Design conception and evaluation of an unmanned amphibious aerial vehicle using systematic approach
This article’s incitement interprets Unmanned Amphibious Aerial Vehicle (UAAV)’s conceptual design process in a systematic approach. The UAAV is conceptualised to be an ideal tool for limnologists in water quality assessment. Integration of hovercraft with the multi-rotor system helps collect water samples from remote and inaccessible water bodies. The UAAV flies in multi-rotor mode, subsequently land and glide along the water surface in hovercraft mode. The new and unconventional vehicle configuration makes the conceptual stage a challenging one in the design process. To overcome the challenges and strapped configuration of vehicle design, the Authors used a systematic approach of scenario-based design, morphological matrix, and Pugh’s method in the design process of the “Pahl & Beitz” model to retrieve the best possible UAAV design. The conglomerate design of UAAV is evaluated for its design requirements, and the computational analysis is performed to examine the mechanical strength and flow characteristics of UAAV. The experimental prototype of UAAV demonstrates the competence of flying in the air and hovering in water through field trials.
Keyword : unmanned amphibious aerial vehicle, design process, product design, user-centered design, scenario-based design, morphological matrix
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Alam, M. P., & Manoharan, D. (2016). Design and development of autonomous amphibious unmanned aerial vehicle and UAV mountable water sampling devices for water based applications (No. 2016-01-2004). SAE Technical Paper.
Altshuller, G. S. (1984). Creativity as an exact science: The theory of the solution of inventive problems. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781466593442
Altuntas, S., Özsoy, E. B., & Mor, Ş. (2019). Innovative new product development: A case study. Procedia Computer Science, 158, 214–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.044
Amyot, J. (2013). Hovercraft technology, economics and applications. Elsevier.
Banerjee, B. P., Raval, S., Maslin, T. J., & Timms, W. (2020). Development of a UAV-mounted system for remotely collecting mine water samples. International Journal of Mining, Reclamation and Environment, 34(6), 385–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/17480930.2018.1549526
Baxter, M. (1995). Product design. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315275246
Bershadsky, D., Haviland, S., Valdez, P. E., & Johnson, E. (2016). Design considerations of submersible unmanned flying vehicle for communications and underwater sampling. In OCEANS 2016 MTS/IEEE Monterey (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANS.2016.7761266
Bhagat, N., & Alyanak, E. (2014). Computational geometry for multi-fidelity and multi-disciplinary analysis and optimisation. In 52nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA 2014-0188, 0188. National Harbor, Maryland. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2014-0188
Blessing, L., & Chakrabarti, A. (2009). DRM: A design research methodology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-587-1
Buurman, R. D. (1997). User-centred design of smart products. Ergonomics, 40(10), 1159–1169. https://doi.org/10.1080/001401397187676
Chakladar, N., & Chakraborty, S. (2008). A combined TOPSIS-AHP-method-based approach for non-traditional machining processes selection. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 222(12), 1613–1623. https://doi.org/10.1243/09544054JEM1238
Delano, G., Parnell, G., Smith, C., & Vance, M. (2000). Quality function deployment and decision analysis: A R&D case study. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 20(5), 591–609. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570010318959
Desmet, P. M., & Pohlmeyer, A. E. (2013). Positive design: An introduction to design for subjective well-being. International Journal of Design, 7(3), 5–19.
Engler, W., Biltgen, P., & Mavris, D. (2007). Concept selection using an interactive reconfigurable matrix of alternatives (IRMA). In 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, AIAA 2007-1194, 1194. Reno, Nevada. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2007-1194
Esakki, B., Mathiyazhagan, S., Moses, M., Rao, K. J., & Ganesan, S. (2019). Development of 3D-printed floating Quadrotor for collection of algae in remote water bodies. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 164, 104891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2019.104891
French, M. J. (1998). Conceptual design for engineers. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3627-9
Ganesan, S., & Esakki, B. (2019). Design and development of unmanned hovercraft. International Journal of Mathematical, Engineering and Management Sciences, 4(5), 1180–1195. https://doi.org/10.33889/IJMEMS.2019.4.5-093
Gorbea, C., Hellenbrand, D., Srivastava, T., Biedermann, W., & Lindemann, U. (2010). Compatibility matrix methodology applied to the identification of vehicle architectures and design requirements. In DS 60: Proceedings of DESIGN 2010, the 11th International Design Conference (pp. 733–742). Dubrovnik, Croatia.
Hanington, B. (2003). Methods in the making: A perspective on the state of human research in design. Design Issues, 19(4), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1162/074793603322545019
Hassenzahl, M., Eckoldt, K., Diefenbach, S., Laschke, M., Len, E., & Kim, J. (2013). Designing moments of meaning and pleasure. Experience design and happiness. International Journal of Design, 7(3), 21–31.
Hsiao, S. W., & Chou, J. R. (2004). A creativity-based design process for innovative product design. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 34(5), 421–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2004.05.005
Iqbal, L., & Sullivan, J. (2009, January). Comprehensive aircraft preliminary design methodology applied to the design of MALE UAV. In 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, AIAA 2009-431, 431. Orlando, Florida. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2009-431
Kamal, A., & Ramirez-Serrano, A. (2019). Generalised sizing methodology for hybrid aircraft using integrated performance constraints. Journal of Aircraft, 56(5), 2083–2092. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C035114
Kamal, A., & Ramirez-Serrano, A. (2019). Systematic approach to conceptual design selection for hybrid UAVs using structured design methods. In AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum (2097). San Diego, California. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2019-2097
Kim, K., & Lee, K. P. (2010). Two types of design approaches regarding industrial design and engineering design in product design. In DS 60: Proceedings of DESIGN 2010, the 11th International Design Conference (pp. 1795–1806). Dubrovnik, Croatia.
Koparan, C., & Koc, A. B. (2017). Development of a UAV-Assisted water quality measurement system. In 2017 ASABE Annual International Meeting, 1701352. Spokane, Washington. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. https://doi.org/10.13031/aim.201701352
Lindbeck, J. R., & Wygant, R. M. (1995). Product design and manufacture. Prentice Hall.
Nagamachi, M. (2002). Kansei engineering in consumer product design. Ergonomics in Design, 10(2), 5–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/106480460201000203
Nelson, J. (2018). Modelling the creative process in design: A socio-cognitive approach. In Creative Process (pp. 209–227). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50563-7_8
Niemiec, R., & Gandhi, F. (2016). A comparison between quadrotor flight configurations. In the 42nd European Rotorcraft Forum. Lille, France.
Ölvander, J., Lundén, B., & Gavel, H. (2009). A computerised optimisation framework for the morphological matrix applied to aircraft conceptual design. Computer-Aided Design, 41(3), 187–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2008.06.005
Pahl, G., & Beitz, W. (2013). Engineering design: A systematic approach. Springer Science & Business Media.
Park, J. (2011). Developing a knowledge management system for storing and using the design knowledge acquired in the process of a user-centered design of the next generation information appliances. Design Studies, 32(5), 482–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.05.001
Pavăl, M. S., & Popescu, A. (2018). Hovercrafts – an overview. Part II: Basic Construction Principles, Classification, Advantages, Disadvantages Buletinul Institutului Politehnic din Iaşi, 64, 51–61.
Ríos-Zapata, D., Duarte, R., Pailhès, J., Mejía-Gutiérrez, R., & Mesnard, M. (2017). Patent-based creativity method for early design stages: Case study in locking systems for medical applications. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 11(3), 689–701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-016-0352-1
Ritchey, T. (2006). Problem structuring using computer-aided morphological analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 792–801. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602177
Rodrigues, P., Marques, F., Pinto, E., Pombeiro, R., Lourenço, A., Mendonça, R., Santana, P., & Barata, J. (2015, October). An open-source watertight unmanned aerial vehicle for water quality monitoring. In OCEANS 2015-MTS/IEEE Washington (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.23919/OCEANS.2015.7404447
Roozenburg, N. F., & Eekels, J. (1995). Product design: Fundamentals and methods. John Wiley & Son Ltd.
Sadraey, M. (2012). Aircraft design: A systems engineering approach. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118352700
Seligman, M. E. (2004). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realise your potential for lasting fulfillment. Simon and Schuster.
Sharma, V., Simpson, R. C., LoPresti, E. F., Mostowy, C., Olson, J., Puhlman, J., Hayashi, S., Cooper, R. A., Konarski, E., & Kerley, B. (2008). Participatory design in the development of the wheelchair convoy system. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 5(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-5-1
Sholeh, M., Ghasemi, A., & Shahbazi, M. (2018). A new systematic approach in new product development through an integration of general morphological analysis and IPA. Decision Science Letters, 7(2), 181–196. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.dsl.2017.5.004
Sokolowski, S. L., & Meyer, Z. (2019). A product design approach to prosthetic design: A case study. In 2019 Design of Medical Devices Conference, 3304. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection. https://doi.org/10.1115/DMD2019-3304
Sun, X. (2014). Incorporating multi-criteria decision analysis techniques in aircraft conceptual design process. Journal of Aircraft, 51(3), 861–869. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.C032530
Tama, I. P., Azlia, W., & Hardiningtyas, D. (2015). Development of customer oriented product design using Kansei engineering and Kano model: Case study of ceramic souvenir. Procedia Manufacturing, 4, 328–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.11.048
Tan, R. (2000). Quality functional deployment as a conceptual aircraft design tool. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey CA.
Tan, R., Liu, W., Cao, G., & Shi, Y. (2019). Creative design inspired by biological knowledge: Technologies and methods. Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering, 14(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11465-018-0511-0
ul Haque, A., Asrar, W., Sulaeman, E., Omar, A., & Ali, J. S. M. (2015). Pugh analysis for configuration selection of a Hybrid Buoyant Aircraft (No. 2015-01-2446). SAE Technical Paper. https://doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-2446
Ulrich, K. T. (2003). Product design and development. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
Van der Lelie, C. (2006). The value of storyboards in the product design process. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 10(2–3), 159–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-005-0026-7
Vijayanandh, R., Kumar, M. S., Rahul, S., Thamizhanbu, E., & Jafferson, M. D. I. (2019, April). Conceptual design and comparative CFD analyses on unmanned amphibious vehicle for crack detection. In International Conference on Unmanned Aerial System in Geomatics, Proceedings of UASG 2019 (pp. 133–149). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37393-1_14
Wu, F. G., Ma, M. Y., & Chang, R. H. (2009). A new user-centered design approach: A hair washing assistive device design for users with shoulder mobility restriction. Applied Ergonomics, 40(5), 878–886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2009.01.002
Zhu, Y., Guo, Z., Li, T., & Wang, M. (2019). Implementation and performance assessment of triphibious robot. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation (ICMA) (pp. 1514–1519). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMA.2019.8816394