nTop Drives Rapid UAV Innovation

Natalie Scala on nTop Drives Rapid UAV Innovation, nTop Intern 2026

This summer, I had the opportunity to work as an Aircraft Design Fellow at nTop, focusing on detail design, parametric modeling, and Design for Additive Manufacturing (DFAM). Over 3 months, we designed eight 3D printable UAVs from scratch. As a third-year Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering student at the University of Florida, this internship gave me the chance to learn about computational parametric design and apply my DFMA knowledge to hands-on rapid prototyping and real-world flight testing.

The Experience

Throughout these 3 months of designing and building various remote-controlled planes, I learned more about the core principles of aircraft design – not just theory, but how to materialize that knowledge into tangible RC UAVs.

Doing this meant harnessing foundational aerodynamic concepts and getting them to work under real manufacturing limitations. Whether pushing through rapid modeling sprints, working through design reviews with impressive aerospace engineers like George Irving and Ian Marks, or overcoming physical constraints in the manufacturing room, every iteration made me think about how geometry impacts both airworthiness and production.

Building Dynamic, Parametric Aircraft Workflows

The first step of my summer with nTop was mastering implicit modeling. Instead of traditional B-rep CAD where small geometric changes break all the downstream operations, nTop allowed us to create fully adaptive master files. Once the underlying workflow is built with proper parameterization, updating a wing (span, dihedral, taper, twist, and more) or swapping out a tail end (between conventional, T-tail, and V-tail) takes only a few seconds as all the internal geometry can be recalculated in parallel without destroying a single feature.

Some of the specific custom blocks and features I designed were:

(Multi-) Fuselage Block: One of the first custom blocks I created for a fuselage that could be dictated by a length and three 4-point splines (top, side, and bottom). This block was used for all of our tube-and-wing aircraft and flexed to meet our variety of OML designs. I later created an accompanying block that would produce 1-3 fuselages based on a dropdown menu, implicit fuselage body input, and specified spacing. Using these blocks in tandem means an aircraft body in seconds.

Fully Parameterized Wing Details: Created servo recesses, horn holes, wing spar channels, and wiring tubes that scale, rotate, and flex with any changes to the outer mold line (OML). I created a similar workflow for alignment dowels that aided us in assembling the aircraft sections.

Custom Spring Clip Block: Developed a reusable serpent spring clip where nearly every feature can be altered to fit its specific application. Named the Nata-Latch by George Irving, this allowed us to secure the fuselage access panel into place with full parametric control over clip dimensions and spring stiffness.

Multi-material Nose Cone: Engineered the workflow for a PLA Aero nose cone integrated with a PLA-CF (carbon fiber infused plastic) implant for mounting the motor. The carbon fiber provided more structural support for the weight and torque applied by the motor, without adding unnecessary weight. This same process was implemented for the dual wing-mounted motors on our final tube-and-wing plane. In doing this, I learned a lot about meshing as well as dual-nozzle multi-material printing. (My support document on this process is available on the nTop Community forum).

Airfoil Landing Gear Custom Block: Through iterative printing and physical load testing, I finalized a two-wheel PLA-CF bracket design with X-shaped struts and a mounting plate that conforms to the fuselage’s curves. I applied an airfoil profile to all of the bars to reduce drag since the gear was not retractable. This block outputs a printable bracket as well as fastener hole subtraction bodies (already subtracted from the bracket but to be implemented the fuselage) and a representative axle – all fully driven by custom parameters.

From File to Flight

Turning computational geometry into a physical aircraft requires troubleshooting manufacturing limitations of 3D printing and our own assembly skills:

Tolerance Test Batches: I designed and executed tolerancing test prints with spar channels oriented perpendicular and parallel to the print bed to eliminate post-processing friction. I shared my findings with the team, outlining which tolerances to use for loose, moderate, and tight/friction fits depending on the print’s orientation and implemented them in all our aircraft models.

Control Surface Assembly: We had initially planned to use piano wire for control surface hinges but quickly realized that it’d be better to use thin carbon rods for better tolerancing. Assembly with these proved to be slightly difficult with tolerances slightly tight for pushing the rod through the control surface but still too much wiggle when secured in the greater body. Ultimately, we turned to printing TPU dogbone-shaped ribbon hinges that slotted into the control surface and body. This created better alignment and tighter tolerances, as well as deflection that relied on the bendiness of the TPU ribbon rather than overcoming friction between carbon rods and printed pieces.
Multi-Material Print Slicing: I solved multi-nozzle print challenges and worked to optimize results using filaments such as PLA Aero, PLA-CF, and TPU across our Bambu and Anycubic printers. Through trial and error I figured out what temperatures, speeds, thicknesses, and infills worked best for our application.

Time & Production Management: nTop’s biggest flex is how it facilitates such rapid iteration. Our main workflow and first prototype were made in about 3 weeks. This allowed our first plane to be created from scratch and flown in under 30 days. Design changes only got faster from there since the main framework was already made, so in about two weeks, any values could be altered, or custom blocks updated or swapped. Because of that, our biggest inhibitor was not designing,modeling, or computational speed, but the actual time it took to print and assemble our UAVs. Especially as our designs scaled up throughout the summer, print time increased to 176 hours just for one of the final planes. Due to this and the sheer multitude of printed parts, it required organization and printing things in an order that maximized both my time in the office and overnight manufacturing. We also learned the importance of leaving a couple buffer days before flight if possible so that we could workshop any issues that came up in assembly and have time to test the electronics and taxi our plane.

Rapid Prototyping Case Study: Another testament to the ease of aircraft design and additive manufacturing in nTop was the mini plane I modeled separately in a single day. For our third flight, we had initially intended to fly both our dual prop 6 foot wingspan tube-and-wing as well as our large electric ducted fan flying wing. However, it would’ve taken over 300 print hours in combination which we did not have a week before flight. The Tuesday before our Friday flight we prioritized the EDF flying wing since it was our most distinct design (and therefore we wanted to test it ASAP) but we still wanted two aircraft to make it to the airfield. So I created a separate file for a small conventional tube-and-wing with 0.5m wing span in under a day to be able to set up prints that night. In another day and a half, the plane was printed and assembled, complete with shark mouth nose art and a streamlined .ntop file containing comments explaining nearly every block.

Deliverables & Key Takeaways

We went through a rapid build-and-test pipeline that proved how fast computational workflows facilitate speedy production. The ultimate payoff was at the airfield where we determined how well our digital models could actually fly, and pinpointed key areas for design iteration.

Over three months, we designed eight planes: Cool 1, Monty, Cool 2, Python, Vlad the Inhaler, Lil Cool, Super Cool, and The Vamp. Our most successful flights were for Cool 2 and Vlad the Inhaler – a nose prop 1.2m wingspan tube-and-wing and EDF flying wing.

It was incredibly rewarding to watch our completely 3D-printed aircraft takeoff after spending weeks fine tuning every detail of its geometry. Through observing performance and taking in our pilot’s feedback, we were able to improve upon our designs. For example, we determined where structural improvements needed to be made when landing gear fractured, and focused on precision control surface design when we realized pitch sensitivity or trim alignment were not ideal. Because our nTop master files were fully parameterized, any damage sustained during field testing was an opportunity rather than a setback. We could tweak part thickness or pin alignment, export a fresh mesh, slice, and re-print replacement sections in a matter of hours.

For myself, this summer internship was a transformative experience, as I:

Deepened aircraft design knowledge by applying core principles to tangible RC aircraft
Gained a working understanding of parametric computational design, going from beginner nTop Learn tutorials to complex master files that flex with a variety of inputs
Handled all of our 3D printing, jumping from no prior experience to running thousands of hours across several machines
Contributed to the community by developing several custom blocks and and publishing support guides on the nTop forum

Interning at nTop this summer has made me a more skillful engineer and taught me to communicate my work with confidence and supporting data. I’m looking forward to bringing nTop and the knowledge I have now to my team at UF to model and optimize our club’s UAV project. Having learned how to use this software, I can’t imagine going back to B-rep CAD!

Main menu

nTop Drives Rapid UAV Innovation

The Experience

Building Dynamic, Parametric Aircraft Workflows

From File to Flight

Deliverables & Key Takeaways

Natalie Scala