46th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics & Materials Conference

18 - 21 April 2005, Austin, Texas

AIAA 2005-1882

Light Rigidizable Inflatable Wings for UAVs:

Resin and Manufacturing Development
R. E. Allred*, A. E. Hoyt, and L. A. Harrah
Adherent Technologies, Inc.
Albuquerque, NM 87123-3361
S. Scarborough, M.B. Mackusick **, and T. Smith
ILC Dover, LP
Frederica, DE 19946

The objective of this ongoing study is to prove the feasibility of using light-curing resins
to rigidize an inflatable wing for terrestrial and space applications. Current inflatable wings
rely on the continuous presence of an inflation gas to maintain their shape. Rigidization of
inflatable wings provides several potential advantages, including reducing the vulnerability
to punctures, increasing stiffness and load-carrying capability, allowing a higher aspect ratio
for high altitude efficiency and longer missions, and reducing weight by eliminating the
make up pressurization supply. A previous multifaceted study included defining operating
environments for Mars survey craft and military UAVs; analyzing wing loads during
deployment and rigidization as a function of internal pressure and leak rate to determine
needed rigidization times; developing rapid cure resin formulations with long shelf lives;
fabricating, deploying, and rigidizing a wing half-span; and testing and characterizing the
rigidized wing. Results show that the wings must deploy and cure rapidly at low
temperatures for some missions. The maximum time allowed for the resin to rigidize is the
range in time that the inflated and unrigidized wing maintains structural integrity to fly and
provide lift for the vehicle while the wing is undergoing rigidization. The current work
includes internal light selection for wing rigidization, evaluation of urethane acrylate resin
systems, and wing design and analysis.

I.

Introduction

As the unmanned exploration of Mars and Venus becomes more of a focus area at NASA, inflatable, rigidizable
wings will become an enabling technology. The development of these wings will require wing and deployment
design and flight-testing. The successful development of this type of wing will also have significant military
applications in unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The Department of Defense has made UAVs a significant future
priority1. Future requirements include wing designs that can bring the greatest possible measure of endurance to
collection platforms surveying targets of intelligence interest1.
There is a long history of inflatable wings, which is reviewed in Refs. 2 and 3. Recently, there has been renewed
interest in inflatable wings for a variety of applications4-8, including rigidization of inflatable wings3,7,8. Rigidization
of inflatable wings for UAVs provides several potential advantages, including reducing the vulnerability to
punctures, increasing stiffness and load-carrying capability, allowing a higher aspect ratio for high-altitude
efficiency and longer missions, and reducing weight by eliminating the make up pressurization supply. The current
inflatable, deployable wings rely on the continuous presence of an inflation gas to maintain their shape (Figure 1).

President, 11208 Cochiti SE, Albuquerque, NM 87123, Professional Member

Polymer Projects Manager, 11208 Cochiti SE, Albuquerque, NM 87123, Professional Member

Chief Scientist, 11208 Cochiti SE, Albuquerque, NM 87123, Nonmember

Technical Staff, One Moonwalker Dr., Frederica, DE 19946, Professional Member

**
Technical Staff, One Moonwalker Dr., Frederica, DE 19946, Nonmember

Technical Staff, One Moonwalker Dr., Frederica, DE 19946, Professional Member

1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Copyright 2005 by Adherent Technologies, Inc. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.

Figure 1. Front and top views of an inflatable wing (courtesy ILC Dover)
The objective of this study was to prove the feasibility of using light-curing resins and internal light sources to
rigidize an inflatable wing for terrestrial and space applications. This technology builds on current developments for
rigidization of space inflatable booms and struts using the Rigidization on Command (ROC) system9-15, although
more rapidly curing formulations are required for inflatable wing applications. A significant benefit is foreseen in
combining these two technologies to provide a UAV with a very high packing efficiency and a subsequently highly
stiff wing. There are also significant potential advantages for using inflatable, rigidizable wings on conventional
small aircraft for purposes of shipping and stowing the craft before use.
The development of inflatable rigidizable wing technology has the potential to revolutionize next generation
UAVs for both military and space applications. The ability to tightly pack wings into a small volume, deploy them
using inflation pressure, and then rigidize them will provide significant advantages over purely inflatable or rigid
wings. Among the advantages is that inflation pressure is no longer required for structural support during flight and
therefore make-up gas is not required. This lowers the overall mass of the system and increases the wings flight
longevity. The rigidized wing will possess superior aerodynamic characteristics to those found in inflatable wings in
some cases, because the higher stiffness afforded by a rigidized structure allows the use of a thinner, higher aspect
ratio wing, which thereby reduces drag. Further, the wing will be more robust, able to absorb some amount of
damage, including puncture, without the structural failure that would occur as a result of the puncture of an
inflatable wing.

II.

Identification of Candidate Light Sources

The development of materials and manufacturing methods for lightweight rigidizable wings will be dictated to a
significant degree by the availability of suitable light sources for use in this application. Requirements for an ideal
light source include, but are not limited to the following:
Light weight and small size
Suitable wavelength for cure activation
High intensity
Large illumination area
Mechanically robust.
Based on these criteria, a survey of available light sources was conducted and the light sources with the most
promise for this application were identified. These are described briefly below.
A. Xenon Lamps
Xenon lamps are of particular interest due to their broad spectral emission characteristics; a wavelength range of
200-600 nm at reasonable intensity is typical. This broad spectral range not only allows more effective use of
common photoinitator systems, but also allows greater flexibility in photoinitiator and sensitizer development.
A promising bulb that could be mounted in the fuselage of a UAV is a 50-watt Ushio short arc mercury/mercuryxenon microscope lamp. In addition to the broad emission characteric of a xenon lamp, this lamp also exhibits
mercury emission lines. In Figure 2, the mercury lines are clearly visible over a lower intensity broad spectrum
emission representative of xenon lamps. The presence of the mercury lines offers a high probability of being able to
effectively cure some of our fastest resin systems with this lamp.

2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Figure 2. Emission spectrum of 50-watt mercury/mercury-xenon microscope lamp.

B. UV Light Emitting Diodes (UV LEDs)
UV light emitting diodes (UV LEDs) are another promising illumination system. They offer the advantages of
being small and lightweight with low power consumption and can be placed throughout the wing assembly to
provide a consistent level of illumination. The major disadvantage of the UV LEDs is the emission wavelength,
typically in the 365-390 nm range, outside the activation range for most commercial photoinitiator systems. Shorter
wavelength UV LEDs are currently under development at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) in Albuquerque, NM
(275 290 nm) [16].
Nichia (Japan) currently offers two high power UV LEDs (85-100mW) with emissions at either 365nm or
380nm. While the emission wavelengths are still longer than required by most UV photoinitiators, but there are
several initiator candidates available that will allow for the use of these light sources. We are currently evaluating
photoinitiator candidates for this purpose. At present, these UV LEDs are available in research quantities only and
are still quite expensive ($20-$40 each depending upon quantity purchased). However, they are slated for mass
production in the near future, which will result in a dramatic lowering of the price.

III.

ROC Resin Development

High cure speed at low temperature with appropriate light sources are all driving factors for resin development.
The high cure speeds required are reminiscent of those required for rapid prototyping operations (e.g.,
stereolithography). In stereolithography, speed is a driver as is the overall dimensional stability of the cured
prototype. The body of literature related to stereolithography resins has served as a guide for developing fast curing
resins.
A. Formulation Details
Acrylate-based systems were chosen for formulation development because of their higher photospeeds. A
survey of the literature indicated that these systems typically consist of mixtures of several monomers of varying
functionality and at least one photoinitiator.17,18 A typical system may consist of up to 70% monofunctional acrylate
(or methacrylate) with the remainder of the mixture comprised of multifunctional acrylates (or methacrylates) and
photoinitiators.
Preliminary evaluations were conducted on several resin systems. Typical components of these systems are:
An acrylate resin
A multifunctional acrylate crosslinker
Free radical photoinitiators
A free radical polymerization inhibitor to improve system shelf life
Amine synergists to reduce oxygen poisoning.

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

B. Resin Development
Previously, fast-curing epoxy acrylate resins were evaluated for application in wing structures constructed using
Rigidization on Command technology. Cure times of 5 seconds at temperatures as low as 0C were achieved for
a few resin systems7,8.
Our current work is focusing on urethane acrylate-based systems in order to optimize cure for the selected
mission scenario. Things to be considered include cure rate at room temperature as well as at temperatures as low as
-40C, cure with light sources representative of what will be used in actual hardware; light intensity, flashes, and
flash rate are among the variables that must be considered. Resin issues are discussed below.
1. Resin Composition
It was shown earlier that increasing the multifunctional character of the resin formulation led to faster cure rates,
particularly at low temperatures7,8. In this study, we continue to use a large fraction of multifunctional monomers in
all resin formulations under consideration. At least 20% of each base resin formulation should consist of highly
functional acrylate monomers (e.g., tetrafunctional or higher functionality) with the remainder comprising either
difunctional or monofunctional material. However, further increases in polymerization rate are desirable.
It has been recently demonstrated that certain factors in acrylate monomer structure have significant effects on
the photopolymerization rate19. It was demonstrated that hydrogen bonding of the monomers led to a significant
increase in the polymerization rate, particularly at lower temperatures. This is due to some preorganization of the
monomers, thereby placing reactive groups in close proximity for faster reaction. As temperature increases,
hydrogen bonds are broken and the polymerization rate again decreases. This type of behavior has been observed
for urethane acrylates. While this research was not conducted at the low temperatures that we must consider here,
the idea of preorganizing monomers to promote fast polymerization is worthy of some consideration.
Samples of several difunctional, trifunctional, and hexafunctional urethane acrylates were acquired and
evaluated with a series of photoinitiators. The best performing single systems were then combined with a
hexafunctional urethane acrylate crosslinker and further analyzed using isothermal photo-DSC. Five different
photoinitiators and three different resin formulations were evaluated in isothermal photocure experiments. There
were two objectives in analyzing the urethane acrylate systems: (1) to identify the best resin system(s) and (2) to
identify the most promising photoinitators for use in these systems. It is likely that a final formulation will contain
at least two photoinitiators in order to perform effectively with either xenon lamp or UV LED illumination.
2. Resin System Evaluation Isothermal Photocalorimetry
Isothermal photocalorimetry experiments were conducted in our Perkin Elmer Diamond DSC system modified
for use of a 150W xenon arc lamp for sample and reference illumination. Samples of approximately 7.00mg were
exposed to full intensity irradiation from the 150W xenon lamp at 20C, 30C, and 40C. Cure times were noted by
the approximate return of the cure exotherm to baseline value. Data obtained at 20C were felt to be the most
revealing and are discussed below.
In general, all of the urethane acrylate systems cured considerably faster than the epoxy acrylates previously
studied with the systems containing aliphatic base resins curing slightly faster than those containing the aromatic
base resin for all but one of the initiators considered. Figure 3 compares the isothermal photocures of the best
systems identified for each initiator.

4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Figure 3. Photocure thermograms for isothermal irradiation at 20C.

The best performing system for each photoiniator was selected for this comparison.
It appears that those formulations containing the shorter wavelength photoinitiators do not cure as effectively as
those that use photoinitiators with substantial longer wavelength absorption components in their spectra. This may
be due to the broad spectrum nature of the xenon source.
Four of the best urethane acrylate systems identified were further modified by the addition of a longer
wavelength, potentially synergistic, photoinitiator. For wholly aromatic urethane acrylate systems, the addition of
the longer wavelength photoinitiator had very little effect on the overall time to cure. However, in the case of the
formulations containing 80% aliphatic resin and 20% aromatic crosslinker, there was a notable effect. Figure 4
shows the comparison of the isothermal DSC curves for both single and dual initiator systems using the same base
resin material.

Figure 4. Isothermal (30C) DSC curves for aliphatic base resin/crosslinker

formulation with single and dual photoinitiators.
The curve for TS2024-11 (single photoinitiator) showed a much faster initial cure rate indicated by the steeper
return to baseline after initiation. However, there was still a significant exotherm observed at relatively long
exposure times (around 15 min.). This longer time exotherm is shifted to shorter times by the addition of the longer
wavelength photoinitiator. The origin of the dual exotherm is unknown but may relate to the composition of the
resin system (80% base resin, 20% crosslinker). This will be investigated further in the future. A sample with a
larger concentration of the longer wavelength initiator was then evaluated for comparison. There was no obvious
difference in the cure rate with this increase in concentration in the DSC experiment.

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

3. Resin System Evaluation Cold Cure Experiments

Resin systems were also evaluated in a cold cure scenario. Samples of six binary resin systems with a standard UV
photoinitiator were prepared. The compositions of the resin systems are given in Table I. One-milliliter samples of
resin were chilled in a chest freezer (-30C) overnight before being subjected to the exposure experiment.
Exposures were conducted with the samples maintained at 0C on a cold plate in the UV chamber. Samples were
equilibrated on the cold plate for 15 minutes before exposure. Samples were exposed for 5 seconds and then
immediately analyzed using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) to evaluate the degree of cure. The results of
these experiments, in combination with the isothermal photocalorimetry results will allow downselection of the
fasted curing systems for further investigation.
The results of the 5 second exposures at 0C are given in Table II. As expected, one of the mostly aliphatic
systems exhibited the highest degree of cure at approximately 84% cure after only 5 seconds exposure to UV at 0C.
In contrast, the fully aromatic system showed only 53% cure. Other correlations can be made between resin
chemical structure and degree of cure in the partially aliphatic systems; the more highly functionalized systems
cured faster as expected.
Table I. Compositions of Candidate Fast-Curing Urethane Acrylate Resin Systems.
Sample No.

Composition

Aromatic or Aliphatic

MG1219A

80/20

Aliphatic triacrylate/ aromatic hexaacrylate

MG1219B

80/20

Aromatic triacrylate/ aromatic hexaacrylate

MG1219C

80/20

Aliphatic diacrylate/ aromatic hexaacrylate

MG1219D

50/50

Aliphatic triacrylate/ aromatic hexaacrylate

MG1219E

50/50

Aromatic triacrylate/ aromatic hexaacrylate

MG1219AF

50/50

Aliphatic diacrylate/ aromatic hexaacrylate

Table II. Results for 5 second exposures at 0C

Sample No.

Uncured H (J/g)

Exposed H (J/g)

% Cure

MG1219A

-257.149

-42.165

83.6

MG1219B

-332.631

-156.495

52.9

MG1219C

-446.675

-166.442

62.7

MG1219D

-396.278

-140.892

64.4

MG1219E

-418.944

-162.205

61.2

MG1219F

-474.315

-151.068

68.1

The results of these experiments correspond with the results from the isothermal photocalorimetry, with the most
highly aliphatic resin system showing the most promise.
C. Alternative Film Analysis
Two different types of films under consideration for wing fabrication were evaluated for light transmission.
These included polyurethane films (5 mil and 10 mil thicknesses) and two fluoropolymer films (THV 220 and THV
6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

500). Of particular interest are the light transmission characteristics in the ultraviolet (UV) and visible regions of the
spectrum and the stability of the different film materials toward the resin systems under consideration.
4. Light Transmission
The transmission spectra of all four films are given in Figure 5.
100
10 mil Polyurethane
90
80

5 mil Polyurethane
THV 220 Fluoropolymer
THV 500 Fluoropolymer

Transmission (%)

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
220

240

260

280

300

320

340

360

380

400

Wavelength (nm)

Figure 5. Transmission spectra of several candidate bladder films.

The polyurethane films generally did not exhibit good transmission in the UV region of the spectrum where our
typical photoinitiators are most active. Indeed, it was observed at ILC Dover that resin cure could not be conducted
using the 10 mil polyurethane films. In contrast, the UV transmission of the fluoropolymer films is much more
favorable; significant light transmission was observed over the entire range tested. The THV 500 film was by far
the most favorable in transmission. We believe this is at least in part due to the nature of this film relative to the
other fluoropolymer film. The THV 500 film was a smooth optically clear film approximately 6 mil in thickness
whereas the THV 220 film was not only thicker (approximately 8 mil) but was translucent. This translucent nature
undoubtedly scatters quite a bit of the incoming light, resulting in the significantly lower transmission observed in
the spectral analysis.
5. Stability in Resin
Previous work has shown that the polyurethane bladder films do not exhibit long term stability in the epoxy
acrylate resins previously studied. During longer term exposures, the films swell and weaken where they are in
contact with the resin. Similar results were observed for the polyurethane films when exposed to the urethane
acrylate resins that are the focus of this program. These observations were verified and experiments conducted
using the new fluoropolymer films as described below.
Two kinds of UV curing materials, namely the urethane acrylate and the epoxy acrylate systems, were deposited
in ~1 mm layers on film swatches, which were then folded or rolled and stored in the dark (to prevent curing) for
two weeks. The film integrity was then examined. The film swatches were pulled on all four corners to eliminate
wrinkles due to storage. The film surface in contact with the resin was then visually evaluated.
Both of the urethane films exhibited significant swelling on contact with both resin systems, more so with the
epoxy acrylate resin. The swollen areas were easily torn. In contrast, the THV films remain intact with no obvious
swelling and show a tendency to straighten themselves after removal from the evaluation vessels.
6. Film Conclusions
In general, it appears that the THV 500 fluoropolymer film is the most promising for ultimate application in the
types of rigidizable wing structures being developed in this program. Not only does this film exhibit excellent light
transmission characteristics, but it appears to have good stability in the uncured resin material.
D. Photocuring Calorimeter Modifications
We modified our differential scanning calorimeter for photocure in such a way that the system was (1) flexible to
evaluation of many different light sources and (2) such that the light sources could be positioned reproducibly
relative to the sample pans in the instrument. The performance of a previous modification that used a bifurcated
7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

fiber optic light guide was extremely sensitive to the light guide orientation, resulting in difficulty in reproducing
results. Additionally the optical fiber cable was somewhat fragile; individual fibers could be easily damaged,
thereby affecting the overall intensity of light delivered to the sample and reference areas of the DSC sample holder.
To correct these problems, the system was modified to accommodate a dual light guide system. The light guides
selected are 5-mm diameter liquid light guides. The large diameter ensures that the sample receives the highest
possible intensity and the liquid filler eliminates the orientation effects that were observed with the optical fiber
system. The newly modified system is shown in Figure 6.

(a)
(b)
Figure 6. Modification of differential scanning calorimeter for photocure kinetics analysis. (a) Dual
light guides inserted through instrument cover and (b) light guide output into sample compartment.

IV.

Manufacturing Development

A. Wing Design
1. Preliminary Material Selection
The wing will be manufactured from a mininum of two plies of 52x52 plain weave E-glass fabric that has been
used on previous programs due to its high seam strength (as compared to other fabrics). This fabric also imparts
good mechanical properties into the cured composite and has a low areal weight of 4.18 oz/yd2. The results from
seam testing show that the spars do not need to be more than 2 plies thick; therefore, they will most likely remain at
2 plies as long as the composite analysis currently being performed reveals the wing can support all required loads
when it is cured. The restraint plies will be varied along the length of the wing. The skin will be manufactured from
a high tenacity nylon fabric that has an air permeability of 0.5-3.5 ft3/minute. This particular material is used in
parachutes. It has an areal weight of 1.17 oz/yd2 and is not optically clear (which is not needed since we will be
rigidizing via lights from the inside of the wing and/or fuselage).
2. Spar-Restraint Seam Sample Testing
In order to detemine the strength of the wing spar/restraint seam, a number of samples were fabricated and
tested. The results of this testing will feed directly into the wing design once an airfoil shape is determined and will
allow a decision to be made regarding the proper number of spars for the wing based on the required inflation
pressure. In other words, the strength of the spar/restraint seam is the limiting factor in determining the maximum
inflation pressure for the wings. The test that is performed is a grab tensile test. The samples are approximately
4 wide by 7 long. Only 1 of the fabric is gripped by the Instron machine. The samples are made 4 wide so that
fabric edge effects (unraveling, etc.) do not adversely affect the results (Figure 7).

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Figure 7. Seam sample during a grab tensile test

Five samples of each seam configuration were fabricated and tested in order to provide some statistical
significance. Besides the baseline fabric (52x52 E-glass) a number of other types of fabrics were obtained for
testing for comparison. When comparing both peak load and maximum extension, the 52x52 count is still the best
fabric for this application because it is so tightly woven. Seam type A-8 was chosen for the wing as it provided the
best overall balance of strength (approximately 70 lbs/inch at max. extension) and number of plies required (See
Figure 8).
80
70
60

Load (lbf/in)

50
1

40

2
3

52x52 Plain Weave E-glass Fabric

Vectran Thread
1 Stitch Row
2 Restraint plies, 2 Spar Plies

30
20

4
5

10
0
-0.2

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

-10
Extension (inches)

Figure 8. Seam type A-8 grab tensile test results

B. Wing Profile Selection
Two airfoils were suggested by NASA-DFRC- NACA 4318 and NACA 8315. A comparison of these two
airfoils was performed and the results are given in Table III.
Table III. Airfoil Comparison
NACA 4318
Used previously on FASM
Thicker (easier to manufacture)
No concavity (easier skinning)
Used on previous program
Max Coefficient of Lift = 1.24
Max Section L/D ~ 60

NACA 8315
Not used as a previous airfoil at ILC
Concavity might be difficult for skinning
Expands ILC airfoil experience
Higher Lift Coefficient
Max Coefficient of Lift=1.45
Max Section L/D ~80

Based on the Table III data, we selected the NACA 8315 for use in this study. To determine some of the
physical characteristics of this wing, the following steps were taken.
1. Reviewed the initial requirements
9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

2.
3.

4.

Assuming the vehicle is oriented nose down under parachute descent at 25 ft/s, the angle of attack
would be 0 degrees providing a lift coefficient of 0.9 total lift force is 4.9 lbs
Entered the design information from the requirements into a wing analysis spreadsheet to determine
the operational pressure, spar/restraint seam strength, etc. Based on the total lift of 4.9 lbs and
assuming a 4g max load as a very conservative value to account for wind gusts, a 12 spar wing
construction results in an operational pressure of 20 psig and a spar/restraint seam loading of 50 lb/in.
The safety factor is 1.5 structural, 1.5 proof pressure.

The designfoil results are shown in Figures 9 and 1020. There are actually three graphs plotted on the different
axes of the graphs. The coefficient of lift (Cl) versus the coefficient of drag (Cd) is plotted in the top left-hand
quadrant. The slope of the line drawn from the origin of this quadrant to the point on the plot that has the highest Cl
and lowest Cd is called the maximum lift over drag (L/D) for the section. Note that the shape of the wing affects
both the coefficient of lift and the coefficient of drag.

Coefficient
of Lift

Coefficient of Lift

m= max L/D = 80

Stall begins

Angle of Attack
Coefficient of Drag

Moment Coefficient
Figure 9. Design Foil Results for the NACA8315 Airfoil

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

NACA8315
Coefficient of Lift

Coefficient
of Lift

m= max L/D = 80

NACA4318

Stall begins

m= max L/D = 60

Coefficient of Drag
Moment
Coefficient
Figure 10. Design Foil Comparison of the NACA4318 and NACA8315 Airfoil
The second plot on the graph is located on the top right-hand side of the graph. The coefficient of lift versus the
angle of attack is plotted here. From this plot, the angle of attack at which stall begins for the given airfoil can be
determined. The airfoil is in stall for angles of attack beyond the point of maximum Cl. For both airfoils, stall
occurs at an angle of attack of greater than 14o.
The third plot on these graphs is the moment coefficient versus the percent distance back from the leading edge
referenced to the chord length. During flight as the lift on the wing increases, a corresponding moment is also
induced so as to push the nose of the plane down. This torque is called the pitching moment and is balanced out by
the airplanes tail. The spreadsheet results are given in detail in Table IV.
Based on the airfoil selection, a preliminary requirements list that was generated and is shown in Table V. Some
of these requirements should be considered goals when developing the resin. For example, a typical military storage
requirement for humidity and temperature is 100% and 160oF. This is assuming that these wings will be used by the
military. These values should be considered goals, but there may be a need for special storage conditions depending
on the properties of the resin. Note that some values are TBD.
C. Airfoil and Wing Design Drawings
In order to improve flight dynamics, the trailing edge of the NACA 8315 wing will be sharpened (as compared
to an inflatable) through the use of a shaped attachment that is bonded to the last inflatable/rigidizable cell. The
final selection of the trailing edge has not been completed at this time. Figure 11 shows the comparison between the
conceptual airfoil design and the NACA 8315. Note that the wing will have a skin in order to more accurately
approximate the NACA 8315 airfoil. The expected seam loading for the wings during inflation to 20 psig during
cure is 50 lbf/in. Based on the spar-restraint seam tensile test results, the wing will require a minimum of 2 restraint
and 2 spar plies to meet the loading conditions.

11
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Figure 11. Conceptual wing airfoil compared with a NACA 8315 airfoil
The wing requirements were then used to create the half-span wing drawing shown in Figure 12.

Figure 12. Wing design half-span

planform

12
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Table IV. Inflatable Wing Analysis Spreadsheet Results

8/25/2004

English

INPUT DATA
Description
"W" (Mean Take Off Weight)
"b" (Full Wing Span Tip to Tip)
"Cri" (Ideal Root Chord)
"Crm" (Modeled Root Chord as % Ideal)
"T1r" (Max Root Thick - % of Ideal Cr)
"T2" (Restraint Thickness)
"Xs" (Supported Length)
"Tr" (Taper Ratio)
"G" (Max G Load)
"N" (Number of Spars)
Max Spar to Spar Dist vs. Average
"SFs" (Structural Factor of Safety)
"War" (Restraint fabric weight)
"Tb" (Bladder Thickness)
"Wab" (Bladder weight)
"Efp" (Packing Efficiency)
Proof Pressure Factor over Operating

OUTPUT DATA

Value
4.9
90.00
15.00
85.0%
15.0%
0.014
0.00
1.00
4.0
12
115%
1.5
9.20
0.010
9.0
30%
1.5

Units
lbf
in
in
%
%
in
in
G
%
oz/yd^2
in
oz/yd^2
%
-

English

Metric
Value
2.2
228.6
38.1
85.0%
15.0%
0.036
0.0
1.00
4.0
12
115%
1.5
0.312
0.025
0.31
30%
1.5

Units
kg
cm
cm
%
%
cm
cm
G
%
kg/m^2
cm
kg/m^2
%
-

Metric

Description
Value
Units
Value
Units
Planform Area (Ideal - Full Span)
1350
in^2
0.87
m^2
Planform Area (Infl/Modeled - Full Span)
1148
in^2
0.74
m^2
Aspect Ratio (Ideal)
6.0
6.0
Aspect Ratio (Inflated/Modeled)
7.1
7.1
Tip Chord (Ideal)
15.00
in
38.1
cm
Tip Chord (Inflated/Modeled)
12.75
in
32.4
cm
Wing Loading (Ideal Area, at max G's)
2.1
lb/ft^2
0.10
Kpa
Operational Inflation Pressure
19.6
psig
135
Kpa
Proof Pressure
29.4
psig
202.6
Kpa
Design Stress, Spanwise (Warp)
41.5
lb/in
7263
N/m
Design Stress, Chordwise (Fill)
49.6
lb/in
8682
N/m
Design Stress, Spar & Spar Seam
49.7
lb/in
8704
N/m
Root Plug Stress @ Proof, No Load, w/SF
31.1
lb/in
5448
N/m
Average Spar to Spar Length at Root
0.98
in
2.5
cm
Average Spar to Spar Length at Tip
0.98
in
2.5
cm
Max Spar to Spar Length at Root
1.13
in
2.9
cm
Max Spar to Spar Length at Tip
1.13
in
2.9
cm
Packed Volume (FULL SPAN)
330
in^3
5411
cm^3
Restraint & Spar Weight
2.2
lbf
1.01
kg
Bladder Weight
2.1
lbf
0.96
kg
Total Softgoods Wing Weight - Full Span
4.3
lbf
1.97
kg
Gas Weight (FULL SPAN - lbs)
0.21
lbf
0.09
kg
3000 psi Bottle Size (30% Margin)
27
in^3
442
cm^3
4500 psi Bottle Size (30% Margin)
18
in^3
295
cm^3
COMMENTS Using 13may04 requirements and 8315 airfoil.
Weight is determined by lift force supplied by wings
at 25 ft/sec under parachute descent.

13
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Table V. Updated Wing Requirements / Goals

CATEGORY

NO.

ITEM

Configuration

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Airfoil Shape
Aspect Ratio (full span/chord)
Root Chord
Tip Chord
Dihedral Angle
Take Off Weight
Span
T/C (Max Thickness/Chord)
Taper ratio ct/cr
Wing Area
Wing Incidence Angle

Storage

12

Humidity

13
14

Temperature
Time

15
16
17

Humidity
Temperature (@ 40,000 ft)
Time

18

Altitude (Envelope)

19

Velocity

Travel to Release

Deployment &
Rigidization

19.1 Max Wing Loading

Operation

VALUE

NACA8315
6
15 in
15 in
0 deg
100 lb
90 in
15% / 2.25 in
1
1350 in^2
0
up to 100%

160F
5 years
up to 100%
36 hours
15,000 - 20,000
ft
25 ft/sec
0.53 lbf/ft2
up to 100%

20
21

Humidity
Temperature

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Time to Rigidize
L/R Deployment Time Assymmetry
Max Loading
Max Altitude
Max Speed
Cruise Speed
Landing Speed

29
30

Stall Speed
Mission Duration

40 - 60 knots
10 hrs

31

Humidity Range

20-100%

32

Temperature Range

33

Pressure Range

14
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

3 minutes (10
sec Goal)
< 0.4 sec
4g
15,000 ft MSL
120 knots
TBD

V.

Conclusions and Recommendations

In this ongoing study of inflatable rigidizable wings for UAVs, a NACA 8315 airfoil has been selected as the
basis of a conceptual inflatable wing. Performance requirements have been identified that will be used for an indepth wing design. Internal lighting devices have been identified that define the cure requirements for the resins
used to rigidize the wing. Urethane acrylate resins appear to be the formulations of choice for this application,
demonstrating rapid cure at low temperatures.

VI.

Future Work

The next phase of this study will consist of a thorough analysis of the required wing construction to meet the
identified performance requirements, fabrication and testing of rigidizable inflatable wings, and a deployment and
rigidization wind tunnel test.

VII.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Joe Pahle at NASA Dryden for his guidance during the course of this
program. We would also like to acknowledge funding from NASA Dryden under contract NND04AA05C.

VIII.

References

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Roadmap 2002-2027, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Washington, DC,
December 2002.
2
G. Brown, R. Haggard, and B. Norton, Inflatable Sturctures for Deployable Wings, Proc. of 16th AIAA
Aerodynamic Decelerator Systems Tech. Conf. and Seminar, Boston, MA, May 21-24, 2001, paper 2001-2068.
3
D. Cadogan, T. Smith, R. Lee, S. Scarborough, and D. Graziosi, Inflatable and Rigidizable Wing Components
for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, Proc. 44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials
Conf., Norfolk, VA, April 7-10, 2003, paper 2003-1801.
4
J. E. Murray, J. W. Pahle, S. V. Thornton, S. Vogus, T. Frackowiak, J. D. Mello, and B. Norton, Ground and
Flight Evaluation of a Small-scale Inflatable-winged Aircraft, Proc. 40th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and
Exhibition, Reno, NV, Jan. 14-17, 2002, paper 2002-0820.
5
J. Blondeau, J. Richeson, and D. J. Pines, Design, Development and Testing of a Morphing Aspect Ratio Wing
using an Inflatable Telescopic Spar, Proc. 44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS Structures, Structural Dynamics, and
Materials Conf., Norfolk, VA, April 7-10, 2003, paper 2003-1718.
6
N. A. Weisend, Jr., Inflatable Airfoil Device, U. S. Patent 06443394, Sept. 3, 2002.
7
R. E. Allred, A. E. Hoyt, L. A. Harrah, P. M. McElroy, S. Scarborough, D. Cadogan, and J. W. Pahle, Light
Curing Rigidizable Inflatable Wing, Proc. 45th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics,
and Materials Conf., April 19-22, 2004, Palm Springs, CA, paper 2004-1809.
8
A. E. Hoyt Haight, L. A. Harrah, and R. E. Allred, Light Curing Resin Systems for Use in Inflatable Wing
Applications, Proc. 50th Intl. SAMPE Symp. and Exhib., Long Beach, CA, May 1-5, 2005.
9
R.E. Allred, L.A. Harrah, A.E. Hoyt, P.M. McElroy, R.A. Wise, and M.C. Lou, Inflatable Spacecraft Using
Rigidization on Command (ROC) Concept, Proc. 41st AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC SDM Conf., Atlanta, GA,
April 3-6, 2000, paper 2000-1637.
10
P. M. McElroy, R. A. Wise, R. E. Allred, L. A. Harrah, and A. E. Hoyt, Orbital Thermal Analyses of
Rigidization on Command (ROC) Materials for Inflatable Spacecraft, 31st Intl Conf. on Environmental Systems,
Orlando, FL, July 2001, Technical Paper Series 2001-01-2220.
11
R. E. Allred, A. E. Hoyt, P. M. McElroy, S. Scarborough, and D. P. Cadogan, UV Rigidized CarbonReinforced Isogrid Boom for Gossamer Applications, Proc. Space Technology and Applications Intl Forum-STAIF
2002, Albuquerque, NM, Feb. 3-6, 2002, pp. 406-413.
12
R. E. Allred, A. E. Hoyt, P. M. McElroy, S. Scarborough, D. P. Cadogan, UV Rigidizable Carbon-Reinforced
Isogrid Inflatable Booms, Proc. 43rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials
Conf., April 22-25, 2002, Denver, CO, Paper 2002-1202.
13
A. E. Hoyt, L. A. Harrah, R. E. Allred, and P. M. McElroy, Rigidization-on-Command (ROC) Resin
Development for Lightweight Isogrid Booms with MLI, 33rdt Intl Conf. on Environmental Systems, Vancouver, BC,
July 2003, Technical Paper Series 2003-01-2342.
14
L. A. Harrah, A. E. Hoyt Haight, M. R. Sprouse, R. E. Allred, P. M. McElroy, S. Scarborough and A. Dixit,
Resin and Manufacturing Development for Light Curing Inflatable Composite Booms, Proc. 45th

15
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conf., April 19-22, 2004, Palm
Springs, CA, paper 2004-1659.
15
A. E. Hoyt, L. A. Harrah, M. R. Sprouse, R. E. Allred, P. M. McElroy, S. E. Scarborough and D. P. Cadogan,
"Light Curing Resins for Rigidizing Inflatable Space Structures, Proc. 49th Intl. SAMPE Symp. and Exhib., Long
Beach, CA, May 17-20, 2004.
16
New Sandia UV LEDs emit short-wavelength, high-power output, Sandia National Laboratories Press
Release, November, 18, 2003, http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2003/elect-semisensors/uvleds.html ; UV LEDs have multiple uses, Sandia National Laboratories Press Release, November 18,
2003, http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2003/elect-semi-sensors/uvuse.html.
17
S. K. Mirle and R. J. Kumpfmiller, Photosensitive compositions useful in three-dimensional part-building and
having improved photospeed, U.S. Patent 5,418,112 (1995).
18
W. Shi and B. Ranby, UV Curing of Composites Base on Modified Unsaturated Polyester, J. Appl. Polym.
Sci., 1994, 51, 1129.
19
J.F.G.A. Jansen, A.A. Dias, M. Dorschu, and B. Coussens, Fast Monomers: Factors Affecting the Inherent
Reactivity of Acrylate Monomers in Photoinitiated Acrylate Polymerization, Macromolecules 2003, 36, 3861.
20
J. Dreese, DesignFOIL Aero Basics and Design FOIL User Guide, DreeseCode Software, Capitola, CA,
2001.

16
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics