PASSENGER AIRCRAFT
Aircraft design lab - i
Submitted by
ABBAS.S
(090101130001)
Banu priya . p
(090101130008)
Dinesh . r
(090101130014)
Dinesh prabu . m
(090101130015)
AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING
KARPAGAM INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,COIMBATORE.
COIMBATORE-641 105
Certified
that
this
is
the
bonafide
record
of
work
done
Staff-in-charge
Head of the Department
REGISTER No:
Submitted for the Third year / Sixth semester Examination of this
Institution conducted on
Internal Examiner
External Examiner
INDEX
MARKS
EXPT
. NO.
DATE
NAME OF THE
EXPERIMENT
PAGE
NO
Preparat
ion
Recor
d
V
i
v
a
Tot
al
INITIA
L OF
THE
STAFF
CONTENTS
List of symbols
Introduction
Literature survey
10
Weight estimation
24
Engine selection
32
Airfoil selection
33
Wing design
35
40
Drag estimation
48
Lift estimation
54
64
70
Reference
80
LISTOF SYMBOLS
R -Range
V -Velocity
C -specific fuel consumption
E -Loitering time
L/D -lift to drag ratio
V alt -Velocity at altitude
alt -Density at altitude
S - wing surface area
b - wing span
alt -coefficient of viscosity at altitude
C HT -Horizontal tail volume coefficient
LHT - Horizontal tail arm moment
S HT - Horizontal tail area
S W -Wing area
CW
-Wing span
S W -Wing area
VTO - Vertical take-off distance
STO - Take-off distance
FTO - Take-off thrust
VA - Approach Velocity
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
The end of the phase is the decision if the airplane is to be manufactured or not. It is no longer a
critical condition where you bet your company on full scale development of a new airplane.
DETAIL DESIGN:This phase is literally the nuts and bolts phase of airplane design. The aerodynamic, propulsion,
structures, performance, flight control analysis are over in the preliminary phase. The airplane is
to be fabricated and machined. The size, number and location of rivets, fasteners are determined
now. Flight simulators are developed. At the end of this phase, the aircraft is ready to be
fabricated.
THE SEVEN INTELLECTUAL PIVOT POINTS FOR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN:The overall conceptual design is anchored b seven intellectual pivot points seven factors that
anchor the conceptual design thought process. They allow different, detailed thinking to reach
out in all directions from each point.
REQUIREMENTS:The requirements are given by the people who are going to buy the customers. For other
aircrafts, these requirements are usually set by the manufacturer in full appreciation of needs of
owner. Requirements of one airplane are different from the other. There can be no stipulated
specific standard. There must be established requirements that serve as impinge off point for
design process. The requirements that are frequently stipulated are:
Range
Takeoff distance
Stalling velocity
Endurance
Maximum velocity
Rate of climb
For dog fighting combat, maximum turn rate and minimum turn radius
REQUIREMENTS
NO
YES
OPTIMIZATION IS IT BEST DESIGN?
YES
BETTER
NEW CONCEPT
SIZING AND
REQUIREMENT
IDEAS
TECHNOLOGY
AVAILABLE
INITIAL
PROPULSIO
PERFORMANCES
AERO
CONCEPT
GUESS
WEIGHTS
S FIRST
REFORMED SIZE
ETC
PRELIMNARY
PERFORMANCE
REVISED
WEIGH
LANDING
AER
PROPULSI
STRUCTUR
COS
T
CRITICAL PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS:Requirements stipulate the performance of the new aircraft. The critical parameters are:
CONSTRAINT DIAGRAM:A constraint diagram is constructed which identifies allowable solution space for airplane design.
A constraint diagram consists of plots o the sea level thrust to take off weight ratio versus wing
loading attakeoff weight ratioTO/WO versuswing loading at takeoff WO /S determined by
intellectual pivot point.
SIZING AND
TRADE
STUDIES
DESIGN
REQUIREMENT
ANALYSIS
DESIGN
CONCEPT
LITERATURE SURVEY
LITERATURE SURVEY
It is very easy to design an aircraft if we have datas about already existing aircrafts of similar
type. It provides more satisfaction and avoids confusion while choosing some design parameters
for our aircraft. In this detailed survey some many important design drivers like aspect ratio,
wing loading, overall dimensions and engine specifications are determined for our reference. It
assists in proposing a new design and modification in our design which will improve the
performance of the proposed aircraft. This assures the performance of the aircraft as per the
design calculations and easy way of designing an aircraft within particular period of time. So in
this literature survey we have collected some ten already existing 20 seated jet transport aircraft
for our reference of design parameters. Mostly these aircrafts have similar characteristics in
many designs aspects which are shown in the table.
GEOMETRIC SPECIFICATION
S.NO
AIRCRAFTNAM
E
IAI Avara
ASPECTRATIO WINGSPAN(m)
10.06
20.96
WINGAREA(m^2
)
43.68
CASA C 212
Aviocar
De Havilland 300Series
10.03
20.28
41
10.05
19.8
39
De Havilland 400Series
10.05
19.8
39
PZL M28
12.25
22.06
39.72
Antonova An-38
11.48
22.06
42.4
Antonova An-28
12.19
22
39.7
8
9
Dornier 328
Dornier 228
11
9
20.98
16.97
40
32
10
10
19.78
39.4
11
8.07
15.33
29.10
12
Beechcraft 1900
9.52
17.64
32.67
13
Harbin y-12
9.52
17.24
34.67
14
11.15
19.79
35.12
15
16
Short-330
C-23A
12.3
12.3
22.76
22.78
42.1
42.1
17
C-23B/C
12.26
22.8
42.4
18
Jetstream 41
10.47
18.42
32.4
19
Embraer 123
vector
11.5
17.72
20
PZL M28
12.25
22.06
S.NO
AIRCRAFTNAME
27.2
LENGTH(m)
39.72
HEIGHT(m)
IAI Avara
12.69
5.21
16.20
6.3
15.77
5.93
15.77
4.9
PZL M28
13.16
5.06
Antonova An-38
15.67
4.6
Antonova An-28
12.98
7.24
Dornier 328
Dornier 228
21.11
4.86
16.56
6.35
20
4.92
11
15.10
4.72
12
Beechcraft 1900
17.62
5.68
13
Harbin y-12
18.86
4.6
14
12.21
4.95
15
Short-330
C-23A
17.69
4.95
17.69
17.7
5.74
19.25
5.97
18.09
4.9
11.4
4.7
10
16
C-23B/C
17
Jetstream 41
18
Embraer 123 vector
19
20
PZL M28
WEIGHT SPECIFICATION
AIRCRAFTNAME
EMPTY
WEIGHT(kg)
IAI Avara
3999
6804
3780
7700
3400
5670
3628
5670
PZL M28
4100
7500
Antonova An-38
5300
9500
Antonova An-28
3900
6100
Dornier 328
Dornier 228
8920
13990
3739
6600
7070
11500
3393
5900
S.NO
11
12
Beechcraft 1900
4732
7764
13
Harbin y-12
2840
5300
14
3331
5670
15
Short-330
C-23A
6680
10387
6440
10387
7276
11610
6416
10880
6230
7711
10
16
C-23B/C
17
Jetstream 41
18
Embraer 123 vector
19
20
PZL M28
3628
7500
POWERPLANT SPECIFICATION
S.NO
AIRCRAFTNAME
IAI Avara
POWER PLANT(hp)
THRUST
POWER(kw)
559
617
559
507
820
De Havilland 400-Series
4
5
PZL M28
Antonova An-38
Honeywell TPE331
1118
Antonova An-28
720
Dornier 328
Dornier 228
11
12
13
10
578
1340
559
955
Harbin y-12
462
14
533
15
16
Short-330
C-23A
C-23B/C
893
894
1062
AlliedSignal TPE331
1250
Garret TPF351-20A
969
17
Jetstream 41
18
Embraer 123 vector
19
20
PZL M28
AIRCRAFTNAME
S.NO
WING
LOADING(kg/m^2)
820
CREW
2
1
IAI Avara
155.77
187.8
145.38
145.38
PZL M28
188.8
Antonova An-38
224
Antonova An-28
146
Dornier 328
Dornier 228
349.75
206.25
11
12
Beechcraft 1900
237.65
13
Harbin y-12
152.87
14
136.6
15
Short-330
C-23A
247
247
274
10
16
291.87
202.75
C-23B/C
17
Jetstream 41
18
336
284
188.8
PZL M28
PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION
S.NO
AIRCRAFTNAME
MAXIMUM
SPEED(km/h)
SERVICE
SEILING(km/h)
IAI Avara
CASA C 212 Aviocar
326
7620
370
7925
314
7620
314
7620
7620
De Havilland 300Series
De Havilland 400Series
PZL M28
355
Antonova An-38
405
Antonova An-28
355
6000
Dornier 328
Dornier 228
620
9455
433
8535
608
9085
382
6550
11
12
Beechcraft 1900
546
7620
13
Harbin y-12
328
7000
14
324
6858
15
Short-330
C-23A
352
6400
10
16
352
3500
400
4252
546
7925
593
10670
355
7620
C-23B/C
17
Jetstream 41
18
Embraer 123 vector
19
20
PZL M28
AIRCRAFTNAME
RANGE(km)
RATE OF CLIMB
S.NO
6.6
1
IAI Avara
1056
1811
8.3
1690
8.1
1690
8.1
11
3
De Havilland 400-Series
4
5
PZL M28
1500
Antonova An-38
1750
Antonova An-28
510
Dornier 328
Dornier 228
1850
12
1111
7.5
1750
8.3
1964
8.3
11
12
Beechcraft 1900
707
13.28
13
Harbin y-12
1340
8.1
14
1200
8.3
10
15
Short-330
C-23A
16
695
1239
1907
1433
11.2
1852
8.3
C-23B/C
17
Jetstream 41
18
Embraer 123 vector
19
20
PZL M28
1500
Aspect Ratio
ASPECT RATIO
6
4
2
0
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650
speed
Service Ceiling
SERVICE CEILING(m)
4
2
0
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650
Speed
Speed Vs b/l
12
10
8
b/l
Rate of climb
4
2
0
250
300
350
400
450
Speed
500
550
600
650
Wing Loading
200
wing loading(kg/m2)
150
100
50
0
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650
Speed
Speed Vs Range(m)
2500
2000
1500
Range
RANGE (km)
1000
500
0
250
300
350
400
450
Speed
500
550
600
650
Rate of climb
Rate of climb
4
2
0
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650
Speed
RESULT:
From the above literature survey graphs and calculation,
1. Velocity Vs Range
Velocity=370km/h
Range=300km
2. Velocity Vs Service ceiling
Velocity=370km/h
Service ceiling=7925m
3. VelocityVs Wing loading
Velocity=370km/h
Wing loading =187.9kg/m2
4. Velocity Vsb/l
Velocity=370km/h
b/l=1.256
5. VelocityVs Aspect ratio
Velocity=370km/h
Aspect ratio=10.03
6. VelocityVs Rate of climb
Velocity=370km/h
Rate of climb=8.3m/s.
WEIGHT ESTIMATION
The major factor that determines the whole design of aircraft especially the selection of overall
weight, airfoil and power plant of the aircraft.
Total weight of an airplane is given by,
WTO =WC+WPL+WF+WE
Where,
WTO = Overall weight of the aircraft
WC = crew weight
WPL = weight of the payload
WF = weight of the fuel
WE = empty weight
To simplify the calculation, both fuel and empty weights can be expressed as fractions of the
total takeoff weight, i.e., Wf/WO. Equation
WF
WTO
WO = WC+WP+
)W +(
WE
WTO
TO
)W
TO
WTO
WF
WTO
)W (
WE
WTO
TO
WTO =
)W
TO
= WC+WPL
WC WPL
1 WF / WTO WE / WTO
380
1-(W f/WTO) (WE / WTO )
MISSION PROFILE:-
From the figure the various stages of aircraft during mission is as follows,
1 start &warm up
2 Taxiing in the runway
3 Takeoff
4
Climb
Cruising
6 Loiter
7 Descent and
8 Landing.
For subsonic jet transport aircraft weight fuel fraction is,
(W8/W0) =( W1/W0)( W2/W1) ( W3/W2) ( W4/W3) ( W5/W4) ( W6/W5) ( W7/W6)
(W8/W7)
APPROXIMATE WEIGHT ESTIMATION:
Weight fraction for each profile in mission segment,
For Warm up,
(W1/W0) =0.995.
For Taxy,
(W2/W1) =0.997.
For Takeoff,
(W3/W2) =0.998.
For Climb,
(W4/W3) =0.992.
For Cruising,
(W5/W4) =exp
RC
V L / D
Where,
SYMBOL
DESIGN PARAMETERS
DESIGN VALUES
S
R
V
L/D
C
So,
range
velocity
lift to drag ratio
specific fuel consumption
1811km
102.78m/s
10
0.5
= 0.414
For loiter,
Assume 10 minutes for loitering,
(W6/W5) =exp
EC
L / D
Where,
SYMBOL
DESIGN PARAMETERS
DESIGN VALUES
S
E
L/D
Loitering time
lift to drag ratio
12s
12
C
So,
(W6/W5) =exp
[ -120.4 ]
12
=0.670
For descent,
(W7/W6) =0.993
For landing,
(W8/W7) =0.993
Then,
(WF/WTO) = (1.06 (1-W8/W0))
=0.775
Assume Empty Weight fraction,
(WE/WTO) = 0.56
So, overall weight,
W TO=
2600
1-(W f/WTO) (WE / WTO)
0.4
RESULT:
Thus the final Takeoff weight of the proposed aircraft was estimated using FUEL FRACTION
METHOD were as follows,
WAPPROXIMATE
=7761.2 kg.
ENGINE SELECTION
ENGINE SELECTION
RESULT:
Name of engine selected=Garrett Ai Research TPE
Number of engine = 2
Total thrust
= 984.27kw
AIRFOIL SELECTION
AIRFOIL SELECTION
The airfoil is the main aspect and is the heart of the airplane. The airfoils affects the cruise speed
landing distance and take off, stall speed and handling qualities and aerodynamic efficiency during
the all phases of flight
Aerofoil Selection is based on the factors of Geometry & definitions, design/selection, families/types,
design lift coefficient, thickness/chord ratio, lift curve slope, characteristic curves.
The following are the airfoil geometry and definition:
Chord line: It is the straight line connecting leading edge (LE) and trailing edge (TE).
Chord (c): It is the length of chord line.
Thickness (t): measured perpendicular to chord line a % of it (subsonic typical 12%).
Camber (d): It is the curvature of section, perpendicular distance of section mid-points from chord
line as a % of it (sub sonically typically 3%).
Angle of attack (): It is the angular difference between chord line and airflow direction.
The following are airfoil categories:
Early it was based on trial & error.
NACA 4 digit is introduced during 1930s.
NACA 5-digit is aimed at pushing position of max camber forwards for increased C Lmax.
NACA 6-digit is designed for lower drag by increasing region of laminar flow.
Modern it is mainly based upon need for improved aerodynamic characteristics at speeds just below
speed of sound.
NACA 4 Digit
1st digit: maximum camber (as % of chord).
2nd digit (x10): location of maximum camber (as % of chord from leading edge (LE)).
3rd & 4th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord).
NACA 5 Digit
1st digit (x0.15): design lift coefficient.
2nd & 3rd digits (x0.5): location of maximum camber (as % of chord from LE).
4th & 5th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord).
NACA 6 Digit
1st digit: identifies series type.
2nd digit (x10): location of minimum pressure (as % of chord from leading edge (LE)).
3rd digit: indicates acceptable range of CL above/below design value for satisfactory low drag
performance (as tenths of CL).
4th digit (x0.1): design CL.
5th & 6th digits: maximum section thickness (%c)
The airfoil that is to be used is now selected. As indicated earlier during the calculation of the lift
coefficient value, it becomes necessary to use high speed airfoils, i.e., the 6x series, which have been
designed to suit high subsonic cruise Mach numbers.
The airfoil, in many respects, is the heart of the airplane. The airfoil affects the cruise speed,
take-off and landing distances, stall speed, handling qualities, and overall aerodynamic efficiency
during all phases of flight.
Much of the Wright brothers success can be traced to their development of airfoils using a wind
tunnel of their own design, and the in-flight validation of those airfoils in their glider
experiments if 1901-1902. More recently, the low speed airfoils develop by peter Lissaman
contributed much to the success of the man-powered Gosssmer Condor, and the airfoils designed
by John Rontz were instrumental to the success of Burt Rutans radical designs.
The airfoil can be selected for based on the cruising Reynolds number(Re) as follows,
Re =
V alt =Velocity at altitude
alt = Density at altitude
C
S
b
=(s/b)
= wing surface area
= wing span
V alt alt C
alt
alt
And,from standard air table at altitude 4200 m,
T alt =236.23 k.
alt
=5.3195 kg/m2
V alt
=M (R T alt )
1.4 287 236.23
=0.3
=92.42 m/s
Aspect ratio of our aircraft=10.03
From the literature survey for that aspect ratio,
Area=41 m2
Span=20.28 m
And, c =s/b =2.02m-1
And
T alt
= 0 ( T 0 )
alt
17.5 105 (
0.75
236.23
)
288
4
=1.508 10
So, Re =
92.425.3195 2.02
1.508 104
5
=6.6 10
0.75
NACA 65(3)-418
1.25
0.0045
NACA 64(2)-415
1.2
0.010
Station
Ordinates
90
2.35
95
1.12
100
1.25
-1.781
2.5
-2.36
-3.217
7.5
-3.87
10
-4.41
15
-5.25
20
-5.877
25
-6.334
30
-6.648
40
-6.856
50
-6.362
60
-4.334
70
-2.603
80
-1.743
90
-0.282
95
100
-0.144
-0
NACA 65-418
RESULT:
From the above analysis NACA 65-418 series type airfoil was selected for our aircraft design.
WING DESIGN
WINGDESIGN
The front of the airfoil is defined by a leading-edge radius that is tangent to the upper and lower
surfaces. An airfoil designed to operate in supersonic will have a sharp or nearly- sharp leading
edge to prevent a drag producing bow shock.
The chord of the airfoil is the straight line from the leading edge to the trailing edge. It is very
difficult to build a perfectly sharp trailing edge, so most airfoils have a blunt trailing edge with
some small finite thickness.
Camber refers to the curvature characteristic of most airfoils. The Mean camber line is the
line equidistant from the upper and lower surface. Total airfoil camber is defined as the
maximum distance of the mean camber line from the chord line, expressed as a percent of the
chord.
In earlier days, most airfoils had flat bottoms, and it was common to refer to the upper surface
shape as the camber. Later, as airfoils with curved bottom came into usage, they were known as
Double cambered airfoils. Also, an airfoil with a concave lower surface was known as UnderCambered airfoils. These terms are technically obsolete but still in common usage.
The thickness distribution of the airfoil is the distance from the upper surface to the lower
surface, measured perpendicular to the mean camber line, and is function of the distance from
the leading edge. The Airfoil thickness ratio refers to the maximum thickness of the airfoil
divided by its chord.
For many aerodynamic calculations, it has been traditional to separate the airfoil into its
thickness distribution and a zero-thickness camber line. The former provides the major influence
on the profile drag, where as the latter provides the major influence upon the lift and the drag due
to lift.
When an airfoil scaled in thickness the camber line must remain unchanged, so the scaled
thickness distribution is added to the original camber line to produce the new, scaled airfoil. In a
similar fashion, an airfoil which is having its camber changed is broken into its camber line and
thickness distribution. The camber line is scaled to produce desire maximum camber; then the
original thickness distribution is added to obtain the new airfoil. In this fashion, airfoil can be
reshaped to change either the profile drag or lift characteristics, without greatly affecting the
other.
Fuselage:
Once the takeoff gross weight has been estimated, the fuselage, the wing. And tail can be sized.
Many methods exist to initially estimate the required fuselage size. For certain types of aircraft,
the fuselage size is determined strictly by real world constraints. For example, a large
passenger aircraft devotes most of its length to the passenger compartment. Once the number of
passengers is known and the number of seats across is selected, the fuselage length and diameter
are essentially determined.
Wing:
Actual wing size can now be determined simply as the takeoff weight divided by takeoff wing
loading. Remember that this reference area of the theoretical, trapezoidal wing, and includes the
area extending into the aircraft center line.
Tail Volume Co-efficient:
For the initial layout, the historical approach is used for the estimation of the tail size. The
effectiveness of a tail in generating a moment about the centre of gravity is proportional to the
force produced by the tail and to the tail moment arm. The primary purpose of the tail is to
counter the moments produced by the wing.
1. Length of fuselage:
LFU = a woc
= 0.37 7761.2
0.5
= 10.87 m.
2. Surface area:
Aspect ratio of our aircraft=10.03
3.Root:
C tip chord
C root chord
=2.696 m.
2
1+ + 2
C root chord
( (1+ ) )
3
2
1+ 0.5 ..+ 0.52
2.696
3
( 1+ 0.5)
CW =2.097 m.
And, Y =
b (1+2 )
6 (1+ )
20.28 (1+1)
6 (1+0.5)
=3.76 m.
SW
-Wing area
CW
LHT
Since,
LHT
= 0.25
= 0.2510.87
= 2.7175 m.
For our design,
S W =41 m2
CW =2.097 m.
From Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach by Daniel.P.Raymer 3rd Ed,
C HT =0.9So,
SHT=
SHT=
C W SW C HT
LHT
2.097 41 0.9
= 28.47 m2
2.7175
And,
CVT
LVT S VT
= bW SW
Where ,
LVT -Vertical tail arm moment
-Wing span
S W -Wing area
Since,
LVT
LVT
= 0.5
=8.1525 m.
For our design,
S W = 41 m2.
bW = 20.28 m.
From Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach by Daniel.P.Raymer 3rd Ed,
CVT =0.08 m.
So,
S VT
bW SW C VT
=
LVT
20.28 41 0.08
8.1525
= 8.16 m2
RESULT:
Length of fuselage, LFU =10.87 m
Root, C tip chord =1.348 m
Aerodynamic mean chord, C_(W )=3.76 m
Vertical and horizontal volume coefficient,S_(VT )= 8.16 m2
Aircraft wetted area (Swet), the total exposed surface area, can be visualized as the area of the
external parts of the aircraft that would get wet if it were dipped into water. The wetted area must
be calculated for drag estimation, as it the major contributor to friction drag.
The wing and tail wetted areas can be approximated from their platforms. The wetted area is
estimated by multiplying the true view exposed plan form area is estimated by multiplying the
true view exposed planform area (S exposed) times a factor based upon the wing or tail thickness
ratio.
If a wing or tail were paper thin, the wetted area would be exactly twice the true plan form area.
The effect of finite thickness id to increase the wetted area, as approximated by the following
equations.
Note that the true exposed plan form area is the projected area divided by the cosine of the
dihedral angle.
If t/c 0.05,
S wet =2.003 S exposed
If t/c 0.05,
S wet= S exposed [1.977 + 0.52(t/c)]
The exposed area can be measured from the drawing in several ways. A professional designer
will have access to a planimeter a mechanical device for measuring areas. Use of the
planimeter is a dying art as the computer replaces the drafting board. Alternatively the area can
be measured by tracing onto graph paper and counting squares.
The wetted area of the fuselage can be initially estimated using just the side and top views of the
aircraft. The side and top view projected areas of the fuselage are measured from the drawing,
and the values are averaged.
For a long, thin body circular in cross section, this average projected area times will yield the
surface wetted area. If the body is rectangular in cross section, the wetted area will be four times
the average projected area. For typical aircraft the following equation provides a reasonable
approximation.
S wet=3.4 [(A top + A side) / 2) ]
A more accurate estimation of wetted area can be obtained by graphical integration using a
number of fuselage cross sections. If the perimeters of the cross sections are measured and
plotted Vs longitudinal locations, using the same units on the graph, then the integrated area
under the resulting curve gives the wetted area.
Perimeters can be measured using a professionals map-measure, or approximated using a
piece of scrap paper. Simply follow around the perimeter measurements should not include the
portions where components join, such as at the wing fuselage intersection. These areas are not
wetted.
d 2f
4
Now,
df =
s f =
10.87
7.2
Lf
=10.87 m,
=1.51 m,
2
d 2f
1.51
=1.79 m2
4
4 =
2) For wing
s w = t w bw
tw
A known relation, croot
= 0.1
t w =0.12.696 = 0.2696 m.
c root is 2.696 m,
lf
d f for passenger twin Engine Aircraft is 7.2,
s w = 0.269620.28 =5.47 m2
t ht
bht
=.269616.898 =4.58 m2
b2ht
(AR)ht= s2 = 10.03
ht
Now,
bht
2 =8.4945 m
s vt
b vt
t vt
5) Engine area
d 2e
4
s engine =
0.755 2
=
4
=0.447 m2.
s = 0.075 m2
Since
d
d e = f = 1.51/2 =0.755 m
2
s = 0.175 m2
8) Undercarriage
s u =1.1 s engine
=1.10.447
=0.4917 m2
RESULT :
S.No
Component
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Fuselage
Wing
Horizontal tail
Vertical tail
Engine
1/4 flap
3/4 flap
Undercarriage
cd
s
0.03
0.08
0.008
0.008
0.01
0.04
0.035
0.0504
(m2)
cd s
1.79
5.47
4.556
2.278
0.447
0.075
0.175
0.4917
0.0522
0.3348
1.983210-3
9.8410-4
4.3610-3
310-3
6.12510-3
0.024110-3
DRAG ESTIMATION
DRAG ESTIMATION
DRAG:
Drag Components
Skin Friction:
o Due to shear stresses produced in boundary layer.
o Significantly more for turbulent than laminar types of boundary layers.
Wave Drag
o Due to the presence of shock waves at transonic and supersonic speeds.
o Result of both direct shock losses and the influence of shock waves on the
boundary layer.
o Often decomposed into portions related to:
Lift.
Thickness or Volume.
The lift induced drag is the component which has to be included to account for
the 3-D nature of the flow (finite span) and generation of wing lift.
CALCULATION:
Generally for jet aircrafts, it is given that
CD,0= 0.0045
e = 0.8
The general drag equation is given by,
C L2
1
C D , 0+
Ae )
= 2 2
16 h
(
)
b
2
=
16 h
1+(
)
b
Where h = height above ground,
b = wing span.
h=3m
b = 16.898 m
3
)
16.898
2 = 0.89
=
3
1+(16
)
16.898
(16
Drag at Cruise
= 5.3195 kg/ m
V = 102.77 m/s
S = 41 m2
CL(cruise) = 1.25 (from the wing and airfoil estimation)
Substituting all these values in the general drag equation,
2
2
D(cruise) = 1/25.3195 (102.77) 41 (0.0045+0.89 1.25 /3.1410.030.8)
Drag at cruise = 69450.3 N
Drag at Take-off
= 1.225 (at sea altitude)
V = 0.7 x Vlo= 0.7 x 1.2 x Vstall
S = 41 m2
CL(take-off) = 1.25 (flaps extended and kept at the take-off position of
200 )
Drag at Landing
= 1.225 (at sea altitude)
V = 0.7 x Vt = 0.7 x 1.3 x Vstall
S = 41m2
CL(landing) = 1.25 (flaps extended and kept at the landing position of
40 0 )
Drag at landing
RESULT:
Drag at cruise
= 69450.3 N
= 4046.09 N
4046.09 N
LIFT ESTIMATION
LIFT ESTIMATION
LIFT:
Component of aerodynamic force generated on aircraft perpendicular to flight direction.
1 2
Lift =( 2 v S C L =qS C L
CL is a measure of lifting effectiveness and mainly depends upon:
Section shape, planform geometry, angle of attack (), compressibility effects
(Mach number), viscous effects (Reynolds number).
Generation of Lift
Aerodynamic force arises from two natural sources:
Variable pressure distribution.
Shear stress distribution.
Shear stress primarily contributes to overall drag force on aircraft.
Lift mainly due to pressure distribution, especially on main lifting surfaces, i.e.
wing.
Require (relatively) low pressure on upper surface and higher pressure on
lower surface.
Any shape can be made to produce lift if either cambered or inclined to flow
direction.
Classical aerofoilsection is optimum for high subsonic lift/drag ratio.
0o .
CALCULATION:
General Lift equation is given by,
1 2
v S C L =qS C L
Lift=( 2
Lift at Cruise
= 5.3195 kg/ m
V = 102.77 m/s
S = 41 m2
CL(cruise) = 1.25 (from the wing and airfoil estimation)
Substituting all these values in the general lift equation,
L(cruise) = 1/25.3195102.77^2411.25
Lift at cruise = 1439684.7 N
Lift at Take-Off
= 1.225 (at sea altitude)
V = 0.7 x Vlo= 0.7 x 1.2 x Vstall
S = 41 kg/m2
CL(take-off) = 1.25 (flaps extended and kept at the take-off position of
Substituting all these values in the general lift equation,
20
411.25
411.25
RESULT:
Lift at cruise
= 1439684.7 N
Lift at take-off
= 71782.58
Lift at landing
= 101773.5
40
V2
V1
Ground run
Transition
Climbing
= 297.03 m/s
Vav =70% VTO
=0.7 297.03
=207.90 m/s
CL max = 3/4( CL max av) + (CL max)flap
=3/4 [1.25+0.2]
=1.08
L av = CL av 1/2 (Vav) 2 S
For 45 of angle of attack, (from the graph)
CL av = 0.175
Lav =0.1751/2 1.225 (207.90)2 41
= 189.9KN
CD av = CDO (take off) + K (CL av) 2 (from drag polar calculation)
= 0.03462 +0.055(0.175)2
= 0.03630
Dav = CD av V2av S
= 0.0363 0.5 1.225 (207.9)2 41
=3.9 KN
From thrust required calculation at altitude sea level,
FTO = 984.27 KN
= 0.03 to 0.05
So let us take =0.04
STO = (297.03)2
29.81
=46.316 m.
7761.29.81
984.27 3.9 - 0.03 (7761.29.81-189.9)
VA = 1.3 VSL
VA - Approach Velocity.
VSL =
(2W) / S CL max
VA = 1.3891.1
=1158.4 knots.
Now, SLG =0.265 VSL2
=0.265 891.12
= 210425.6 feet.
And SL = 1.938 SLG
=1.938 210425.6
=407804 feet
RESULT:
Approach Velocity = 891.1knots.
SLG
= 210425.6 feet
Landing Distance
= 407804 feet
FRONT
VIEW:
8.15
m
82 m
TOP
VIEW:
10.87m
82
m
SIDE
VIEW:
10.87
m
REFERENCE
TEXTS:
1. Theory of wing section.
By IRA H.ABBOT and ALBERT E.VON DOENHOFF.
2. Aircraft performance and design
By JOHN D.ANDERSON JR
3. Aircraft design: A conceptual Approach
By DANIEL P.RAYMER
WEBSITES:
www. janesalltheworldaircrafts.com
www.wiki.com/type of aircraft