Da Vinci Recursive Improvement CAD Harness

Unmodified baseline for the fixed 0.5 kg payload and 150 Wh battery. Establishes the reference for subsequent optimization; performance has not yet been evaluated.

Engineering estimates establish a feasible 68.33 km baseline at 17 m/s. Cruise has 105.42 Wh after reserve/overhead; hardware plus profile drag contributes 2.30 of 3.59 N. Static margin is 8.99% within the 5–20% band. Structure passes, but wing deflection is 44.2 mm against a 52.5 mm limit, constraining weight cuts.

Prioritize parasite-drag reduction, especially hardware/profile drag, before structural thinning. Keep 150 Wh and the 0.5 kg mission payload fixed; recheck static margin, stress and deflection. Protect max speed ≥18.05 m/s and payload capacity ≥0.912 kg (95% of baseline). Compare nominal and adverse range against 68.33 and 51.84 km.

Best-range drag: body 0.56 N · induced 0.72 N · profile 1.11 N · hardware 1.20 N. Consumption: 1.54 Wh/km.

Wing screening: 116.2 MPa stress · 44.2 mm deflection. Boom stress: 31.4 MPa.

Electrical cruise power across supported airspeeds.

Combined adverse range: 51.8 km. Passes scenario constraints. Assumes 10% less usable battery energy, 20% more parasite drag and 10% more empty mass.

Finer-grid validation: converged within 3%; aircraft checks passed.

Targets the baseline’s 1.109 N profile and 0.562 N body drag with a longer, narrower wing, slimmer fuselage, smaller aft all-moving tail and shorter booms. Enlarged tapered spar, 1.30 mm shell and 45 mm box separation address structure and packaging. Keeps 0.5 kg payload and 150 Wh fixed. Range improvement, 5–20% static margin and 95% speed/capacity retention require evaluation.

At 14 m/s, screening estimates 77.45 km at 1.386 Wh/km. Cruise energy is 120 Wh usable minus 12.66 Wh overhead. Profile/body/hardware drag are 0.862/0.298/0.791 N. Static margin is 15.48%; structure passes with 45.75 mm wing deflection. Max speed is 19.5 m/s and payload capacity 0.96 kg; 95% baseline retention remains unverified.

Target hardware/profile drag while preserving wing stiffness. Investigate zero-payload static-margin failure; maintain 5–20% across intended loadings. Keep 0.5 kg payload and 150 Wh fixed. Obtain baseline range, speed and capacity to verify improvement and 95% retention. Recheck robustness: combined-adverse range is 58.52 km, with 18.75 m/s max speed.

Best-range drag: body 0.30 N · induced 0.74 N · profile 0.86 N · hardware 0.79 N. Consumption: 1.39 Wh/km.

Wing screening: 105.8 MPa stress · 45.8 mm deflection. Boom stress: 31.4 MPa.

Electrical cruise power across supported airspeeds.

Combined adverse range: 58.5 km. Passes scenario constraints. Assumes 10% less usable battery energy, 20% more parasite drag and 10% more empty mass.

Targets the 77.45 km incumbent's induced/profile/body/hardware drag of 0.737/0.862/0.298/0.791 N with a longer, strongly tapered wing, larger thin-wall spar, compact hull, smaller all-moving tail and shorter booms. Aft battery placement targets the reported unloaded static-margin failure; battery and payload boxes have a 10 mm axial gap. Keeps 0.5 kg payload and 150 Wh fixed. Range improvement, 5–

Screening estimate: 82.39 km (+6.4%); 107.24 Wh remains for cruise at 1.302 Wh/km. Profile/hardware drag dominate (0.880/0.752 N). Static margin is 11.82% nominal; unloaded is feasible. Structure passes; wing stress/deflection are 100.5 MPa/54.2 mm. Speed 19.5 m/s and capacity 0.960 kg exceed protected 18.05 m/s/0.912 kg.

Reduce profile/hardware drag before adding span; monitor wing deflection against the 65 mm limit. Keep 150 Wh and 0.5 kg payload fixed. Recheck 5–20% static margin across payloads, structure, and ≥18.05 m/s speed/≥0.912 kg capacity with the unchanged evaluator. Improve energy/drag robustness: combined-adverse range is 61.96 km.

Best-range drag: body 0.26 N · induced 0.60 N · profile 0.88 N · hardware 0.75 N. Consumption: 1.30 Wh/km.

Wing screening: 100.5 MPa stress · 54.2 mm deflection. Boom stress: 42.2 MPa.

Electrical cruise power across supported airspeeds.

Combined adverse range: 62.0 km. Passes scenario constraints. Assumes 10% less usable battery energy, 20% more parasite drag and 10% more empty mass.

Targets the 82.39 km incumbent’s 0.880 N profile and 0.260 N body drag with a 17.5% smaller wing, compact hull, smaller all-moving tail and rebalanced booms. Forward payload/aft battery packaging leaves a 5 mm box gap and addresses iteration 2’s unloaded static-margin failure. The thicker-wall, chord-tapered spar has a 10.46%-chord root. Keeps 0.5 kg payload and 150 Wh fixed. Range improvement, co

Screening estimates give 84.74 km vs 82.39 at 1.280 Wh/km. Profile/body drag fell to 0.803/0.233 N. Static margin is 9.20%; unloaded screening and structure pass (wing 97.1 MPa, 53.5 mm deflection). Max speed/payload capacity are 19.75 m/s/0.960 kg, above protected 18.05/0.912 floors. Battery -10%/parasite +20% cut range to 75.36/76.46 km.

Target profile and hardware drag (0.803/0.728 N) plus 11.54 Wh overhead while preserving wing stiffness. Keep 150 Wh and 0.5 kg mission payload fixed. Recheck containment, 5–20% static margin across loading, structure and protected speed/payload capacity with the unchanged evaluator. Track the 63.90 km combined-adverse range, not just nominal gains.

Best-range drag: body 0.23 N · induced 0.63 N · profile 0.80 N · hardware 0.73 N. Consumption: 1.28 Wh/km.

Wing screening: 97.1 MPa stress · 53.5 mm deflection. Boom stress: 37.6 MPa.

Electrical cruise power across supported airspeeds.

Combined adverse range: 63.9 km. Passes scenario constraints. Assumes 10% less usable battery energy, 20% more parasite drag and 10% more empty mass.

Targets the 84.74 km incumbent’s 0.803 N profile and 0.728 N hardware drag with an 11.5% larger, straight-quarter-chord wing, thinner-wall tapered spar, compact hull, smaller all-moving tail and shorter booms. Retains forward-payload packaging following iteration 2’s unloaded-margin failure; boxes have a 5 mm axial gap. Spar root diameter is 10.47% chord. Keeps 0.5 kg payload and 150 Wh fixed. Imp

Screening estimate: 83.85 km trails 84.74 km; profile/hardware drag rose to 0.828/0.778 N. Cruise has 108.18 Wh at 1.290 Wh/km. Static margin is 11.23%; structure passes with 54.0 mm wing deflection. The unloaded case passes, and 19.5 m/s speed plus 0.960 kg capacity exceed protected floors.

Use the unchanged evaluator to isolate wing-area and hardware-drag changes, targeting lower Wh/km. Hold 150 Wh and 0.5 kg mission payload; retain forward packaging. Recheck containment, 5–20% static margin across payloads and spar stiffness. Protect ≥18.05 m/s speed and ≥0.912 kg capacity; require range >84.74 km before replacing the incumbent.

Best-range drag: body 0.24 N · induced 0.63 N · profile 0.83 N · hardware 0.78 N. Consumption: 1.29 Wh/km.

Wing screening: 97.3 MPa stress · 54.0 mm deflection. Boom stress: 34.7 MPa.

Electrical cruise power across supported airspeeds.

Combined adverse range: 63.2 km. Passes scenario constraints. Assumes 10% less usable battery energy, 20% more parasite drag and 10% more empty mass.

Targets the 84.74 km incumbent after iteration 5 regressed to 83.85 km. A higher-aspect-ratio wing, larger all-moving tail, slimmer hull and rebalanced booms address the incumbent’s 0.803 N profile and 0.728 N hardware drag. Retains forward-payload packaging following iteration 2’s reported unloaded-margin failure, with a 5 mm box gap. Spar diameter is 10.483% root chord. Keeps 0.5 kg payload and

Screening estimates 84.35 km, below the 84.74 km incumbent. Profile drag rose to 0.866 N; hardware barely changed at 0.726 N. Cruise has ~108 Wh at 1.280 Wh/km. Static margin is 9.44%; structure passes (56 mm wing deflection vs 65 mm limit). Max speed 19.5 m/s and capacity 0.960 kg clear protected minima.

Sweep wing/tail area and boom geometry to reduce profile/hardware drag. Keep 150 Wh and 0.5 kg payload fixed; recheck 5–20% static margin loaded/unloaded, containment and spar stress/deflection. Protect ≥18.05 m/s and ≥0.912 kg capacity. Promote only if the unchanged evaluator confirms range above 84.74 km.

Best-range drag: body 0.22 N · induced 0.59 N · profile 0.87 N · hardware 0.73 N. Consumption: 1.28 Wh/km.

Wing screening: 93.8 MPa stress · 56.0 mm deflection. Boom stress: 38.9 MPa.

Electrical cruise power across supported airspeeds.

Combined adverse range: 63.1 km. Passes scenario constraints. Assumes 10% less usable battery energy, 20% more parasite drag and 10% more empty mass.

Targets the 85.14 km incumbent, whose induced/body/profile/hardware drag was 0.659/0.225/0.782/0.726 N. Unlike iterations 5–6's regressions, limits main-wing area growth to 2.2%, pairing it with a higher-aspect-ratio all-moving tail, rebalanced wing position, shorter booms and lighter shell. Retains forward-payload packaging after iteration 2's reported unloaded-margin failure; boxes have a 3 mm a

Screening estimates regressed to 84.29 km from 85.14: lower induced drag did not offset higher profile/hardware drag (0.876/0.778 N). Cruise costs 1.290 Wh/km. Nominal static margin is 9.33%; structure passes, but fails at 0.96 kg payload. Speed 19.5 m/s and capacity 0.929 kg exceed protected floors.

Reduce profile/hardware drag before adding area; compare at matched speeds with 150 Wh and 0.5 kg payload fixed. Reserve and overhead leave 108.74 Wh for cruise. Recheck structural stiffness and containment; verify loaded/unloaded static margins within 5–20% (unloaded value not reported). Protect ≥18.05 m/s speed and ≥0.912 kg capacity.

Best-range drag: body 0.24 N · induced 0.59 N · profile 0.88 N · hardware 0.78 N. Consumption: 1.29 Wh/km.

Wing screening: 103.1 MPa stress · 51.1 mm deflection. Boom stress: 39.0 MPa.

Electrical cruise power across supported airspeeds.

Combined adverse range: 63.0 km. Passes scenario constraints. Assumes 10% less usable battery energy, 20% more parasite drag and 10% more empty mass.

Targets the 85.14 km incumbent, whose induced/body/profile/hardware drag was 0.659/0.225/0.782/0.726 N. A 12% larger, higher-Reynolds-number wing targets slower efficient cruise without iteration 8’s oversized tail. Pair it with a tapered afterbody, moderate all-moving tail, shorter booms and a 3 mm box gap. Restore the 1.28 mm shell after iteration 8’s full-payload structural failure. The minimum

Screening estimate: 84.80 km misses 85.14. Induced drag fell 0.659→0.624 N, but profile rose 0.782→0.821 N; hardware remains 0.725 N. Cruise has 108.54 Wh at 1.280 Wh/km. Static margin is 9.61% nominal; structure passes (52.2 mm wing deflection). Speed/payload capacity remain 19.5 m/s/0.960 kg.

Target profile/hardware drag rather than further wing growth. Keep 150 Wh and 0.5 kg payload fixed; retain shell strength and spar stiffness. Verify spar containment, full-payload structure and 5–20% loaded/unloaded static margins. Use the unchanged evaluator to confirm range improvement while protecting ≥18.05 m/s speed and ≥0.912 kg capacity.

Best-range drag: body 0.22 N · induced 0.62 N · profile 0.82 N · hardware 0.73 N. Consumption: 1.28 Wh/km.

Wing screening: 102.1 MPa stress · 52.2 mm deflection. Boom stress: 36.6 MPa.

Electrical cruise power across supported airspeeds.

Combined adverse range: 64.6 km. Passes scenario constraints. Assumes 10% less usable battery energy, 20% more parasite drag and 10% more empty mass.

Targets the 85.14 km incumbent with a longer, narrower wing, smaller-area high-aspect-ratio all-moving tail, shorter full-width fuselage section and rebalanced rotor stations. Its best-cruise induced/body/profile/hardware drag was 0.659/0.225/0.782/0.726 N; iteration 9 showed that larger wing area alone did not improve range. Retain the 1.28 mm shell after iteration 8’s full-payload structural fai

Screened range is 83.30 km, below 85.14: induced drag fell to 0.556 N, but profile/hardware rose to 0.851/0.840 N. Battery -10%/parasite +20% reduce range to 74.11/74.88 km. Nominal static margin is 12.77%; structure passes with 51.8 mm wing deflection. Speed 19.75 m/s and capacity 0.960 kg exceed protected floors.

Prioritize hardware/profile drag and Wh/km over further span. Hold 150 Wh and 0.5 kg payload; retain the 1.28 mm shell and verify spar stiffness, containment and 5–20% loaded/unloaded static margins. With the unchanged evaluator, require range >85.14 km while keeping max speed ≥18.05 m/s and capacity ≥0.912 kg.

Best-range drag: body 0.26 N · induced 0.56 N · profile 0.85 N · hardware 0.84 N. Consumption: 1.31 Wh/km.

Wing screening: 98.4 MPa stress · 51.8 mm deflection. Boom stress: 36.4 MPa.

Electrical cruise power across supported airspeeds.

Combined adverse range: 63.4 km. Passes scenario constraints. Assumes 10% less usable battery energy, 20% more parasite drag and 10% more empty mass.

Targets the 85.14 km incumbent’s induced/body/profile/hardware drag of 0.659/0.225/0.782/0.726 N with a larger efficient wing, longer-chord all-moving tail, tapered afterbody and shorter booms. Avoids iteration 10’s short-chord tail regression; retains the 1.28 mm shell after iteration 8’s full-payload structural failure. The chord-tapered spar has a 10.492%-chord root and increased wall thickness

Screening estimate: 84.86 km misses 85.14 despite lower body/hardware drag; induced stays 0.659 N and profile rises to 0.800 N. Cruise has 108.33 Wh at 1.277 Wh/km. Nominal static margin is 9.39%; nominal structure passes with 54.2 mm wing deflection. Speed 19.5 m/s and capacity 0.960 kg clear protected floors.

Reduce profile/hardware drag and improve propulsion efficiency. Keep 150 Wh, 0.5 kg payload and 1.28 mm shell; protect speed ≥18.05 m/s and capacity ≥0.912 kg. Recheck containment, integrated spar stiffness and 5–20% loaded/unloaded static margins with the unchanged evaluator; require range >85.14 km.

Best-range drag: body 0.21 N · induced 0.66 N · profile 0.80 N · hardware 0.67 N. Consumption: 1.28 Wh/km.

Wing screening: 100.3 MPa stress · 54.2 mm deflection. Boom stress: 36.6 MPa.

Electrical cruise power across supported airspeeds.

Combined adverse range: 64.5 km. Passes scenario constraints. Assumes 10% less usable battery energy, 20% more parasite drag and 10% more empty mass.

Finer-grid validation: converged within 3%; aircraft checks passed.

Targets the 85.14 km incumbent, whose induced/body/profile/hardware drag was 0.659/0.225/0.782/0.726 N. Combines increased washout, a longer-chord all-moving tail, reshaped afterbody, shorter booms and forward battery adjustment with a 2 mm box gap. Retains the 1.28 mm shell after iteration 8's full-payload structural failure; avoids iteration 10's short-chord-tail approach. Spar root is 10.474% c

Screening estimates 85.03 km, below 85.14: reduced induced drag is offset by higher body/profile/hardware drag. Cruise has 108.92 Wh at 1.281 Wh/km. Static margin is 10.23%; nominal structure passes with 50.6 mm wing deflection. Speed/payload capacity remain 19.75 m/s/0.960 kg, above protected 18.05 m/s/0.912 kg.

Keep the incumbent. Isolate tail/boom/afterbody changes targeting profile (0.821 N) and hardware (0.752 N) drag. Retain the 1.28 mm shell; recheck containment, tapered-spar stiffness and full-payload structure with the unchanged evaluator. Hold 150 Wh, 0.5 kg mission payload, 5–20% static margins, and protected speed/capacity of >=18.05 m/s and >=0.912 kg.

Best-range drag: body 0.23 N · induced 0.63 N · profile 0.82 N · hardware 0.75 N. Consumption: 1.28 Wh/km.

Wing screening: 104.8 MPa stress · 50.6 mm deflection. Boom stress: 37.1 MPa.

Electrical cruise power across supported airspeeds.

Combined adverse range: 63.1 km. Passes scenario constraints. Assumes 10% less usable battery energy, 20% more parasite drag and 10% more empty mass.

Finer-grid validation: converged within 3%; aircraft checks passed.