The process of span extension is discrete and reversible, i.e., a fixed pre-determined wing-span is
achieved and held for the loiter mission segment. Also, once increased, the wing-span can be
decreased to return to its initial configuration.

The maximum morphing case of 5.33 m is considered in this study, and a similar methodology is
proposed for any other morphing coefficient4.

Estimation of aerodynamic loads is carried out using a Vortex Lattice Method simulation in
XFLR511. The baseline and morphed wings were modelled and simulated for loiter condition. The
span-wise distribution is shown in Fig. 5, lift coefficients are depicted in Fig. 6(a) and drag loads
are estimated using the lift-coefficient values and calculated zero-lift-coefficient, using standard
methods4 and are depicted in Fig. 6(b).

Figure 5. Change in Local Lift Coefficient versus Wing-span

 (a) Lift distribution (b) Drag Distribution
Figure 6. Lift and Drag Distribution on Span Extension

Peak forces due to static friction will be considered, rather than forces due to dynamic/rolling
friction as their magnitude will be much larger, and hence used to size the actuator.

At the start of the extraction phase, the forces are: Weight of the extending tip, friction due to
normal reaction of weight on bearings and force due to acceleration of the extending tip. The forces
acting at the start of the retraction phase are weight of the extending tip, lift, drag, friction due to
normal reaction of resultant of lift and weight on bearings, friction due to normal reaction of drag
on bearings and force due to acceleration of the extending tip.

The weight of the extending tip is taken to act at the centroid of the trapezoidal wing shape.
Coefficient of initial static friction for the bearings is estimated from standard catalogues12.

A summary of these forces is depicted in Fig. 7.

Figure 7. Forces acting during Extraction and Retraction of Span Extensions

Acceleration is determined from the assumption that the initial acceleration time is 0.1 seconds.
The velocity profile of the actuator is trapezoidal in nature as shown in Fig. 8, such that half the
time is spent at constant velocity and the acceleration and deceleration are of equal magnitudes.

0.3
Velocity (m/s) 0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
TIME (s)

Figure 8. Velocity Profile of Actuator

Based on the above assumptions, estimation of actuator axial capacity is carried out as shown in
Table 3. It can be observed that the force in extraction is greater than that in retraction.

Table 3. Calculation of Actuator Axial Load Capacity

Parameter Value
Mass of Extension (kg) 397
Lift on Extension (N) 6272
Drag on Extension (N) 72
Speed of extraction (m/s) 0.25
Total time of extraction (s) 21
Acceleration (m/s2) 0.047
Coefficient of Static Friction 0.16
Coefficient of Dynamic Friction 0.005
Extraction force (friction + acceleration) (N) 642
Retraction axial force (friction + acceleration) (N) 399

Actuators require specification of the duty cycle at the selection stage itself. The duration of each
mission segment is calculated and the duty cycle was calculated by taking the ratio of duration of
loiter to total mission time as shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Estimation of Actuator Duty Cycle

Parameter Value
Loiter time (h) 28
Total Cruise + Climb time (h) 7.7
Duty Cycle 78
 4. ACTUATION SYSTEMS
In this paper, three actuation methods of telescoping wing are considered viz., pneumatic,
hydraulic and electromechanical (i.e., rack-and-pinion actuation systems).

Detailed design of these actuation systems is carried out, along with calculations of their weight
and size to account for increase in aircraft empty weight and loss of fuel volume.

4.1 Pneumatic Actuation System

A single-stage cylinder is seen to occupy a large amount of space in the wing. To save space, the
proposed pneumatic actuator consists of a multi-stage telescoping cylinder13,14. As compared to a
standard cylinder designed to ISO 6431, the three-stage actuator with the same stroke achieves a
length reduction of 45%15. However, this is at the cost of weight due to the additional mechanisms
required for functioning of the multi-stage cylinder. Sizing of the pneumatic system is carried out
using standard engineering design methods from available catalogues. A representative two-stage
telescoping cylinder is illustrated in Fig. 9.

Figure 9. Multi-stage telescoping pneumatic cylinder17

Since a pneumatic system is not available on-board the aircraft, additional weight of
components such as compressor, reservoir, pneumatic fittings, valves, filters, gauges and
guideways are also required. Weight of these is estimated using weight estimation methods
for military transport aircraft16. These weight estimation relationships give total mass of
hydraulic and pneumatic systems. In the absence of another way to separate the pneumatic
form the hydraulic components, it is assumed that the pneumatics account for 50% of the
combined mass. This results in an additional weight of 53 kg which is added to the average
 mass of actuators shown in Table 5. The resulting weight of the actuation system is taken
as 104 kg.

Table 5. Available Pneumatic Actuators

Mass per Retracted Actuators

Stroke Mass per
Make Model Code actuator Length per per
(m) System
(kg) system (m) System
Univer Group15 RT2330631800 18 1.8 0.7 3 53
18
Airon TLTD0402000 5 2.0 0.9 3 16
17 TC-MS4-2 1/2x60x2S-
TRD 21 1.5 0.9 4 83
OS=1-KK2-SSA
Average 0.8 51

4.2 Hydraulic Actuation System

Similar to the pneumatic system, the hydraulic actuation system considered is also multi-stage
telescoping. A schematic is shown in Fig. 10.

Figure 10. Multi Stage Hydraulic Actuator19

For extraction, high pressure oil is directed by the control valve into port A. The oil passes
through the transfer tube in the rod to the base of the cylinder. The pressure acts on the entire
area of the largest piston and extends all stages until the first stop ring. The next stage then
begins to extend and is extended until its own stop ring. The excess oil returns to the reservoir
through Port B. Since it is a double-acting cylinder, the retraction is the exact opposite where
 the functions of Ports A and B are swapped. Selection of the hydraulic actuator is carried out
based on stroke length and bore calculations as shown in Table 6.

Table 6. Available Hydraulic Actuators

Mass per Retracted Actuators

Stroke Mass per
Make Model Code actuator Length per per
(m) System
(kg) system (m) System
SD85DC-66-
Parker20 256 5.3 1.5 1 256
220
Eagle Hydraulics21 HTC-10833 46 2.7 1.1 2 92
Southern Hydraulic22 3272CT 40 1.8 1.2 3 121
DAT63-313-
Custom Hoists21 118 144 3.0 1.5 2 288

Average 1.3 189

4.3 Electromechanical Actuation System

A similar design activity is taken up for selection of electromechanical actuators to meet the span-
extension requirement specified in Table 3. Table 7 shows the survey of electromechanical
actuators and their corresponding numbers and masses required.

Table 7. Available Electromechanical Actuators

Stroke Actuators Mass per

Make Part Number Mass (kg)
(m) per system system (kg)
Flexible Electric Linear Servomotor Inline
2 31 8 245
size 4 with 20 mm lead
Moog23,24
Flexible Electric Linear Servomotor Inline
1.5 38 1 228
size 3 with 20 mm lead
Tolomatic25 ERD size 25-BN01 1 54 12 652
ERD size 22-BN02 1 22 12 262
RSA size 64 inline 1.5 48 8 380
GSA size 32 inline 0.9 32 12 389
26
Exlar FT35 series 1.2 45 10 454
27
Thomson TC5-B32-50-32B 1.5 45 8 359
TC4-B32-10-25B 1.5 45 359
Average 1.3 370

4.4 Comparison of Actuation Systems

A comparison of the actuation systems studied in Section 4.1 to 4.3 is depicted in Table 8, in terms
of their mass and volume occupied (which would otherwise have been occupied by fuel tanks).
 Table 8. Comparison of Weight and Volume occupied by Actuation System

System Mass (kg) Space in span-wise direction (m) Volume of fuel lost (m3)
Pneumatic 104 0.8 60
Hydraulic 189 1.3 100
Electromechanical 370 1.3 100

It is observed that hydraulic and electromechanical systems are equivalent in terms of volume lost,
though electromechanical systems are heavier. The pneumatic system is now only the lightest, but
also results in least loss of fuel volume.

5. IMPACT ON ENDURANCE
Weight estimates are obtained for each of the actuation systems and the endurance calculations are
updated for each case by aircraft sizing methods4,5. Fig. 11 depicts the effect of endurance of each
type of actuation system.

3.5 3.19
3
Excess Endurance (hrs)

2.5

2 1.79

1.5

0.5
0.11
0
Pneumatic Hydraulic Electromechanical
Actuation System Type

Figure 11. Endurance Gain from Actuation System

It is observed that the maximum benefit for 5.33 m morphing case is obtained using pneumatic
actuators and electromechanical actuators provide very small endurance benefit. As compared to
previous single-stage span extension5, the use of multi-stage telescopic span extensions and
actuators is seen to provide higher endurance, i.e., 24 to 27 hours instead of 20 hours for the 5.33
m span extension case.

6. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

Three actuation methods of telescoping wing are explored viz., pneumatic, hydraulic and
electromechanical (i.e., rack-and-pinion actuation systems). A detailed selection procedure is
followed and thereby, the weight and volume occupied by each system is estimated.
The methodology presented here will be used for selection of actuation systems for other morphing
coefficients and an extensive design space created for varying degrees of telescopic span morphing
of HALE UAV. Future work involves development of an optimization framework for
maximization of endurance benefit from telescopic span extension. This will involve choice of the
decision variables, constraints and optimization algorithm.

REFERENCES
1. S. Barbarino, O. Bilgen, R. M. Ajaj, M. I. Friswell and D. J. Inman, "A Review of Morphing Aircraft," Journal
of Intelligent Materials Systems and Structures, vol. 22, pp. 823-827, 2011.
2. P. Santos, J. Sousa and P. Gamboa, "Variable-span wing development for improved flight performance,"
Journal of Intelligent Materials Systems and Structures, vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 961-978, 2017.
3. X. D. Liu, S. L. Li and Y. Tang, "Fuel System Configuration and Restructuring of MALE and HALE UAV,"
Applied Mechanics and Materials,vol.779, pp.268-276, 2015.
4. T. Prakash, "Feasibility Analysis of Span Extension of Morphing HALE UAV Wing," in 30th Congress of the
International Council of the Aerospace Sciences, Daejeon, 2016.
5. T. Prakash, “Studies in Telescopic Span Morphing of HALE UAV,” in Proceedings of 8th International
Conference on Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Prague, 2017.
6. R. M. Ajaj, M. I. Friswell, E. I. S. Flores, A. Keane, A. T. Isikveren, G. Allegri, and S. Adhikari, “An integrated
conceptual design study using span morphing technology,” J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct., vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 989–
1008, 2014.
7. Rockwell International, “NA-73-296 B-1 Flight Manual,” 1976. [Online].
Available: http://www.avialogs.com/viewer/avialogs-documentviewer.php?id=4232. [Accessed: 31-Oct-
2017].
8. Aeritalia, “Panavia 200 Tornado Flight Manual,” 1990. [Online].
Available: http://www.avialogs.com/viewer/avialogs-documentviewer.php?id=1694. [Accessed: 31-Oct-
2017].
9. Naval Engineers Manual, “NATOPS FLIGHT MANUAL NAVY MODEL F − 14D,” vol. 1, April 2002.
10. “Sweeping Changes - The treacherous Bell X-5 helped pi - Hemmings Motor News.” [Online]. Available:
https://www.hemmings.com/magazine/hmn/2011/06/Sweeping- Changes/3699721.html. [Accessed: 31-Oct-
2017].
11. M. Drela, XFLR5 v6.35, 2017.
12. THK Co. Ltd., “THK Linear Motion Systems - General Catalog: Product Specifications,” 2012.
13. J. E. Blondeau, “Development and Testing of a Variable Aspect Ratio Wing Using Pneumatic Telescopic
Spars”, Masters’ dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, 2004.
14. J. E. Blondeau, D. J. Pines, “Pneumatic Morphing Aspect Ratio Wing”, in 45th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC
Structures, Structural Dynamics & Materials Conference, Palm Springs CA, 2004.
15. Univer S.p.A., “Telescopic cylinders UNIVER,” Milano, 2017.
16. L. M. Nicolai and G. E. Carichner, Fundamentals of Aircraft and Airship Design: Volume 1 - Aircraft Design,
Reston: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2010.
17. TRD Manufacturing Inc, “TRD TC Series 2-stage Telescoping Aluminum Cylinders,” Machesney Park, IL,
2016.
18. Airon s.r.l., “3 Stages Telescopic Cylinder,” Borsea, 2017.
19. Parker Hannifin Corporation, “Standard Telescopic Service Manual,” Youngstown OH, 2009.
20. Parker Hannifin Corporation, “Dump Product and Quick Reference Guide,” Youngstown OH, 2009.
21. Eagle Hydraulic Components Inc., “Double Acting Cylinders,” Quebec, 2014.
22. Southern Hydraulic Cylinder Inc., “Telescopic Cylinder Assembly,” Athens TN, 2014.
23. Moog Inc., “MaxForce Electric Linear Actuation Solution: Size 4,” 2017.
24. Moog Inc., “MaxForce Electric Linear Actuation Solution: Size 3,” 2017.
25. Tolomatic, “Electric Rod Style Actuators - RSA / RSM & GSA / GSM,” Hamel MN, 2017.
26. “FT Series | Roller Screw Actuators | Exlar,” Curtiss Wright, 2016. [Online]. Available:
https://exlar.com/product/ft-series/specs/. [Accessed: 31-Oct-2017].
27. Danaher Motion, “Thomson Actuators,” 2003.