Acd 510 Bzb0911002 - Report

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP
Module Code Module Name Course Department
ACD 510 Aircraft Conceptual Design M.Sc. [Engg.] in Aircraft Design Automotive and Aeronautical Engg.
Name of the Student Reg. No Batch Module Leader
ACD FT-11
Full-Time / Part-Time 2011. Dr. H. K. Narahari
M.S.Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies

Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programmes(PEMP)
#470-P Peenya Industrial Area, 4th Phase, Peenya, Bengaluru-560 058 Tel; 080 4906 5555, website: www.msrsas.org
Aircraft Conceptual Design
POSTGRADUATE ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME (PEMP)

i
FINAL REPORT
Declaration Sheet Student Name Reg. No Course Batch Module Code Module Title Module Date Module Leader MSc. [Egg] Aircraft Design FT 11 ACD 510 Aircraft Conceptual Design to 06.08.2012 Dr. H. K. Narahari 1.09.2012 Batch Full-Time 2011. ACD FT-11
Extension requests:
Extensions can only be granted by the Head of the Department in consultation with the module leader. Extensions granted by any other person will not be accepted and hence the assignment will incur a penalty. Extensions MUST be requested by using the Extension Request Form, which is available with the ARO. A copy of the extension approval must be attached to the assignment submitted.
Penalty for late submission

Unless you have submitted proof of mitigating circumstances or have been granted an extension, the penalties for a late submission of an assignment shall be as follows: Up to one week late: Penalty of 5 marks One-Two weeks late: Penalty of 10 marks More than Two weeks late: Fail - 0% recorded (F) All late assignments: must be submitted to Academic Records Office (ARO). It is your responsibility to ensure that the receipt of a late assignment is recorded in the ARO. If an extension was agreed, the authorization should be submitted to ARO during the submission of assignment. To ensure assignment reports are written concisely, the length should be restricted to a limit indicated in the assignment problem statement. Assignment reports greater than this length may incur a penalty of one grade (5 marks). Each delegate is required to retain a copy of the assignment report.
Declaration
The assignment submitted herewith is a result of my own investigations and that I have conformed to the guidelines against plagiarism as laid out in the PEMP Student Handbook. All sections of the text and results, which have been obtained from other sources, are fully referenced. I understand that cheating and plagiarism constitute a breach of University regulations and will be dealt with accordingly.
Signature of the student Submission date stamp

(by ARO)
Date
Signature of the Module Leader and date
Signature of Head of the Department and date
ii
Abstract
____________________________________________________________________________ Aircraft design mainly depends on the existing historical data. Drastic changes in design cannot be made hence it is usually the up gradation or the enhancement of the existing design. This report is such an effort to Design of a Passenger Aircraft with a Range of 3000 nautical miles with a passenger Capacity of 80. This report is made by a group of five members working on different areas of design. The first Chapter deals with the initial weight estimation which is usually the first step in the design process of any aircraft. This is only a rough estimate rather than detailed weight estimation because the weights must be varied in order to meet various customer requirements in the later part of the design phase. This is because the design is a compromise of several parameters. Chapter 2 deals with the design of wing and high lifting devices. Various parameters like Wing area, aspect ratio, airfoil, geometry, sweep angle, taper ratio is actually assumed based on the historical data available. This is a good starting point because a lot of time is saved and most importantly near close or meaningful results can be obtained in first set of assumption itself. CFD analysis is carried out with the final geometry to validate the results obtained. Similar procedure is carried out with flaps deflected at a particular angle calculated using Javafoil in order to obtain max Cl needed as per the requirement. Chapter 3 deals with the fuselage design which includes the entire layout and seating arrangement which usually depends on the number of passengers. Several considerations are carried out in design process to meet all FAA regulation like vision of the pilot and space between the seats and also the dimension of the seats. Chapter 4 deals with the selection of a propulsion system and the integration of the same. This process depends upon the gross weight and the thrust requirements. Chapter 5 deals with the design of horizontal and vertical tail and various performance parameters are calculated to check it meets with the customer requirement.
iii
Contents
____________________________________________________________________________
Declaration Sheet ......................................................................................................................... ii Abstract ....................................................................................................................................... iii Contents ........................................................................................................................................iv List of Figures ..............................................................................................................................vi List of Nomenclature ....................................................................................................................ix CHAPTER 1 ..............................................................................................................................10 1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................10 1.2 Initial Weight Estimate ......................................................................................................10 1.2.1 Payload Weight ..........................................................................................................11 1.2.2 Crew Weight...............................................................................................................11 1.2.3 Empty weight Fraction ...............................................................................................11 1.2.4 Fuel weight Fraction ...................................................................................................12 2.1 Wing Design ......................................................................................................................16 2.1.1 Wing loading ..............................................................................................................17 2.1.2 Aspect Ratio ...............................................................................................................17 2.1.3 Wing Sweep and Taper ..............................................................................................18 2.1.4 Wing Geometry and Planform ...................................................................................19 2.1.5 Number of wings ........................................................................................................20 2.1.6 Wing vertical location on the fuselage [1] .................................................................20 2.1.7 Steps for selection of the Airfoil for the wing [4] ......................................................23 2.1.8 Wing Twist .................................................................................................................27 2.2 Wing high lift devices .......................................................................................................30 2.2.1 Calculation of Takeoff and landing distance ..............................................................31 2.2.2 Javafoil .......................................................................................................................32 2.2.3 Finite 3D Wing ...........................................................................................................34 3.1Fuselage layout [6] .............................................................................................................36 3.2 Fuselage nose section ........................................................................................................38 3.3 Fuselage Mid-section ........................................................................................................39 3.4 Fuselage tail section ..........................................................................................................39 3.5 Galley and Toilet configuration ........................................................................................40 3.6 Passenger loading and emergency exits ............................................................................40 iv
3.7 Structural consideration .....................................................................................................42 3.8 Weight estimation for fuselage ..........................................................................................43 3.9 Landing gear layout: ..........................................................................................................45 4.1Propulsion System ..............................................................................................................47 4.2Engine Selection .................................................................................................................47 4.3 Why to go for CFM56-5B3 Engine ...................................................................................49 4.4 Engine integration .............................................................................................................51 5.1 Empennage ........................................................................................................................52 5.2 Empennage types ...............................................................................................................52 5.3 Empennage design .............................................................................................................53 5.4 Tail geometry ....................................................................................................................53 5.5 Tail sizing ..........................................................................................................................55 5.6 Tail layout..........................................................................................................................56 6.1 Empty weight build up and C.G location ..........................................................................59 6.2 Performance.......................................................................................................................61 7.1 Assembly ...........................................................................................................................64 8.1 Conclusion .........................................................................................................................65 REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................................66
List of Figures
____________________________________________________________________________ Figure1. 1 Empty weight fraction Vs Wo[1] ...............................................................................11 Figure1. 2 Mission Profile ...........................................................................................................12 Figure1. 3 Aircraft type based on Range[2] ................................................................................13 Figure1. 4 Selection of SFC[1]....................................................................................................13 Figure1. 5 Selection of L/D Ratio[1]...........................................................................................13 Figure1. 6 Selection of L/D based on type of Aircraft[2] ...........................................................14 Figure1. 7 No. of Passenger Vs MTOM[3] .................................................................................15 Figure1. 8 Range Vs MTOM/Passenger[3] .................................................................................16
Figure2. 1 Selection of Wing Loading[2][3] ...............................................................................17 Figure2. 2 Selection of Aspect Ratio[2] ......................................................................................18 Figure2. 3 Mach no Vs Leading edge sweep angle[1] ................................................................ 19 Figure2. 4 Maximum and ideal lift co-efficient plot [5] .............................................................25 Figure2. 5 Cl Vs Cd plot for 631-412 [5] ....................................................................................26 Figure2. 6 Airfoil created using ICEM CFD ...............................................................................28 Figure2. 7 CATIA model of the wing (isometric view) ..............................................................28 Figure2. 8 Top view of the wing .................................................................................................29 Figure2. 9 Domain around the wing ............................................................................................29 Figure2. 10 3-D domains around the wing ..................................................................................29 Figure2. 11 Unstructured mesh for the wing ...............................................................................30 Figure2. 12 Creation of Airfoil geometry ...................................................................................32 Figure2. 13 Flap deflection .........................................................................................................33 Figure2. 14 Computation of Cl....................................................................................................33 Figure2. 15 Generation of curves using ICEM CFD from point data .........................................34 Figure2. 16 CATIA model of 3D wing .......................................................................................34 Figure2. 17 Domain sketch .........................................................................................................35 Figure2. 18 Domain surface ........................................................................................................35 Figure2. 19 Mesh generated in ICEM CFD ................................................................................35
Figure3. 1 Seat pitch and height. [3] ...........................................................................................36 Figure3. 2 Fuselage Interior detail (mm).....................................................................................37 Figure3. 3 Fuselage Plan view (mm)...........................................................................................37 Figure3. 4 Fuselage side view (mm). ..........................................................................................38
vi
Figure3. 5 Nose section layout. [6] .............................................................................................38 Figure3. 6 Pilot Vision designed in Catia (mm). .........................................................................38 Figure3. 7 Pilot seat dimensions as per FAR. [3] ........................................................................39 Figure3. 8 Galley and toilet layout. [6] .......................................................................................40 Figure3. 9 CATIA model for fuselage view-1 ............................................................................41 Figure3. 10 CATIA model fuselage view-2 ................................................................................41 Figure3. 11 Mesh geometry of fuselage and domain. .................................................................42 Figure3. 12 Mesh geometry of fuselage. .....................................................................................42 Figure3. 13 Stringers layout. [1] .................................................................................................43 Figure3. 14 Mass fractions for rapid mass estimation. [3] ..........................................................44 Figure3. 15 Landing gear forward retract. [8] ............................................................................45 Figure3. 16 Nose landing gear load calculation. [8] ...................................................................46 Figure3. 17 Tires used in typical aircraft. ...................................................................................46
Figure 4. 1 Effect of flight speed on engine efficiency. [6] ........................................................48 Figure 4. 2 Effect of Mach number and specific thrust on thrust lapse rate. [6] .........................48 Figure 4. 3 Inlet locations-podded engines. [1] ...........................................................................51 Figure 4. 4 Location of the nacelle compared to the wing ..........................................................51
Figure 5. 1 Tail variations [1] ......................................................................................................52 Figure 5. 2 Tail aspect ratio and taper ratio for various types of aircraft [1] ..............................54 Figure 5. 3 Tail volume coefficient [1] .......................................................................................55 Figure 5. 4 NACA 0012 airfoil coordinates with deflected control surface ...............................57 Figure 5. 5 Velocity distribution and Cl values with deflected control surface ..........................58 Figure 5. 6 NACA 0012 airfoil with deflected control surface in CATIA .................................58 Figure 5. 7 CATIA model-Horizontal tail ...................................................................................59 Figure 5. 8 CATIA model-Vertical tail .......................................................................................59
Figure 6. 1 Approximate empty weight build up and c.g. location [1] .......................................60
Figure 7. 1 Front View ................................................................................................................64 Figure 7. 2 Top view ...................................................................................................................64 Figure 7. 3 Side view ...................................................................................................................64 Figure 7. 4 Isometric view ...........................................................................................................65
vii
List of Tables
____________________________________________________________________________ Table1. 1Iterations .......................................................................................................................16 Table1. 2 2D Cl increment for leading edge flaps[2] ..................................................................31 Table2. 1 Different set of airfoils selected from the graph [5] ....................................................25 Table2. 2 Geometric twist for different aircrafts .........................................................................27
Table3. 1 Typical seat width and pitch for different class of travel. [6] .....................................36 Table3. 2 Typical guidelines for fuselage front and aft closure ratio. [3] ...................................37 Table3. 3 Emergence exits requirements. [6] ..............................................................................40 Table3. 4 Dimensions for types of exits. [6] ...............................................................................41 Table3. 5 Mass amended for different configuration. [6] ...........................................................43
Table 4. 1 Specifications and applications of CFM56-5 series engines. [10] .............................50
Table 5. 1 Design data of wing and fuselage ..............................................................................54 Table 5. 2 Geometrical data supposed for tail design .................................................................54 Table 5. 3 Tail Design configuration...........................................................................................57
Table 6. 1 Empty weight build up and c.g. location ....................................................................61 Table 6. 2 Derived data from design ...........................................................................................62 Table 6. 3 Designed aircraft characteristics ................................................................................63
viii
List of Nomenclature
____________________________________________________________________________
Acronym Cl Cd TWR WL LDR Ct AR Wf MTOM Cdo DSL
Expansion Coefficient of lift Coefficient of Drag Thrust to Weight Ratio Wing Loading Lift to Drag Ratio Specific Fuel Consumption Aspect ratio Fuel Weight Maximum Takeoff weight Zero lift Drag co efficient Density at Sea Level
ix
CHAPTER 1
Design of a Passenger Aircraft with a Range of 3000 nautical miles with a passenger Capacity of 80
1.1 Introduction
This report deals with the conceptual design of an aircraft. Any type of aircraft has the same parts like fuselage, wing, engine etc but analyzing it a bit deeper it is evident that they are only same by parts not on the geometry or the size. Fighter planes are smaller but much faster when compared to that of the commercial transport plane. The root cause for such a big difference in the design of aircraft is mainly due to the change in the functionality that has to be met. So in order to start the conceptual design, proper understanding of the purpose of the aircraft to be designed is required. Design in any field is a compromise of various factors, especially in the field of aircraft where changing one influencing parameter affects many other influencing parameters. Since there is a correlation between various influencing parameters the final modified design cannot be achieved by changing only one influencing parameter. It is usually a combination of various parameters to meet the final customer requirements and moreover other performance parameter as per FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) regulation has to be satisfied for the aircraft to be certified. An aircraft with a range of 3000 (nautical miles) and a passenger capacity of 80 comes under the small Jet transport category. Looking into the available statistical data of similar type of aircraft is regarded as the good starting point for a new design. The design process begins with the rough estimate of the maximum take off mass. In this process several decisions has to be made on initial assumptions to be used for calculations. Since most of the processes in aircraft design are iterative in nature it is important to start with a meaningful assumption. By doing so reasonable results can be achieved in a shorter span. This is done with the help of available statistical data.
1.2 Initial Weight Estimate

First step is to come up with a rough estimate of the total takeoff weight which is denoted by Wo. It is the sum of crew weight, payload weight, fuel weight and empty weight.
1.2.1 Payload Weight

Here the payload weight can be estimated with the number of passenger and the amount of baggage that they are permitted to carry.
W payload = N * (Average weight of a passenger + Permitted baggage per individual) Where N is the number of passengers and the initial assumption for average weight of an individual passenger is taken as 80 kg (173.36 pounds) and the permitted baggage as 40 kg (88.14 pounds). So
W payload = 80 * (80+40) = 9600 kg (21165 pounds)
1.2.2 Crew Weight

Crew consists of a pilot, a co pilot, a flight engineer and for a passenger capacity of 80 we need two air hostesses which all together make a crew as five members and assuming the crew members are allowed to carry a baggage of 40 kg. Then
W crew = 5 * (120) = 600 kg (1323 pounds)
1.2.3 Empty weight Fraction

Empty weight is denoted as We, rather than calculating the empty weight as such, empty weight fraction is calculated. Empty weight fraction is the ratio between the empty weight and the total takeoff weight. This can be calculated from the statistical data available. Empty weight fraction = (We/ Wo) and is given by We/ Wo = A* WoC * Kvs
Figure1. 1 Empty weight fraction Vs Wo[1]
11
Since the aircraft to be designed comes under Jet transport appropriate values for A and C are selected. Therefore (We/Wo) = 1.02 Wo-0.06 *1.04 (We/Wo) = 1.0608 Wo-0.06
1.2.4 Fuel weight Fraction

Fuel weight as such cannot be estimated from statistical data because amount of fuel to be carried varies according to the mission profile. The mission profile is usually given as the customer requirement. Statistical data are available to find out the fuel fraction at various stages of the mission profile hence the total fuel fraction can be estimated.
Figure1. 2 Mission Profile
Where 1-2 Warm up and Takeoff 2-3 Climb 3-4 Cruise 4-5 Loiter and descent 5-6 Landing phase Let W1, W2, W3, W4, W5 and W6 be the weights after respective phases of the mission profile.
1.2.4.1 Calculation
Amount of fuel utilized for warm up and takeoff phase is estimated as 0.97
(W1/W0) = 0.97 Amount of fuel utilized for climb phase with respect to the amount of fuel left over after the takeoff phase is estimated as 0.985
12
(W2/W1) = 0.985 Fuel utilized for Cruise depends upon the range to be achieved and can be calculated using Range equation
Therefore Wi-1 / Wi in our case it is given by (W3/W2) is given by
Where R is the Range, C is the specific Fuel Consumption, V is the velocity, L/D is the lift to drag ratio
Figure1. 3 Aircraft type based on Range[2]
Range for this mission is 3000 nautical miles (18228341.6 ft) Specific fuel consumption for a high bypass turbo fan engine for cruise was found to be 0.5 1/hr (0.0001389 1/s)
Figure1. 4 Selection of SFC[1]
The cruise velocity was assumed to be 0.85 M (845.58 ft/sec). In a similar fashion the L/D ratio for jet engine at cruise is given by L/D = 0.866 (L/D)
max.
The selection of L/D and specific fuel consumption comes from the statistical data available. (L/D) max was assumed to be 16. So L/D for cruise = 0.866*16 = 13.9
Figure1. 5 Selection of L/D Ratio[1]
13
Figure1. 6 Selection of L/D based on type of Aircraft[2]
Substituting all the values we get (W3/W2) = e-0.2154 = 0.8062 In case the intended airport is closed due to some unavoidable reason like worst climatic condition, the aircraft has to loiter for extra duration or can have an increased range to reach the nearest airport. According to FAA regulation an additional fuel for loitering atleast for 30 min has to be provided. In this case the additional time for endurance is taken as 45 min which includes both loiter and descent. Fuel ratio calculation for endurance is as follows. It can be obtained from endurance formula.
Therefore Wi-1 / Wi in our case it is given by (W4/W3) is given by
Where E is the endurance in seconds. In this case it is 45 min (2700 sec) But again the selection of specific fuel consumption and L/D ratio is based on statistical data but it varies because it is a loitering phase. Specific fuel consumption for jet engines during loiter phase is estimated as 0.4 1/ hr (0.0001111 1/s) L/D for jet engines for loitering phase is the L/D max hence the value is 16 from statistical data which says L/D selection can lie between (15 - 18.2). Substituting all the values we get (W4/W3) = e-0.01874 = 0.9814
14
Fuel fraction used for landing is estimated as 0.995
(W5/W4) = 0.995 Therefore W5/W0 = (W1/WO) * (W2/W1) * (W3/W2) * (W4/W3) * (W5/W4) = 0.97 * 0.985 * 0.8062 * 0.9814 * 0.995
W5/W0 = 0.7521 But the Total fuel fraction (Wf / Wo) is given by the formula (Wf / Wo) = 1.06 * (1- W5/W0) (Wf / Wo) = 1.06 * (1- 0.7521) = 0.2626 We know that
Simplifying the equation, we get
It is an iterative process so the initial guess should be reasonable so that a lot of time can be saved.
Figure1. 7 No. of Passenger Vs MTOM[3]
15
From the Figure 1.3 a initial estimate of 40000 kg approximately 80000 pounds is taken
Table1. 1Iterations
No of Iteration 1 2 3 4 5 6 Initial Guess of Wo 80000 113150 107000 108000 107900 107933 Obtained Value Wo 113148.2 107162.1 108075 107922.4 107937 107932.6
So the initial estimate of Maximum takeoff mass is 48957 kg (107933 pounds). The calculated value can be cross checked with the range VS MTOM / passenger
Figure1. 8 Range Vs MTOM/Passenger[3]
So for a range of 3000 nm and a passenger capacity of 80 we have MTOM as 80*600 we get 48000 kg which is comparable to the estimated value.
2.1 Wing Design

The different parameters that needs to be found during the wing design is Wing area Aspect ratio Taper ratio Root chord Tip chord Mean aerodynamic chord Span Number of wings Wing position on the fuselage
16
Airfoil cross section Twist angle Sweep angle Dihedral angle Wing incidence angle for Cruise The step followed in the selection of wing area is discussed here in a sequential manner
2.1.1 Wing loading

Once the weight estimation is done, the next step is the proper selection of wing loading. The selection of wing loading depends upon the mission requirement of an aircraft. Wing loading is the ratio of total takeoff weight to that of the wing area. It is denoted by W/S and its units are Kg/m2 or lbs/ft2. It is found that for a short/ medium range aircraft the wing loading is about 110 lbs/ft2 (537.06 kg/m2). W/S = 537.06 Kg/m2 (110 lbs/ft2)
Figure2. 1 Selection of Wing Loading[2][3]
2.1.2 Aspect Ratio

Aspect ratio is defined as the ratio between the wing span to the wing mean aerodynamic. The selection of aspect ratio in conceptual design phase is mainly on the historical data but what leads to
17
the selection of particular aspect ratio is based on its effects on the various flight features such as aircraft performance, stability, control, cost, and manufacturability. The effects of aspect ratio are As the aspect ratio increases, the aerodynamic features of the three-dimensional wing such as CL, 0, CLmax, CDmin will get closer to the two-dimensional airfoil properties. This is because of reduction of the influence of wing tip vortex, so it is desired have high AR. As the AR increases, the maximum lift co-efficient for a particular angle of attack increases, because the wing effective angle of attack increases, so it is desired to have a high aspect ratio wing. As the aspect ratio increases the weight of the wing increases, this needs more stiffer wing, hence more stress on the root to hold the wing, hence it is desired to have a short wing to reduce the weight of the wing. From statistical data it is found that the aircraft that comes under the jet transport category has an optimum Aspect ratio which lies between (7 - 9.5) hence a approximated value of aspect ratio 9 is assumed. It is denoted by A.R and is a dimensionless quantity. Aspect ratio = b2/S = 9
Figure2. 2 Selection of Aspect Ratio[2]
2.1.3 Wing Sweep and Taper

The next step in the design process is to come up with the wing geometry which includes the Root chord and tip chord dimension, taper ratio, Sweep angle. The sweep back angle is provided to reduce the effective Mach number at the leading edge. By doing so the loss of lift associated with supersonic flow can be reduced. The sweep angle usually depends on the cruise Mach number.
18
Figure2. 3 Mach no Vs Leading edge sweep angle[1]
From Figure 1.6 for a design cruise Mach no of 0.85 the leading edge sweep angle is chosen as 30 degrees. Taper ratio is defined as the ratio of the tip chord to that of the root chord. Tapered wing is used in order to reduce the lift induced drag. A commercial transport aircraft with swept back wings has a taper ratio that lie between 0.2 - 0.3. The maximum permitted taper ratio (0.3) is taken in this design. So Sweep Angle = 30 degrees Taper Ratio = 0.3
2.1.4 Wing Geometry and Planform

Wing geometry includes calculation of Wing span, tip chord length, root chord length, Mean aerodynamic chord length and span wise location of mean aerodynamic chord. All these parameters can be calculated by the previously assumed parameters. The assumptions were Wing area = 90 m 2, Aspect ratio = 9, Wing sweep = 30 degrees, Taper ratio = 0.3.
Wing span b = Aspect Ratio =
=
Root chord length Cr = 4.864 m
For calculating Tip chord length, We have Taper Ratio = 0.3
19
Tip chord length = 1.459 m Mean Aerodynamic chord length
Span wise location of mean aerodynamic chord
2.1.5 Number of wings

In the olden days because of manufacturing limitations, more number of wings was used to generate the required lift, now with modern manufacturing technologies and with the development of new materials such as Aluminum and its alloys and composite have enabled the manufacturing of single with long span wing. With the modern technologies and the materials, now a days only single wing is used.
2.1.6 Wing vertical location on the fuselage [1]

The parameter that could be found during the initial stage of the design is the vertical location of the wing with respect to fuselage centerline. This parameter will directly affect the other parameters such as the tail location, landing gear design etc Generally there are four types of configurations available, they are High wing Mid wing Low wing Parasol wing As seen from the figure that, the most of the cargo aircrafts have a high wing, where as fighter aircrafts will have the mid wing and the long rage passenger aircrafts will have the low wing. The advantages and disadvantages of the different configuration are
20
High wing The high wing has some advantages as well as some disadvantages for a particular mission, they are Advantages It eases the loading and unloading of cargo in to and out of the aircraft, and the trucks to unload and load can move easily around the aircraft. The clearance from the ground for this configuration is more compared to low wing, which facilitates the installation of engine on the wing. It facilitates the aircraft to take-off and land from the sea in case of amphibian aircrafts, thus preventing the spilling of water in to the engine during take-off, which may shut down the engine. The wing will produce more lift compared to low wing and mid-wing, because part of the fuselage near the connection between two parts of the wing also contributes for the lift produced by the wing. Since the CL produced by the wing the wing is high the aircraft can fly at a lower stall speed compared to high and the low-wing. Disadvantages The aircraft in this configuration will have more frontal area, which increases the drag of the aircraft. The ground effect will be lower compared to low wing, this will influence on landing and take-off distances. Landing gear is longer if connected to the wing. This makes the landing gear heavier and requires more space inside the wing for retraction system. This will further make the wing structure heavier. The wing will produce more induced drag (Di), due to higher lift coefficient. A high will be structurally 20% more heavier than the low wing. Low Wing In this section, advantages and disadvantages of a low wing configuration are discussed Advantages The aircraft take off performance will be better compared with a high wing configuration due to ground effect. The pilot will have a better view above the horizon, since the wing the wing is below the pilot
21
There will be option for the landing gear retracting system in the wing as well as fuselage. Landing gear will be shorter; this makes the landing gear system lighter and requires less space inside the wing for retracting system. The aircraft is lighter compared to the high wing structure, aircraft frontal area in this case is less. Since the frontal area is less, it has less induced drag. Disadvantages The wing generates less lift, compared with a high wing configuration since the wing has two separate sections because of this the wing has less induced drag. Because of the first reason the aircraft will have higher stall speed compared with a high wing configuration due to a lower CLmax because of that the take-off run is longer. The dihedral effect by the wing is less compared to the high wing, thus the aircraft is laterally dynamically less stable. The wing below the pilot will obstruct the view of the pilot below the horizon. Mid Wing In general, the features of the mid-wing configuration stand between features of high-wing configuration and features of low-wing configuration. Some of the new features of a mid-wing configuration are as follows: The aircraft structure is heavier, due to the necessity of reinforcing wing root at the intersection with the fuselage. The mid wing is more expensive compared with high and low-wing configurations. The mid wing is more attractive compared with two other configurations. The mid wing is aerodynamically streamliner compared with two other configurations. The strut is usually not used to reinforce the wing structure. The pilot can get into the cockpit using the wing as a step in a small GA aircraft. The mid-wing has less interference drag than low-wing and high-wing.
22
2.1.7 Steps for selection of the Airfoil for the wing [4]
The design of airfoil is time consuming as well more cost is involved, for a conceptual design it is better to select the best available airfoil from the data base. The steps involved in selection of the airfoil are as follows. The cruise altitude considered is 12 km at which the air speed is given by, temperature at 12 km is 216

The cruise number given for the design is 0.85 mach at an altitude of 12 km, therefore the cruise velocity is given by
Vcruise = 249.8 m/s
First step is to determine the average weight in the cruising flight
Where Wi is the initial aircraft weight at the beginning of cruise and W f is the final aircraft weight at the end of cruise. Calculation of aircraft ideal lift co-efficient (CLc). In the cruising flight the aircraft weight is equal to the lift force.
23
Where V is the aircraft cruise speed, planform area.
is the air density at cruising altitude, and S is the wing
Calculate the wing cruise lift co-efficient (CLcw). We consider that the wing the only component responsible for the generation of lift, but other aircraft components such as tail, fuselage etcwill contribute to the total lift negatively or positively. Thus the relation between aircraft cruise lift coefficient and wing cruise lift coefficient is a function of aircraft configuration. The contribution of fuselage, tail and other components will determine the wing contribution to the aircraft lift co-efficient. In the preliminary design phase where the other components are been decided, then the following relation is used to calculate the Wing cruise lift co-efficient.
Later in the design process when the other components are decided, this should be validated by CFD simulations. Calculation of wing airfoil ideal lift coefficient (Cli). The wing is a 3-dimensional body whereas the airfoil is 2-D section, therefore the airfoil ideal lift coefficient is different from the 3-D wing because the wing has a finite span and different chord lengths and sweep angle results in this variation from the airfoil lift co-efficient, this variation can be approximated using the relation.
24
As per the statistical data the thickness to chord ratio generally used is 10-12%, but the cruise Cl 0.54 is not achieved in any of the airfoil with this thickness range with in the drag bucket. So the wing area is modified to decrease the Cl cruise. So the calculation are redone to adjust the Cl by considering wing area as 120 m 2, then the values lift co-efficient values are
1 Later in the design process when the other components are decided, this should be validated by CFD simulations
Table2. 1 Different set of airfoils selected from the graph [5]
No
NACA
Cdmin
Cmo
s (deg) 14 12 12 14 16
o (deg) -1.5 -1.2 -1.5 -1.2 -1.3
Stall quality moderate Moderate Sharp Sharp Moderate
1 2 3 4 5
631-412 641-412 651-412 652-415 642-415
0.006 0.004 0.004 0.0035 0.0045
-0.08 -0.040 -0.060 -0.028 -0.028
Figure2. 4 Maximum and ideal lift co-efficient plot [5]
25
From the ideal lift co-efficient and the maximum lift co-efficient values required, the airfoil with corresponding values of lift co-efficient are selected from the figure, where the figure represents the collection of airfoils with different lift co-efficient values. If there is no airfoil of particular values then the airfoil that is nearest to the design point is selected. If the wing is designed for a high subsonic passenger aircraft, select the thinnest airfoil (the lowest (t/c max). The reason is to reduce the critical Mach number (Mcr) and drag-divergent9 Mach number (Mdd). This allow the aircraft fly closer to Mach one before the drag rise is encountered. In general, a thinner airfoil will have a higher Mcr than a thicker airfoil.
Figure2. 5 Cl Vs Cd plot for 631-412 [5]
We can notice that the 631-412 is the airfoil which has the maximum Cl which is equal to the calculated value and the cruise Cl of 0.41 according to the calculation, and the stall is moderate, which is acceptable so 631-412 airfoil is chosen for the design. Since the cruise Cl obtained is 0.41 to achieve that the angle of attack of 1.50 is required so the wing is set at 1.50 angle for cruise. The result is validated using CFD
26
2.1.8 Wing Twist

Twist is the difference in angle of attack between wing tip and the root, if the wing tip has lower angle of attack than the root, the wing is said to have negative incidence and if the wing root is at lower angle of attack then the tip, the wing is said to have positive incidence. In most of the cases negative incidence is employed, the main reason for it is to have stall at the root first than at the tip, because in case of stall if the root stalls first, then the pilot can still have a control on the ailerons to control the aircraft, since the tip is at negative incidence, it will lower the overall lift produced by the wing. There are two types of twists employed, they are Aerodynamic twist Geometric twist
If the different airfoil cross-section used in the root and tip, which will have different zero lift angle of attack then, it s called as aerodynamic twist. If the tip and root have the same airfoil cross section and if the incidence is not same then, it is referred to as Geometric twist. In most of the cases aerodynamic twist is employed because it is easy to manufacture, where as geometric twist is difficult to manufacture. The negative incidence of -1 to -4 is used in most of the aircraft, because if the negative incidence is more then it decreases the overall lift produced by the wing and the twist is also used to obtain the elliptical lift distribution on the wing. In case of conceptual design phase, the twist is decided based on the historical data available and in the later stage it can refined based on numerical calculations.
Table2. 2 Geometric twist for different aircrafts
No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Aircraft Fokker 50 Cessna 310 Cessna Citation I Beech King Air Beech T-1A JawHawk Beech T-34C Cessna StationAir 6 Gulfstream IV NorthropGrumman E2C Hawkeye Piper
MTOW (lb) 20,800 4,600 11,850 11,800 16,100 4,300 3,600 73,000 55,000
Wing incidence at root (iw) (deg) +3.5 +2.5 +2.5 +4.8 +3 +4 +1.5 +3.5 +4
Wing angle at tip (deg) +1.5 -0.5 -0.5 0 -3.3 +1 -1.5 -2 +1
Twist (deg) -2 -3 -3 -4.8 -6.3 -3 -3 -5.5 -3
10
11,200
+1.5
-1
-2.5
27
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Cheyenne Beech Super King Beech starship Cessna 208 Beech 1900D Beechjet 400A AVRO RJ100 Lockheed C130 Hercules Pilatus PC-9 Piper PA-28161 Warrior
12,500 14,900 8000 16,950 16,100 101,500 155,000 4,960 2,440
+ 3o 48' +3 +2o 37' +3o 29' +3 +3o 6' +3 +1 +2
-1o 7' -5 -3o 6' -1o 4' -3o 30' 0 0 -1 -1
4.55' -3.5 -5o 31' -4o 25' -6o 30' -3o 6' -3 -2 -3
As seen from the table 2.2 for the design weight of 48900, the similar class of aircraft is NorthropGrumman E-2C Hawkeye, for which the twist angle of -30 is used, since the design weight is close to it, for the initial design phase the twist angle of -30 is being used.
Figure2. 6 Airfoil created using ICEM CFD
Figure2. 7 CATIA model of the wing (isometric view)
28
Figure2. 8 Top view of the wing
Figure2. 9 Domain around the wing
Figure2. 10 3-D domains around the wing
29
Figure2. 11 Unstructured mesh for the wing
2.2 Wing high lift devices

The airfoil selected may give a design Cl required for cruise. But the same amount of lift may not be sufficient during the takeoff and landing condition. Hence it is necessary to design high lifting devices such as flaps and leading edge slats. The lift force is denoted by L and is given by
The need for high lift devices can be explained through the formula itself. The first thing to be noticed is that the cruise velocity and the takeoff or landing velocity is not same. The takeoff velocity is less when compared to that of the cruise velocity. So in order to achieve the desired lift during takeoff and landing two approaches can be formulated, one is by increasing the C l and the other way by increasing the surface area. Cl can be increased by increasing the camber of the airfoil by deflecting the trailing edge flaps or the leading edge slats. There are several types of high lift devices are available like plain flap, slotted flap, double and triple slotted flap, fowler flaps, leading edge Krueger flap, slotted leading edge flap (slats) can be used. By using a plain flap, only the camber of the airfoil can be changed but by using fowler flaps both the effective wing area and also the camber can be varied. This is achieved by the extension or protrusion of the trailing edge through some distance and is then deflected. Higher deflection can be achieved in case of fowler flaps when compared to that of the split flaps because split flaps are prone to flow separation at
30
higher deflection of the trailing edge but whereas in case of fowler flaps the flow separation does not occur even at a higher angle of deflection because the effective chord length is also increased. . Delta Clmax values for different type of leading edge flaps are
Table1. 2 2D Cl increment for leading edge flaps[2]
S.No 1 2 3 4
Type Fixed Slot Leading Edge Flap Kruger Flap Slats
Cl max 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4
The design cruise Cl is 0.44 and if the leading edge slats are used the C l max value will be 0.8 which will also be not sufficient for takeoff and landing purpose. It is roughly estimated that the Cl
max
required for takeoff and landing should be somewhere around 1.6 to 2.2 for long/ medium
range aircraft. Hence the desired Cl cannot be achieved just by using only one high lift device but is usually a combination of both the leading edge slats and the trailing edge flaps. It is roughly estimated that the leading edge flap deflection is usually 30 to 40 degrees. Since it is only a conceptual design phase the normal split flap is only considered for initial computation rather than a slotted flap. The most common flap chord length is 0.25 C from the trailing edge where C is the airfoil chord.
2.2.1 Calculation of Takeoff and landing distance

Landing and takeoff run is usually specified in terms of ground roll. A initial rough approximate of takeoff distance is given by the formula [2]
Sg
Considering the design cruise Cl of 0.44 (i.e.) without using high lift devices. Sg
=
Sg = 12,726 ft (3,878 m)
So it is clearly evident that the takeoff distance is too large approximately 4 km. The airports cannot afford to such a big runway. Moreover the takeoff and landing distance comes under customer specifications and in most cases short take off and landing distance is preferred. The aircraft may not be certified by FAA if the design does not meet the FAA regulations for takeoff and landing. As
31
previously stated the Cl max required to meet takeoff and landing should be somewhere around 1.6 to 2.2 for long/ medium range aircraft. So assuming the required Cl max of 2.1, the landing distance obtained will be 2666.42 fts (812.72 m) which is acceptable. So the takeoff distance with the implementation of high lift devices is
Sg = 812.72 m
The rough estimate for landing distance for initial calculation is given by the formula [2]
SL = 118 (LP) + 400 Where LP is the landing parameter and is given by
LP =
Substituting the known values in the formula the landing distance is calculated as SL = 29,900 ft (9113.52 m) for Cl of 0.44 without using high lift devices. SL =6530 ft (2005.58 m) for Cl of 0.44 with the implementation of high lift devices. These calculations clearly reveal the importance of lifting devices.
2.2.2 Javafoil
Figure2. 12 Creation of Airfoil geometry
32
Javafoil is an applet which is available in public domain that can be used to come up with new airfoil geometry as per the customer requirement. This applet is widely utilised not only to create the required airfoil co-ordinates but it also provides options to vary the flap deflection angle and also the location of percentage of flap with respect to the airfoil chord.
Figure2. 13 Flap deflection
The smooth option can be used to smoothen the curve when the flap is deflected.
Figure2. 14 Computation of Cl
It is found that the created airfoil generates a Cl of 0.464 at zero degree angle of attack which is bit higher than the design Cl of 0.44 but taking the 3 D effects into consideration the wing is attached to the fuselage at an minimum angle not more than 2 degrees because the C L for wing
33
will be less than 2D airfoil. It is also found that the desired flap deflection angle of 25.5 degrees is required to achieve the Cl max value of (2.1). This is just an approximation of flap deflection angle because the results may not be the same in case of a 3D wing hence a bit more deflection of flap angle of 5 degree may be required to attain the Cl max
2.2.3 Finite 3D Wing

In order to study the variation between the 2D airfoil and a 3D wing, the obtained airfoil co ordinates from Javafoil applet is converted into point data and is imported in ICEM CFD to generate the airfoil curve and is then converted into IGES format and is taken to CATIA to create a 3 D wing geometry with all those taper ratio and sweep angle considered. Then the wing geometry along with the domain is converted into IGES format and is imported to ICEM CFD. Meshing is carried out in ICEM CFD and the mesh is read in Fluent. The resulting Cl value will be less when compared to that of the Javafoil case because of the 3D effects.
Figure2. 15 Generation of curves using ICEM CFD from point data
Figure2. 16 CATIA model of 3D wing
34
Figure2. 17 Domain sketch
Figure2. 18 Domain surface
Figure2. 19 Mesh generated in ICEM CFD
35
3.1Fuselage layout [6]

Structural requirements for pressurization mainly dictate the shape of the fuselage cross section. Internal pressure loads are better handled by circular cross section by Hoop tension. This makes the structure stronger and also lighter in comparison to other cross sectional shape. Non circular cross section is more prone to bending stress for a shell structure. For a fuselage to maximize internal volume usually interconnecting two or more circular section are considered. Laying out the fuselage structure mainly depends on the payload specification. The number of passenger dictates the width and length of the fuselage. The seat arrangement and number of aisle helps in deciding the fuselage interior structures. The seat configuration considered in this design is 4 abreast single aisle and number of seats along the fuselage helps in fixing the length of the fuselage. The length to diameter ratio for a given fuselage also needs to be considered at the time of design since this helps in reducing drag. Low ratio increases the drag penalty where as high ratio makes the fuselage long and thin which will adversely affect the structural stability of the airplane. FAR rules have specified the minimum dimensions for different class of passenger seats and are given in table 1.3.
Table3. 1 Typical seat width and pitch for different class of travel. [6]
Class Charter Economy Business First class
Seat width (mm) 400-420 475-525 575-625 625-700
Seat pitch (mm) 700-775 775-850 900-950 950-1050+
The seat width considered for the design is 500mm the seat pitch is 800mm and the aisle width as 500mm. the length of the fuselage for passenger seating is 800x20=16000mm. Fuselage consists of a nose section, midsection barrel with constant cross section and aft-end closure.
Figure3. 1 Seat pitch and height. [3]
36
Figure3. 2 Fuselage Interior detail (mm). Table3. 2 Typical guidelines for fuselage front and aft closure ratio. [3]
Seating abreast 3 4-6 7
Front fuselage closure ratio. Fcf 1.7-2 1.5-1.75 1.5
Aft fuselage closure ratio, Fca 2.6-3.5 2.5-3.75 2.5-3.75
Aft closure angle (deg) 5-10 8-14 10-15
Figure3. 3 Fuselage Plan view (mm).
37
Figure3. 4 Fuselage side view (mm).
Figure3. 5 Nose section layout. [6]
3.2 Fuselage nose section

The fuselage nose section is from the tip of the nose end to the constant cross section of the mid fuselage. This section holds the cockpit, flight deck, forward looking radar, nose undercarriage and the windscreen. The fuselage length to diameter ratio considered is 1.5 as shown in figure 3.3. The shape of the nose cone is designed such as to reduce drag.
Figure3. 6 Pilot Vision designed in Catia (mm).
38
Figure3. 7 Pilot seat dimensions as per FAR. [3]
The pilot seat is standardized to have stress free condition for the pilot during takeoff and landing with ample space to reduce fatigue to the pilot. The wind screen is designed to allow adequate vision to the pilot for flight maneuver.
3.3 Fuselage Mid-section

This section holds the passenger seating, the length for this section depends on the number of passenger to be accommodate. The seating are 4 abreast and 20 along with single aisle configuration with a galley and toilet at both ends. Foldable seats one each at each end of the midsection for the crew is provided. The mid-section is 20148mm long as shown in figure3.3
3.4 Fuselage tail section

The tail section is shaped to provide smooth surface to reduce the drag. The tail section also supports the tail surfaces and in some configuration the engine installation. The lower side of the profile is tapered to 9deg to provide clearance for the aircraft during takeoff. The tail section length to diameter ratio considered is 3. The overall fineness ratio of the fuselage is around ~10.
39
3.5 Galley and Toilet configuration
Figure3. 8 Galley and toilet layout. [6]
As per the FAR rules there should be one galley for 10-60 passengers and one toilet for 15-40 passenger. Since the design is for 80 passengers there are two galley and toilets provided at each end of the midsection of the fuselage. The sizes considered for the galley is 762 mm x 914 mm and for the toilet is 914mm x 914mm.
3.6 Passenger loading and emergency exits

FAR rules state that during emergency the plane needs to be evacuated within 90 second. This leads to FAR guidelines for the number of emergency exits that is needed for different number of passenger.
Table3. 3 Emergence exits requirements. [6]
Seats Less than 10 20 40 80 110 140 180
Emergency exit type Type I 1 1 2 2 Type II 1 Type III 1 1 1 2 1 2 Type IV 1 -
40
MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP Table3. 4 Dimensions for types of exits. [6]
Type Type I Type II Type III Type IV Type A (passenger or service loading door)
Dimension (mm) 610 x 1219 508 x 1118 508 x 914 483 x 660 1067 x 1829
In consideration to the FAR rules two doors are provided at each end of the fuselage with Type-A and two emergency exits one with Type I and one with Type III provided at each end of the fuselage.
Figure3. 9 CATIA model for fuselage view-1
Figure3. 10 CATIA model fuselage view-2
41
Figure3. 11 Mesh geometry of fuselage and domain.
Figure3. 12 Mesh geometry of fuselage.
3.7 Structural consideration

The fuselage structure should be able to take the bending moment, shear force, torsional loads and the compressive loads due to self-weight, weight of wings and the weight of engine along with the thrust force generated by the engine. The structure of the fuselage is constructed with a large number of stringers distributed along the circumference of the fuselage which helps in resisting bending of the fuselage. Bulkhead is provided at the ends of midsection of fuselage with frames along the length of fuselage.
42
Figure3. 13 Stringers layout. [1]
3.8 Weight estimation for fuselage

Even though the weight of fuselage depends on the fuselage size, layout, and location of engine and under carriage, initial guess can be assumed from historical data of similar aircraft which is considered at 7-12% of the maximum takeoff weight. For a better estimation one can use Howe formula [2] recommended for civil aircraft (50-300 seats) to arrive at initial estimation of the fuselage mass. All the equations are for all metal (aluminum) construction only and necessary correction factors need to be factored in for different material or advanced lighter material.
Where LF= fuselage overall length. DF= fuselage diameter. VD=aircraft maximum speed.
Table3. 5 Mass amended for different configuration. [6]
Configuration For pressurized cabin For fuselage mounted engines For fuselage mounted main undercarriage For large cargo door (etc.) discontinuity If free from structural discontinuity
Mass to be amended Increase by 8%. Increase by 4%. Increase by 7%. Increase by 10%. Reduce by 4%.
For the design considered the flight Mach # 0.85, hence the flight speed is at 340.3 x 0.85 = 289 m/s. the fuselage overall length is 35898 mm, fuselage diameter is 3500 mm. The fuselage body mass can be estimated by the Howes formula as
=10889 kg. Rapid mass estimation method can also be used to arrive at initial estimate for fuselage weight.
43
Figure3. 14 Mass fractions for rapid mass estimation. [3]
Roskams [7] suggest few different ways of estimating the fuselage weight, The general dynamic method, ( ) ( ) ( )
Where Kinlet =1.25 for inlets in or on the fuselage, otherwise 1.0 qD=dive dynamic pressure in psf L=fuselage length D=fuselage depth The Torenbeek method,
44
{ Here Kf=1.8 for a pressurized fuselage.
=1.07 for main undercarriage attached to the fuselage = 1.1 for a cargo aircraft with rear door. VD=design dive speed in knots equivalent air speed (KEAS) LH_tail=tail arm of the H-tail Sfus_gross_area= fuselage shell gross area. In light of the fuselage construction it is very difficult to predict the weight since the weight depends on the layout, type of material used and advancement of material technology for better strength to weight ratio, which the initial estimate needs to be cross checked with detail calculation and arrive at reasonably accurate estimation. Empirical formulas are available to get an accurate estimate but are very time consuming since every structural component needs to be accounted for.
3.9 Landing gear layout:

The landing gear used is a tri cycle type. The layout of the landing gear is usually done at the end after all the weight estimation is made for different section of the aircraft so that the CG is known for the landing gear location. The landing gear location also depends on the tail-down angle requirements suited for takeoff and landing attitudes, tipover and general airframe configurations. The weight estimation also gives an idea whether to use two large wheels or 4 small wheels per strut. For rough estimation 92% of gross weight is distributed on the main gear at aft CG condition and 8% of the loads distributed on the nose landing gear at aft CG. The nose landing gear is placed as far forward as possible to minimize the load on nose landing gear. The gear is designed to retract forward to have a free fall capability. [8]
Figure3. 15 Landing gear forward retract. [8]
45
Figure3. 16 Nose landing gear load calculation. [8]
The nose gear load is calculated as, [8] Max static main gear load (per strut) = W (F-M)/2F Max static nose gear load Min static nose gear load Where W is the gross weight, For tire selection the nose gear dynamic load is necessary which is calculated as, Max braking nose gear load = max static load + 10J. W/32.2F = W (F-L)/F = W (F-N)/F
Figure3. 17 Tires used in typical aircraft.
46
From figure 3.17 the landing gear configuration used is a tri cycle type with two wheel per struts with tire size 40 x 14 with 155 psi T type.
4.1Propulsion System
The turbofan is a type of air breathing jet engine that is widely used for aircraft propulsion. A ducted fan which uses the mechanical energy from the gas turbine to accelerate air rearwards. The ratio of the mass-flow of air bypassing the engine core compared to the mass-flow of air passing through the core is referred to as the bypass ratio. Current high bypass ratio turbofan engines are thermodynamically much more efficient than the early turbojet and low bypass types. This has been largely brought about by the introduction of advanced technologies which have enabled turbine blades to withstand high centrifugal loads whilst operating in gas temperatures considerably higher than the melting point of the unprotected blade material. Most commercial aviation jet engines in use today are of the high-bypass type, and most modern military fighter engines are low-bypass. In passenger aircraft, efficiency is the main factor rather than performance, large aircraft the fuel price accounts for some 30% of the aircraft direct operating costs. [3] By increasing the fuel efficiency the amount of fuel carried will be lesser there by reducing the total weight. A more fuel efficient engine will require less fuel to fly a given range and hence will lead to a lower take-off weight. We are designing 80 seater passenger aircraft having maximum takeoff mass is 48957 kg and range of 3000 nm keeping this in mind we have to select the appropriate engine which suits the requirements, the engine should weigh less weight so that maximum takeoff mass will not alter so much and the engine should have better efficiency as the engine efficiency is one of the key factor in passenger aircraft as efficiency decreases operating cost increases in order to decrease the operating cost we need to choose the engine which is having better efficiency.
4.2Engine Selection
The weight estimation can be made by using the statically data of similar plane and plotting the results of MTOW with number of passenger. Similar plots can also be made with range against MTOW per passenger and using this number one can arrive at estimating the maximum take-off weight (MTOW). Figure 1.1 and table 1.1 shows this relation and is used to arrive at first estimate for the given design.
47
Figure 4. 1 Effect of flight speed on engine efficiency. [6]
Above shows the difference between turboprop, turbofan and propfan engines, we can see from the graph that Turboprop engines are having higher efficiency than Propfan and Turbofan engines but Turboprop engine efficiency is high at lesser mach number (mach 0.5-0.6), but we need the cruise speed of 0.85, for this cruise speed Turbofan engines are having higher efficiency than Propfan and Turboprop, so it will be efficient if we install Turbofan engine to our design.
Figure 4. 2 Effect of Mach number and specific thrust on thrust lapse rate. [6]
Our aircraft design has total mass of 48957 kg and we know that thrust to weight ratio of passenger aircraft is in between 0.3 to 0.4.
48
Required thrust = 144080 N = 144.08kN
So we need to choose the engine which gives minimum thrust of 144.08kN. By considering all above conditions one can go for Pratt & Whitney PW6000 series or CFM International CFM56-5 series engine.
CFM International CFM56-5 series engine which gives the thrust of more than 100kN, in our design the CFM56-5B3 engine can be used which gives thrust of 150kN, has bypass ratio of 5.4 and overall pressure ratio of 35.5, CFM56-5B3 is a dual rotor, axial flow turbofan engine, the integrated fan and booster (low pressure turbine) is driven by a 4 stage low pressure turbine. A single stage high pressure turbine drives the 9 stage high pressure compressor, the two rotors are mechanically independent of each other. Air entering the engine is divided into a primary (inner) airstream and a secondary (outer) airstream. After the primary airstream has been compressed by the LPC and HPC, combustion of the fuel in the annular combustion chamber increases the HPC discharge air velocity to drive the high and low pressure turbines. An accessory drive system off the N2 rotor drives engine and airplane accessory components. [9]
4.3 Why to go for CFM56-5B3 Engine

CFM56-5B3 engines gives more thrust than the PW6000 series. CFM56-5B3 engines has higher bypass ratio than PW6000 series engines thus there is increase in the efficiency. In CFM56-5B3 engines there is option of a double-annular combustor that reduces emissions (particularly NOx). A new fan in a longer fan case, and a new low-pressure compressor with a fourth stage. It has higher efficiency than PW6000 series. The CFM56-5B Tech Insertion configuration provides operators with up to 1 percent improvement in fuel consumption over the life of the product compared to the base CFM565B engine. Low carbon emission than PW6000 series engines.
49
Table 4. 1 Specifications and applications of CFM56-5 series engines. [10]
Engine Model Takeoff Conditions (sea level) Max. takeoff (kN) Airflow (N/sec) Bypass ratio
5B1
5B2
5B3
5B4
5B5
5B6
5B7
5B8
5B9
133.46
137.91
146.81
120.11 3990 5.7
97.87 3638.6 6
104.54 3754.3 5.9
120.11 3990 5.7
96.09 3607.5 6
103.65 3741 5.9
4194.65 4252.47 4350.85 5.5 5.5 5.4
In-Flight Performance (10.668 km - Mach 0.80 ISA)
Max climb thrust (kN) Overall pressure ratio At max. climb
28.56
28.56
28.56
25.05
25.05
25.05
28.56
25.05
25.05
35.4
35.4
35.5
32.6
32.6
32.6
35.5
32.6
32.6
Max. cruise thrust (kN) Engine Characteristics Length (m) Fan diameter (m) Basic dry weight (kN) Applications:
25.98
25.98
25.98
22.33
22.33
22.33
25.98
22.33
22.33
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
1.734
1.734
1.734
1.734
1.734
1.734
1.734
1.734
1.734
23.36 23.36 23.36 23.36 23.36 23.36 23.36 23.36 23.36 A321 A321 A321 A320 A319 A319 A319 A319 A319 A319CJ
Specific Fuel Consumption of the engine is 1.00034*10-4 N/N-S. [11] Lapse rate = 5.650 C/km
50
4.4 Engine integration

The engine integration has a significant impact on the aircraft, affecting safety, structural weight, flutter, drag, control, maximum lift, propulsive efficiency, maintainability, and aircraft growth potential. Engines can be mounted on different wing positions,
Figure 4. 3 Inlet locations-podded engines. [1]
Engine location is influenced by many considerations including the interference between the nacelle and the wing which increases drag. Consequently, nacelles must be sufficiently forward and low to avoid drag increases. However, to minimize the weight of the landing gear and engine pylon, a general rule is drawn, the nacelles are usually located as close to the wing lower surface as possible, without causing undue heating of the wing by the engine exhaust.
Figure 4. 4 Location of the nacelle compared to the wing
From the literature survey, the engine can be placed below the wing as shown in the figure.
51
From the data of thrust to weight ratio, the minimum required thrust is found to be 144.08kN for our design and CFM56-5B3 engine is selected for the aircraft and clarification for choosing this engine is discussed.
5.1 Empennage
The function of an empennage is to stabilize the aircraft and provide control moments needed for maneuver and trim. The empennage consists of a horizontal and a vertical tail. Together they stabilize an aircrafts pitch and yaw moments. Trim for a horizontal tail refers to the balancing of moment created by the wing. For a vertical tail, trim force generated by it is largely unexploited, since most aircrafts are axis symmetrical. But in the case of an engine failure the vertical tail must provide for enough trim to sustain the aircraft stable. Though it is possible to build a tailless aircraft, it often comes with greater compromises in weight, wing area, airfoil selection and narrow centre of gravity range. The other major function of the tail is to provide control. The tail must be sized so as to provide adequate control at all critical conditions. For a horizontal tail, this includes control during takeoff and landing, low speed flight and transonic maneuvering. For a vertical tail, engine out flight, spin recovery and maximum roll rate are vital control conditions.
5.2 Empennage types

Different types of tail variations are available for various aircrafts depending on their functionality. Some variations in tail design are as shown in figure 5.1.
Figure 5. 1 Tail variations [1]
Each type of tail has its uniqueness owing to its functionality. Some of the designs are explained as follows.
52
Conventional tail About 70% of the aircrafts use a conventional tail. This is due to the fact that a conventional tail will be able to produce the necessary stability and control at the lightest weight. T tail This design is very popular due to its high aerodynamic efficiency. Since the horizontal tail is above, it avoids wing wake and propwash and also reduces fatigue in both structure and pilot. A smaller area of the vertical and horizontal tails would suffice compared to a conventional tail to produce the necessary moments. But it comes with a high weight penalty though. Cruciform tail The cruciform tail is a compromise between conventional tail and the T tail. It can function even at high angles of attack like the T tail but with comparatively lesser weight penalty. However no reduction in tail area can be made as in the case of a T tail. H tail In this design the vertical tail is positioned as such so as to have undisturbed flow of air at high angles of attack. Also, in the case of twin engines the H tail is positioned as such to be in line of prop wash so as to have better control in the case of engine out. V tail The V tail is intended to reduce wetted area. With a V tail the horizontal and vertical tail forces are the result of horizontal and vertical projection of forces exerted on the V surface. The resulting wetted area of a V tail would be lesser than that of separate horizontal and vertical tails. V tails offer reduced interference drag, but with some penalty in control surface actuation complexity as the rudder and elevator controls must be blended to provide the proper movement of V tail ruddervators. This also results in adverse roll-yaw coupling. Hence for the purpose of commercial transport aircraft a conventional tail would be appropriate.
5.3 Empennage design

The tail design is quite similar to the design of a wing. However a smaller area of tail is enough to compensate for the moments about the aircraft aerodynamic centre due to the distance between tail and wing.
5.4 Tail geometry

The surface area required by the tail is directly proportional to the area of the wing. Hence area of the tail cannot be determined without the area of the wing. However other geometric parameters like aspect ratio and taper ratio are similar over a wide range of aircraft types. These are
53
obtained through statistical data and can be adhered to at the initial stage of tail design. Statistically obtained data of tail aspect ratio and taper ratio for various types of aircraft is as shown in figure 5.2.
Figure 5. 2 Tail aspect ratio and taper ratio for various types of aircraft [1]
Other geometric parameters are selected based on the following guidelines: Tail thickness ratio is similar to wing thickness ratio as per historical guidelines provided in the wing geometry section. Since the aircraft designed is a commercial transport aircraft, the airfoil selected for the tail is NACA0012 which is similar to the thickness of the wing airfoil. Horizontal tail leading edge sweep is set to about 5 deg more than the wing sweep. It enables the tail to stall after the wing and provides the tail with higher critical Mach number. Hence loss of elevator effectiveness due to shock formation is avoided. Vertical tail sweep varies from 35 to 55 deg for most aircrafts. This is to ensure that the vertical tail has higher critical Mach number than the wing. Data obtained from wing design and fuselage design of the given aircraft is as shown in table5.1
Table 5. 1 Design data of wing and fuselage
Sweep angle 30
Wing (airfoil-NACA 63412) Sw Bw Croot AR 2 (m ) (m) (m) 120 9 0.3 32.86 5.62
Ctip (m) 1.69
Cmac (m) 4.61
Fuselage Overall length (m) 35.898
Geometrical data supposed for tail design is as shown in table 5.2

Table 5. 2 Geometrical data supposed for tail design
Horizontal tail (airfoil-NACA 0012)
Vertical tail (airfoil-NACA 0012)
sweep angle 35
AR 4
0.3
sweep angle 45
AR 1.5
0.3
54
5.5 Tail sizing

The primary purpose of a tail is to counter the moments produced by the wing. Hence its effectiveness is directly proportional to the lift produced by the tail and to the tail moment arm. The lift force produced by the tail depends on the tail area. Therefore, the tail effectiveness is directly proportional to the tail area times the tail moment arm. The tail volume coefficient method for initial tail sizing defines this. Now, wing yawing moments to be countered directly depends on its span and wing pitching moment to be countered depends on its chord. Hence by tail volume coefficient method we get:
And,
Where, L = moment arm measured from tail quarter chord to wing quarter chord bw = wing span Sw = wing area Cw = wing mean chord The Cvt and Cht values are obtained through historical data from various aircrafts and are as shown in figure 5.3.
Figure 5. 3 Tail volume coefficient [1]
Hence for a twin engine general aviation aircraft we have: Cvt = 0.07 and Cht = 0.80
55
The tail arm L is taken to 50% of the fuselage length. L = 35.898/2 = 18m Thus we can find tail area by:
We get, m2 Similarly
We get, m2
5.6 Tail layout

From the above calculated parameters the geometric dimensions required for layout can be obtained as follows:
Therefore we get for horizontal tail, = 9.91 = 10m = 3.815 m = 1.144 m
For vertical tail we get, = 4.79 = 4.8 m
56
= 4.92 m = 1.47 m
The tail design data thus obtained is as shown in table 5.3

Table 5. 3 Tail Design configuration
Parameters sweep angle AR Area (m ) Span (m) Croot (m) Ctip (m) MAC (m)
2
Tail Design configuration Horizontal tail (airfoil-NACA 0012) 35 4 0.3 24.58 10 3.815 1.144 2.72 Vertical tail (airfoil-NACA 0012) 45 1.5 0.3 15.33 4.8 4.92 1.47 3.5
The coordinates for the NACA 0012 airfoil with deflected control surface is taken from java flow applet. The deflection of the control surface is at 25% of chord from trailing edge and deflected to an angle of 35 as shown in figure 5.4.
Figure 5. 4 NACA 0012 airfoil coordinates with deflected control surface
The deflection gives a Cl value of -2.257 at zero angle of attack shown in figure 5.5.
57
Figure 5. 5 Velocity distribution and Cl values with deflected control surface
The coordinates are taken as input and an airfoil is created in CATIA as shown in figure 5.6.
Figure 5. 6 NACA 0012 airfoil with deflected control surface in CATIA
With calculated parameters the horizontal and vertical tail is modelled in CATIA as shown in figure 5.7 and figure 5.8.
58
Figure 5. 7 CATIA model-Horizontal tail
Figure 5. 8 CATIA model-Vertical tail
6.1 Empty weight build up and C.G location

A critical part of an aircraft design process is weight estimation. Detailed weight estimation for an aircraft involves expertise in many engineering disciplines involved in the design. Conceptual design of an aircraft begins with weight estimation. It involves coming up with a takeoff gross weight and further breaking it up into structural weight payload weight, fuel weight
59
etc. The next level in weight estimation involves estimating the weight for various components and then sum for the total empty weight. The initial balance calculations for component weight build up is based on planform areas, wetted areas and percents of gross weight. C.G. locations for each of the components are found. As the design phase progresses more refined c.g locations are determined. These are summed and divided by the total weight to determine the actual c.g. location. At this stage of the design it is acceptable to do a rough estimate of the c.g. this can be done with a statistical approach as shown in figure 6.1. Each of the components weight is determined from historical values for weight per square foot of exposed planform area or wetted area or a fraction of the takeoff gross weight. This technique also involves determining approximate locations of c.g. for each of the component. These weights can be used as a check in more detailed weight estimations.
Figure 6. 1 Approximate empty weight build up and c.g. location [1]
From figure 1.9 we have: Wing weight = 2.5 * SWing(ft2) = 2.5 * 1291.67 = 3229.175 lb = 1465 kg Approximate location of c.g is at 40% of MAC. C.g location = 1.844 m from leading edge Horizontal tail weight = 2 * SHtail(ft2) = 2 * 264.58 = 529.16 lb = 240 kg Approximate location of c.g is at 40% of MAC. C.g location = 1.088 m from leading edge Vertical tail weight = 2 * SVtail(ft2) = 2 * 165 = 330 lb = 150 kg Approximate location of c.g is at 40% of MAC.
60
C.g location = 1.4 m from leading edge Fuselage weight = 1.4 * SFuselage wetted area (ft2) = 1.7 * 7825.36 = 13303.11 lb = 6034 kg Approximate location of c.g is at 40% - 50 % of length. C.g location = between 14.36 m and 17.95 m from nose Landing Gear weight = 0.057 * TOGW (lb) = 0.057 * 107916.28 = 6151.23 lb = 2790 kg Installed engine weight = 1.4 * Engine weight (lb) = 1.4 * 5250 = 7350 lb = 3334 kg Empty weight of other components = 0.1 * TOGW (lb) = 0.1 * 107916.28 = 10791.628 lb = 4895 kg Approximate location of c.g is at 40% - 50 % of length. C.g location = between 14.36 m and 17.95 m from nose The determined values can be tabulated as shown in table 6.1.
Table 6. 1 Empty weight build up and c.g. location
Component Wing Horizontal tail Vertical tail Fuselage Landing gear Installed engine Others
Weight (kg) 1465 240 150 6034 2790 3334 4895
C.G. position 1.844 m from leading edge 1.088 m from leading edge 1.4 m from leading edge Between 14.36 m - 17.95 m from nose
Between 14.36 m - 17.95 m from nose
6.2 Performance
Having designed the conceptual aircraft for the given requirements, performance for the same can be calculated. Necessary data, derived from the design, required for performance calculations is as shown in table 6.2.
61
Table 6. 2 Derived data from design
Parameters TOGW (kg) Fuel weight (kg) Landing weight (kg) Cl Cd Wing area (m2) Wing loading (kg/m2) V stall (m/s) Take off thrust (KN) SFC (N/N-s) Thrust-weight ratio Mu-Concrete
Value 48950 12854.27 36095.73 0.41 0.031 120 410 66 130 1.00034*10-4 0.3 0.04
The performance parameters for the designed aircraft are calculated as follows: Range is given by the equation =
Considering 12 km altitude we get, range R = 4780 km Endurance is given by the equation = Endurance E = 11 hours Take off distance is given by = = = Take off distance = 1.556 km Landing distance is given by = Landing distance = 1.557 km Rate of climb is given by the equation:
ln ( ) +
ln (
62
( ) Where,
=*
+ ( ) [
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
Rate of climb = 10.75m/s Turning rate is given by: = Turning rate at 12km altitude = 20 /s
)]
Radius of turn Radius of turn is given by: =
Radius of turn = 583.52 m The aircraft designed has characteristics as shown in table 6.3.
Table 6. 3 Designed aircraft characteristics
Conceptual design-80 seat passenger Length(m) Fuselage Width (m) Dimension Wing Span (m) Wing Area (m2) Aspect Ratio Gross Takeoff Weight (kg) Landing Weight (kg) Weight Fuel Weight (kg) Empty Weight (kg) Payload (kg) Range (km) Max. Thrust (kN) Performance Wing Loading (kg/m2) Thrust Loading (T/W) Take Off Distance (m)
35.898 3.5 32.86 120 9 48950 36100 12850 18908 9600 4780 150 410 0.3 1556
63
Landing distance (m) Endurance (hr) Rate of climb (m/s) Seating Capacity (Max)
1557 11 10.75 80
7.1 Assembly
Figure 7. 1 Front View
Figure 7. 2 Top view
.
Figure 7. 3 Side view
64
Figure 7. 4 Isometric view
8.1 Conclusion
The aeroplane is designed to meet the requirements to fly at 0.85 Mach with a range of 3000 nm flying at an altitude of 12-14 km. The layout and claculations used are for preliminary design and further refinment needs to be done as and how finer details are established. Expecially when accurate weight are established for all the components there will be changes in wing loading and thrust loading which will effect the wing area and thrust required. Chages will also effect the range and endurance and hence needs to be iterated for every changes and a compromise needs to be reached to attain the mission requirements with minimum weight penality and cost to manufacture. Weight will also effect with the advancment of material technology, control system will be effected with the introduction of advanced control systems that will drastically effect the weight and hence all the dependent parameters accociated to gross weight.
65
REFERENCES
________________________________________________________________________________ [1] Daniel P. Raymer, Aircraft design-A conceptual approach, Current Science, AIAA, 2nd edition, 2004
[2] Thomas C. Corke., Design of Aircraft, second edition, Pearson Education, 2005. [3] Ajoy Kundu (2010), Aircraft Design, Cambridge University Press.
[4] Chapter 5 Wing Design/Mohammad Sadraey /Daniel Webster College. [5] Ira H. Abbott, Albert E. Von Doenhoff and Louis S. Stivers Jr, National Advisory Committee For Aeronautics Report No. 824, Summary of Airfoil Data, 1945. [6] Lloyd R. Jenkinson, Paul Simpkin and Darren Rhodes Civil Jet Aircraft Design First published in Great Britain in 1999 by Arnold, a member of the Hodder Headline Group, [7] Dr. Jan Roskam Airplane design Part V component weight estimation copyright Roskam Aviation and engineering Corporation. [8] Norman S. CurreyAircraft Landing Gear Design: Principles and Practices published by American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. 370 L'Enfant Promenade, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20024. AIAA Education Series [9] http://www.b737.org.uk/cfm56_soi.htm retrieved on 30th August 2012. [10] http://www.cfmaeroengines.com/engines/cfm56-5b retrieved on 30th August 2012. [11] http://www.jet-engine.net/civtfspec.html retrieved on 5th September 2012.
66

Acd 510 Bzb0911002 - Report

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Acd 510 Bzb0911002 - Report

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Module Code Module Name Course Department

Name of the Student Reg. No Batch Module Leader

Full-Time / Part-Time 2011. Dr. H. K. Narahari

M.S.Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies

Aircraft Conceptual Design

POSTGRADUATE ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME (PEMP)

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Penalty for late submission

Signature of the student Submission date stamp

Signature of the Module Leader and date

Signature of Head of the Department and date

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Table 4. 1 Specifications and applications of CFM56-5 series engines. [10] .............................50

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Acronym Cl Cd TWR WL LDR Ct AR Wf MTOM Cdo DSL

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

1.2 Initial Weight Estimate

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

1.2.1 Payload Weight

W payload = 80 * (80+40) = 9600 kg (21165 pounds)

1.2.2 Crew Weight

W crew = 5 * (120) = 600 kg (1323 pounds)

1.2.3 Empty weight Fraction

Figure1. 1 Empty weight fraction Vs Wo[1]

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

1.2.4 Fuel weight Fraction

Figure1. 2 Mission Profile

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Therefore Wi-1 / Wi in our case it is given by (W3/W2) is given by

Figure1. 3 Aircraft type based on Range[2]

Figure1. 4 Selection of SFC[1]

Figure1. 5 Selection of L/D Ratio[1]

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure1. 6 Selection of L/D based on type of Aircraft[2]

Therefore Wi-1 / Wi in our case it is given by (W4/W3) is given by

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Fuel fraction used for landing is estimated as 0.995

Simplifying the equation, we get

Figure1. 7 No. of Passenger Vs MTOM[3]

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure1. 8 Range Vs MTOM/Passenger[3]

2.1 Wing Design

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

2.1.1 Wing loading

Figure2. 1 Selection of Wing Loading[2][3]