# Design of a Human Muscle-Powered Flying Machine
## 7 Conclusions  
This work focused on the design of a human-powered aircraft using advanced CAD/CAM software and CFD fluid dynamics analysis. The project aimed to develop a lightweight, eco-friendly flying machine by optimizing aerodynamic properties and material selection to meet initial design objectives. The main conclusions are related to the following:  
* Design Process and Achievements:
* A human-powered aircraft was designed using modern CAD/CAM software and CFD fluid mechanics analysis, aligning with the project goals established at the outset. * The design was found to be theoretically capable of flight, based on the conducted aerodynamic analyses. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Name** & **Year** & **Country** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Apr. Design** \\ **Flight Speed m/s** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Empty** \\ **Weight kg** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Wing Span** \\ **m** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Design** \\ **Power W** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Propeller** \\ **Speed rpm** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Operating** \\ **Altitude m** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline SUHPA Lazarus & 2021 & UK & 8.25 & 45 & 24 & 350 & 190 & - \\ \hline \begin{tabular}{c} Gossammer \\ Albutross \\ \end{tabular} & 1978 & USA & 8 & 32 & 29.8 & 300 & 100 & 3.5–7.5 \\ \hline \begin{tabular}{c} Velair 89 \\ \end{tabular} & 1989 & Germany & 8.6 & 30.5 & 23.2 & 225 & 190 & - \\ \hline Light Eagle & 1987 & USA & 7.8 & 42.1 & 34.7 & 225 & 115 & 2–6 \\ \hline DaSH v5 (or PA) & 2015 & USA & 6.8 & 44.8 & 33.3 & 300 & - & - \\ \hline Daedelus & 1988 & USA & 7.6 & 32 & 34 & 201 & 108 & 4.5–9.1 \\ \hline Airglow & 1990 & UK & 8 & 35 & 29 & 289 & 180 & - \\ \hline \begin{tabular}{c} Aerocycle 3 \\ \end{tabular} & 2014 & UK & 9.5 & 37 & 23 & 370 & 180 & - \\ \hline \begin{tabular}{c} Gossamer \\ Condor \\ \end{tabular} & 1977 & USA & 4.8 & 31.8 & 29.3 & 245 & 107 & 3–4 \\ \hline \begin{tabular}{c} Bionic Bat \\ \end{tabular} & 1984 & USA & 11.8 & 32.8 & 16.9 & 305 & 270 & - \\ \hline \begin{tabular}{c} Betterfly \\ \end{tabular} & 2009 & UK & 6.5 & 56.6 & 22 & 278 & - & - \\ \hline \
\begin{tabular}{c} Abhilasha \\ \end{tabular} & 2009 & Netherlands & 7 & 40 & 26 & 350 & 115 & - \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}{c} Monarch B \\ \end{tabular} & 1984 & USA & 9.7 & 32.7 & 18.75 & 410 & 210 & - \\ \hline Proposed design & 2024 & Poland & 9.5 & 26.4 & 28 & 270 & 185 & - \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Summarized important operating data of selected HPAs. * Aerodynamic Analysis Challenges:
* The selection of software for aerodynamic analysis posed a challenge during the design process. * Initially, the 3 DExperience program's Fluid Scenario Creation module was used for CFD analysis, but this approach was time-consuming. * To optimize workflow, the decision was made to switch to XFLR5, a software based on the VLM2 (Vortex Lattice Method), which is faster and better suited for preliminary design stages (Advantages of XFLR5: Quick analysis time (less than 90 s) and ease of wing shape definition through parametric modeling; Limitations of XFLR5: Lower accuracy compared to CFD and limited ability to handle highly complex shapes). * Final aerodynamic analyses were completed using 3 DExperience for greater precision and to address complex shape requirements. * Fairing Design Issues:
* Final aerodynamic analysis revealed high pressure at the fairing's nose, increasing the overall drag of the aircraft. * To reduce drag, modifications to the fairing's shape will be necessary, aiming for a more streamlined design. * Structural Strength Analysis:
* No structural strength simulations (MES) were performed due to the heterogeneous properties of the composite materials used. * Structural analysis would require detailed data on fiber orientation and material properties, which was beyond the scope of this work.