HINDUSTAN COLLEGE OF

ENGINEERING

AIRCRAFT DESIGN PROJECT – 1
INTERNATIONAL MEDIUM-RANGE 280 SEATER
PASSENGER AIRCRAFT






SUBMITTED BY:
ROBIN RICHARD RAJAN. R
SARAVANAN. T
RAJESH KUMAR. K
P a g e | 1


Aircraft Design Project - 1



HINDUSTAN COLLEGE OF
ENGINEERING

AIRCRAFT DESIGN PROJECT – 1 REPORT

NAME OF THE STUDENT :
NAME OF THE PROJECT :
DEPARTMENT :

Certified that this a bonafide record of the work done by
of VI semester AERO (B.E.)
during the year 2009-2010 on DESIGN OF INTERNATIONAL
MEDIUM RANGE 280 SEATER PASSENGER AIRCRAFT.


INT. Examiner Staff Member Incharge
EXT. Examiner


Name of examination: B.E. DEGREE
Registration number: 305071010


P a g e | 2


Aircraft Design Project - 1


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to extent my heartfelt thanks to Prof . P. K. Dash (Head of
Aeronautical Department) for giving me his able support and encouragement. At this
juncture I must emphasis the point that this DESIGN PROJECT would not have
been possible without the highly informative and valuable guidance by Prof. P. S.
Venkatanarayanan, whose vast knowledge and experience has must us go about this
project with great ease. We have great pleasure in expressing our sincere & whole hearted
gratitude to them.
It is worth mentioning about my team mates, friends and colleagues of the
Aeronautical department, for extending their kind help whenever the necessity arose. I
thank one and all who have directly or indirectly helped me in making this design
project a great success.
P a g e | 3


Aircraft Design Project - 1


INDEX
Serial No. Topic Page No.
1 Aim of the Project 5
2 Abstract 7
3 Introduction 9
4 Comparative Data Sheet 16
5 Graphs 20
6 Mean Design Parameters 39
7 Weight Estimation 41
8 Powerplant Selection 49
9 Fuel Weight Validation 53
10 Wing Selection 55
11 Airfoil Selection 60
12 Lift Estimation 70
13 Drag Estimation 75
14 Landing Gear Arrangement 81
15 Fuselage Design 87
16 Performance Characteristics 94
17 3 – View Diagram 100
18 Conclusion 104
19 Bibliography 106
P a g e | 4


Aircraft Design Project - 1


ABBREVIATION
A.R. - Aspect Ratio
B - Wing Span (m)
C - Chord of the Airfoil (m)
C
root
- Chord at Root (m)
C
tip
- Chord at Tip (m)
C - Mean Aerodynamic Chord (m)
C
d
- Drag Co-efficient
C
d,0
- Zero Lift Drag Co-efficient
C
p
- Specific fuel consumption (lbs/hp/hr)
C
L
- Lift Co-efficient
D - Drag (N)
E - Endurance (hr)
E - Oswald efficiency
L - Lift (N)
(L/D)
loiter
- Lift-to-drag ratio at loiter
(L/D)
cruise
- Lift-to-drag ratio at cruise
M - Mach number of aircraft
Mff - Mission fuel fraction
R - Range (km)
Re - Reynolds Number
S - Wing Area (m²)
S
ref
- Reference surface area
S
wet
- Wetted surface area
S
a
- Approach distance (m)
S
f
- Flare Distance (m)
S
fr
- Free roll Distance (m)
S
g
- Ground roll Distance (m)
T - Thrust (N)
T
cruise
- Thrust at cruise (N)
T
take-off
- Thrust at take-off (N)
(T/W)
loiter
- Thrust-to-weight ratio at loiter
(T/W)
cruise
- Thrust-to-weight ratio at cruise
(T/W)
take-off
- Thrust-to-weight ratio at take-off
V
cruise
- Velocity at cruise (m/s)
V
stall
- Velocity at stall (m/s)
V
t
- Velocity at touch down (m/s)
W
crew
- Crew weight (kg)
W
empty
- Empty weight of aircraft (kg)
W
fuel
- Weight of fuel (kg)
W
payload
- Payload of aircraft (kg)
W
0
- Overall weight of aircraft (kg)
W/S - Wing loading (kg/m²)
p
- Density of air (kg/m³)
u
- Dynamic viscosity (Ns/m²)
ì
- Tapered ratio
R/C - Rate of Climb
P a g e | 5


Aircraft Design Project - 1













AIM OF THE PROJECT

P a g e | 6


Aircraft Design Project - 1


AIM OF THE PROJECT

The aim of this design project is to design a 280 seater passenger aircraft by
comparing the data and specifications of present aircrafts in this category and to calculate the
performance characteristics. Also necessary graphs need to be plotted and diagrams have to
be included wherever needed.

The following design requirements and research studies are set for the project:
- Design an aircraft that will transport 280 passengers and their baggage over a design
range of 7200 km at a cruise speed of about 872 km/h.
- To provide the passengers with high levels of safety and comfort.
- To operate from regional and international airports.
- To use advanced and state of the art technologies in order to reduce the operating
costs.
- To offer a unique and competitive service to existing scheduled operations.
- To assess the development potential in the primary role of the aircraft.
- To produce a commercial analysis of the aircraft project.

P a g e | 7


Aircraft Design Project - 1














ABSTRACT

P a g e | 8


Aircraft Design Project - 1


ABSTRACT
The purpose of the project is to design a 280 seater Medium Range International
passenger aircraft. The aircraft will possess a low wing, tricycle landing gear and a
conventional tail arrangement. Such an aircraft must possess a wide body configuration to
provide sufficient seating capacity. It must possess turbofan engines to provide the required
amount of speed, range and fuel economy for the operator. The aircraft will possess three
engines.

P a g e | 9


Aircraft Design Project - 1














INTRODUCTION

P a g e | 10


Aircraft Design Project - 1


INTRODUCTION
At the instant time there are different types of aircrafts with latest technology. Every
year there is a great competition for making an aircraft of having higher capacity of members
inside the aircraft. So here in this report, We intend to implant the differentiation among the
aircrafts having sitting capacity of 250-350 members. This report gives the different aspects
of specifications like wing specification, weight specification, power plant specification and
performance specification.
Airbus started the development of a very large airliner (termed Megaliner by Airbus
in the early development stages) in the early 1990s, both to complete its own range of
products and to break the dominance that Boeing had enjoyed in this market segment since
the early 1970s with its 747. McDonnell Douglas pursued a similar strategy with its
ultimately unsuccessful MD-12 design. As each manufacturer looked to build a successor to
the 747, they knew there was room for only one new aircraft to be profitable in the 600 to 800
seat market segment. Each knew the risk of splitting such a niche market, as had been
demonstrated by the simultaneous debut of the Lockheed L-1011 and the McDonnell Douglas
DC-10: both planes met the market’s needs, but the market could profitably sustain only one
model, eventually resulting in Lockheed's departure from the civil airliner business. In
January 1993, Boeing and several companies in the Airbus consortium started a joint
feasibility study of an aircraft known as the Very Large Commercial Transport (VLCT),
aiming to form a partnership to share the limited market. Airplanes come in many different
shapes and sizes depending on the mission of the aircraft, but all modern airplanes have
certain components in common. These are the fuselage, wing, tail assembly and control
surfaces, landing gear, and powerplant.
For any airplane to fly, it must be able to lift the weight of the airplane, its fuel, the
passengers, and the cargo. The wings generate most of the lift to hold the plane in the air. To
generate lift, the airplane must be pushed through the air. The engines, which are usually
located beneath the wings, provide the thrust to push the airplane forward through the air.
The fuselage is the body of the airplane that holds all the pieces of the aircraft
together and many of the other large components are attached to it. The fuselage is generally
streamlined as much as possible to reduce drag. Designs for fuselages vary widely. The
fuselage houses the cockpit where the pilot and flight crew sit and it provides areas for
passengers and cargo. It may also carry armaments of various sorts. Some aircraft carry fuel
in the fuselage; others carry the fuel in the wings. In addition, an engine may be housed in the
fuselage.
The wing provides the principal lifting force of an airplane. Lift is obtained from the
dynamic action of the wing with respect to the air. The cross-sectional shape of the wing as
viewed from the side is known as the airfoil section. The planform shape of the wing (the
shape of the wing as viewed from above) and placement of the wing on the fuselage
(including the angle of incidence), as well as the airfoil section shape, depend upon the
airplane mission and the best compromise necessary in the overall airplane design.
The control surfaces include all those moving surfaces of an airplane used for attitude,
lift, and drag control. They include the tail assembly, the structures at the rear of the airplane
that serve to control and maneuver the aircraft and structures forming part of the tail and
attached to the wing.

P a g e | 11


Aircraft Design Project - 1


PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF AIRPLANE DESIGN
OBJECTIVES
To meet the FUNCTIONAL, OPERATIONAL and SAFETY requirements set out
OR acceptable to the USER.
- ACTUAL PROCESS OF DESIGN
- Selection of aircraft type and shape
- Determination of geometric parameters
- Selection of power plant
- Structural design and analysis of various components
- Determination of aircraft flight and operational characteristics .
- How to get the BEST POSSIBLE solution to meet the simultaneous
requirements?
- Very complex and long drawn-out process
- Meeting higher performance requirements than similar aircraft already in
service.
- Role of Design Laboratories and R&D Institutions.
- Trial and Error, in an ingenious fashion.

3 DISTINCT STAGES OF AIRCRAFT DESIGN
- Project Feasibility Study
- Preliminary Design
- Design Project

PROJECT FEASIBILITY STUDY (to evolve a satisfactory specification)
- Comprehensive market survey
- Studies on operating conditions for the airplane to be designed
- Studies on relevant design requirements (specified by Airworthiness Authorities)
- Evaluation of similar existing designs
- Studies on possibilities of introducing new concepts
- Collection of data on relevant power plants
- Laying down PRELIMINARY SPECIFICATIONS

PRELIMINARY DESIGN
It consists of the initial stages of design, resulting in the presentation of a BROCHURE
containing preliminary drawings and clearly stating the operational capabilities of the
P a g e | 12


Aircraft Design Project - 1


airplane being designed. This Brochure has to be APPROVED by the manufacturer and/or
the customer.
The steps involved:
- Layout of the main components
- Arrangement of airplane equipment and control systems
- Selection of power plant
- Aerodynamic and stability calculations
- Preliminary structural design of MAJOR components
- Weight estimation and c.g. travel
- Preliminary and Structural Testing
- Drafting the preliminary 3-view Drawings

DESIGN PROJECT
- Internal discussions
- Discussions with prospective customers
- Discussions with Certification Authorities
- Consultations with suppliers of power plant and major accessories
- Deciding upon a BROAD OUTLINE to start the ACTUAL DESIGN, which will
consist of Construction of Mock-up
- Structural layout of all the individual units, and their stress analysis
- Drafting of detailed design drawings
- Structural and functional testing
- Nomenclature of parts
- Supplying key and assembly diagrams
- Final power plant calculations
- Final weight estimation and c.g. limits
- Final performance calculation











P a g e | 13


Aircraft Design Project - 1


SEVEN INTELLECTUAL POINTS
FOR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN



P a g e | 14


Aircraft Design Project - 1


DESIGN SEQUENCE

1. Define the mission

2. Compare the past design

3. Parametric selection
a. Geometry
b. Shape

4. Weight Estimation

5. Aerodynamics
a. Wing
b. Speed
c. Altitude
d. Drag

6. Propulsive device
a. Engine selection
b. Location

7. Performance
a. Fuel weight
b. Take-off distance
c. Landing distance
d. Climb
e. Descent
f. Loiter
g. Cruise

8. Configuration
a. Conceptional
b. Preliminary
c. Detailed design

9. Stability and control
a. Tail
b. Flaps
c. Control surfaces

P a g e | 15


Aircraft Design Project - 1


10. Structure
a. Primary
b. Secondary
c. Tertiary

11. Construction
a. Truss
b. Semi-monocoque
c. Monocoque

12. Manufacturing → Models
a. Mock up model
b. Training model
c. Scale in/out
d. Fake model
e. Test model
f. Prototype model
g. Flying model

13. Life cycle cost → Minimize the owning cost

14. Iteration → Refine the weight and design

15. Simulation → Flight envelope

16. Testing

17. Modification and refinement

18. Design report
a. Executive summary
b. Management summary
c. Design details
d. Manufacturing plan
P a g e | 16


Aircraft Design Project - 1














COMPARATIVE DATASHEET

P a g e | 17


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Comparative Datasheet - 1
Airbus Aircrafts
Parameter Units 1 2 3 4 5
Name (no unit) A300-600R A310-300 A330-300 A340-500 A350-800
Total Seating Capacity (no unit) 266 240 295 313 270
Aircraft Dimensions
Length m 54 46.6 63.6 67.9 60.7
Height m 16.62 15.8 16.85 17.1 17.2
Fuselage Diameter m 5.64 5.64 5.64 5.64 5.96
Wing Span m 44.85 43.9 60.3 63.45 64.8
Chord m 5.8 5.64 6.5 6.8 7
Aspect Ratio (no unit) 7.7 7.78 9.3 9.3 9.25
Wing Area m
2
260 219 361.6 439.4 443
Wing Sweep degree 28° 28° 30° 31.1° 31.9°
Performance
Cruising Altitude m 10,668 9,998 10,972 10,972 12,192
Service ceiling m 12,000 12,497 12,527 12,527 13,137
Range Km 7,540 9,600 10,500 16,060 15,000
Cruising Speed Km/h 829 850 871 881 903
Max Speed Km/h 871 901 913 913 945
Number of Engines (no unit) 2 2 2 4 2
Max thrust capability kN 311.4 262.5 320 249 374
Design Weights
MTO Weight x10
3
Kg 171.7 164 233 372 268
Empty Weight x10
3
Kg 90.9 83.1 124.5 170.9 115.7
Wing Loading Kg/m
2
660.38 748.86 644.36 846.61 604.96
Max Fuel Capacity litre 68,150 75,470 97,170 2,14,810 1,29,000

P a g e | 18


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Comparative Datasheet - 2
Boeing Aircrafts
Parameter Units 6 7 8 9 10
Name (no unit) 707-320B 757-200 767-200 777-200 787-9
Total Seating Capacity (no unit) 202 234 290 301 280
Aircraft Dimensions
Length m 46.61 47.32 48.5 63.7 62.8
Height m 12.93 13.56 16.8 18.5 16.9
Fuselage Diameter m 3.76 4.1 5.03 6.2 5.9
Wing Span m 44.42 38.05 47.6 60.9 60.1
Chord m 6.25 4.76 5.95 7.02 6.4
Aspect Ratio (no unit) 7.1 7.98 7.99 8.67 9.4
Wing Area m
2
273.7 181.25 283.3 427.8 325.3
Wing Sweep degree 35° 25° 31.5° 31.64° 32.2°
Performance
Cruising Altitude m 10,058 10,668 10,668 10,668 12,192
Service ceiling m 11,887 12,802 11,887 13,137 13,106
Range Km 10,650 7,600 7,300 9,695 15,000
Cruising Speed Km/h 972 850 851 905 903
Max Speed Km/h 1,010 935 913 950 945
Number of Engines (no unit) 4 2 2 2 2
Max thrust capability kN 320.4 193 222 330 320
Design Weights
MTO Weight x10
3
Kg 151.32 115.68 142.88 247.2 248
Empty Weight x10
3
Kg 66.4 57.18 81.23 134.8 115
Wing Loading Kg/m
2
552.87 638.23 504.34 577.84 762.37
Max Fuel Capacity litre 90,160 43,490 90,770 117,000 127,000

P a g e | 19


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Comparative Datasheet - 3
Other Aircrafts
Parameter Units 11 12 13 14 15
Name (no unit)
Lockheed
L-1011-200
Ilyushin
IL-96-300
Tupolev
Tu-204-100
Douglas
DC-8-63CF
Tupolev
Tu-114
Total Seating Capacity (no unit) 263 300 210 259 220
Aircraft Dimensions
Length m 54.15 55.3 46.1 57.1 54.1
Height m 16.87 17.5 13.9 13.11 15.44
Fuselage Diameter m 6.0 6.08 4.1 3.73 4.2
Wing Span m 47.35 60.11 41.8 45.24 51.1
Chord m 6.78 5.82 4.40 6.01 6.08
Aspect Ratio (no unit) 6.98 10.32 9.48 7.52 8.39
Wing Area m
2
321.1 350 184.2 271.9 311.1
Wing Sweep degree 35° 30° 30° 32° 35°
Performance
Cruising Altitude m 10,257 10,668 12,100 10,668 8,991
Service ceiling m 10,668 13,106 12,588 12,497 11,887
Range Km 7,420 10,400 5,650 3,445 6,200
Cruising Speed Km/h 935 860 830 876 770
Max Speed Km/h 990 900 900 965 870
Number of Engines (no unit) 3 4 2 4 4
Max thrust capability kN 222.4 157 158.3 84.5 60
Design Weights
MTO Weight x10
3
Kg 211 250 103 161 175
Empty Weight x10
3
Kg 105.1 120.4 60 66.36 91 to 93
Wing Loading Kg/m
2
657.11 714.28 559.17 592.12 562.52
Max Fuel Capacity litre 99,935 152,620 41,000 66,243 71,615

P a g e | 20


Aircraft Design Project - 1














GRAPHS

P a g e | 21


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 1
Cruising Speed vs. Length





Length = 55.0m
P a g e | 22


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 2
Cruising Speed vs. Height





Height = 15.7m
P a g e | 23


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 3
Cruising Speed vs. Fuselage Diameter





Fuselage Diameter = 5.26m
P a g e | 24


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 4
Cruising Speed vs. Wing Span





Wing Span = 51.5m
P a g e | 25


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 5
Cruising Speed vs. Chord





Chord = 6.0m
P a g e | 26


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 6
Cruising Speed vs. Aspect Ratio





Aspect Ratio = 8.6
P a g e | 27


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 7
Cruising Speed vs. Wing Area





Wing Area = 348m
2
P a g e | 28


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 8
Cruising Speed vs. Wing Sweep





Wing Sweep = 31.5°
P a g e | 29


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 9
Cruising Speed vs. Cruising Altitude





Cruising Altitude = 10800m

P a g e | 30


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 10
Cruising Speed vs. Service Ceiling





Service Ceiling = 12000m

P a g e | 31


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 11
Cruising Speed vs. Range





Range = 7200m

P a g e | 32


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 12
Cruising Speed vs. Maximum Speed





Max Speed = 940km/h

P a g e | 33


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 13
Cruising Speed vs. Number of Engines





Number of Engines = 3

P a g e | 34


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 14
Cruising Speed vs. Maximum Thrust Capability





Maximum Thrust Capability = 265kN

P a g e | 35


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 15
Cruising Speed vs. Maximum Take Off Weight





Maximum Take Off Weight = 272000 kg

P a g e | 36


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 16
Cruising Speed vs. Empty Weight





Empty Weight = 85000 kg

P a g e | 37


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 17
Cruising Speed vs. Wing Loading





Wing Loading = 710 kg/m
3

P a g e | 38


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Graph 18
Cruising Speed vs. Maximum Fuel Capacity





Maximum Fuel Capacity = 100000 litre
P a g e | 39


Aircraft Design Project - 1














MEAN DESIGN PARAMETERS

P a g e | 40


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Mean Design Parameters

S. No. Design Parameter Value Unit
1 Cruising Speed 872 km/h
2 Length 55.0 m
3 Height 15.7 m
4 Fuselage Diameter 5.26 m
5 Wing Span 51.5 m
6 Chord 6.0 m
7 Aspect Ratio 8.6 (no unit)
8 Wing Area 348 m
2
9 Wing Sweep 31.5° degree
10 Cruising Altitude 10800 m
11 Service Ceiling 12000 m
12 Range 7200 km
13 Maximum Speed 940 km/h
14 Number of Engines 3 (no unit)
15 Maximum Thrust Capability 265 kN
16 Maximum Take Off Weight 272000 kg
17 Empty Weight 85000 kg
18 Wing Loading 710 kg/m
2

19 Maximum Fuel Capacity 100000 litre

P a g e | 41


Aircraft Design Project - 1














WEIGHT ESTIMATION

P a g e | 42


Aircraft Design Project - 1


WEIGHT ESTIMATION
FIRST WEIGHT ESTIMATION: -
The design take off gross weight W
o
is the weight of the airplane at the instant it
begins its mission. It includes the weight of all the fuel on board at the beginning of the flight.
W0 = { Wcrew +Wpayload + Wfuel + Wempty }
Wfuel - weight of the fuel load at beginning of the flight
W
0
=

+

1−

0

0

0
- Fuel weight fraction

0
- Empty weight fraction

ESTIMATION OF We /W0:
In the plot of W
0
vs. W
e
/W
0
for the aircrafts shown in the comparative data sheet the
values of W
e
/W
0
tend to cluster around a horizontal line at W
e
/W
0

P a g e | 43


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Estimation of Wf / W0:
The amount of fuel to carry out the mission depends critically on the efficiency of the
propulsion device, the engine specific fuel consumption. It also depends on L/D ratio.

Normal mission profile for passenger aircraft







The fuel weight ratio

0
can be obtained from the product of mission segment weight at the
end of the segment divided by the weight at the beginning of segment.

Suggested Fuel Fractions For Several Mission Phases
Table 1
Airplane Type Take Off Climb Descent Landing
Business Jets 0.995 0.980 0.990 0.992
Transport 0.970 0.985 1.000 0.995
Military Trainers 0.990 0.980 0.990 0.995
Supersonic Cruise 0.995 0.92-0.87 0.985 0.992


From Table 1, we get the following values:
For takeoff, segment 0-1 historical data’s shows that,

1

0
= 0.97
For climb, segment 1-2 historical data shows that,

2

1
= 0.985

Take off
Climb

Cruise
Glide

Landing

0 1
2 3
4 5
Loiter

P a g e | 44


Aircraft Design Project - 1


For loiter, segment 3-4 ignoring the fuel consumption during descent we assume,

4

3
= 1
For landing, segment 4-5 based on historical data we assume that,

5

4
= 0.995
The Brequet’s range equation is used to calculate the value of

3

2
. As we all know that
maximum range is covered during cruise we considering this equation,
R =

ln

2

3


Initial Estimates of Lift/Drag Ratio (L/D)
Table 2

Aircrafts cruise loiter
Homebuilt & single-engine 8 - 10 10 - 12

Business jets 10 – 12 12 - 14

Regional turboprops 11 – 13 14 – 16

Transport jets 13 – 15 14 - 18

Military trainers 8 – 10 10 - 14

Fighters 4 – 7 6 – 9

Military patrol, bombers & transports 13 – 15 14 – 18

Supersonic cruise 4 - 6 7 – 9

From the Table 2, L/D values of similar type of aircrafts we come to know that the
approximate the value of L/D for our aircraft to be 15.
So,

= 15
P a g e | 45


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Specific Fuel Consumption
Table 3
Aircrafts Cruise Loiter
Business & transport jets 0.5 - 0.9 0.4 - 0.6
Military trainers 0.5 - 1.0 0.4 - 0.6
Fighters 0.6 - 1.4 0.6 - 0.8
Military patrol, bombers, transports,
flying boats
0.5 – 0.9 0.4 - 0.6
Supersonic cruise 0.7 – 1.5 0.6 - 0.8

From the comparative data sheet,
V∞
= 872 km/hr
R = 7200 km

From Table 3, we found the values of c
j
as 0.6 hr
-1

So now substituting these values in the Brequet’s range equation,
R =

ln

2

3

2

3
= 1.39135

3

2
= 0.718726
Now using all the fuel fractions,

5

0
=

1

0
x

2

1
x

3

2
x

4

3
x

5

4

5

0
= 0.68327

P a g e | 46


Aircraft Design Project - 1


If at end of the flight, the fuel tanks are not completely empty, making six percent of
allowance for reserve and trapped fuel,

0
= 1.061 −

5

0

0
= 0.33573
W
payload
+ W
crew
= 0.256W=69,632 kg

(Or)

We assume that the airplane occupies 280 passengers (with average weight of 180kg per
passenger including baggage) and 12 crew (with average weight 100kg).

W
payload
+ W
crew
= 280(180) + 12(100) =51,600 kg


From the graph we get values of

0
as 0.475

By substituting these values in:
W0
=

+

1−

0

0

We get W
0
as,
W0
=
280(180) + 12(100)
1−0.33573−0.475
= 272626.4 kg

This is only the first estimation.
Now by doing iterations, we can get a fairly accurate value of the Maximum Take Off
Weight (W
0
).

P a g e | 47


Aircraft Design Project - 1


ITERATION PROCESS (W
0
)
For the iteration process, we use the given formula,
We

0
= 1.02 ×
0
−0.06


FIRST:
We

0
= 1.02 × 272626.4
−0.06

We

0
= 0.481355676
W
0
= 282099.285
SECOND:
We

0
= 1.02 × 282099.285
−0.06

We

0
= 0.4803702
W
0
= 280587.572
THIRD:
We

0
= 1.02 × 280587.572
−0.06

We

0
= 0.4805251
W
0
= 280824.1
FOURTH:
We

0
= 1.02 × 280824.1
−0.06

We

0
= 0.4805008
W
0
= 280786.977

P a g e | 48


Aircraft Design Project - 1


FIFTH:
We

0
= 1.02 × 280786.977
−0.06

We

0
= 0.4805046
W
0
= 280792.801
SIXTH:
We

0
= 1.02 × 280792.801
−0.06

We

0
=0.480504
W
0
= 280791.887
SEVENTH:
We

0
= 1.02 × 280791.887
−0.06

We

0
=0.480504
W
0
= 280792

After doing seven iterations, we can see that the value of
We
Wo
starts to converge on 0.480504.
So we can take the value W
0
= 280792 as the final estimate of the W
0
.

Max Take Off Weight (W
0
) = 280,792 kg.

We know that,

0
= 0.33573
So, substituting the value of W
0
, we get the first estimation value of W
f
,
W
f
= 0.3375 × 280792 = 94767.3 kg
Weight of the Fuel (W
f
)= 94,767.3 kg.
P a g e | 49


Aircraft Design Project - 1














POWERPLANT SELECTION

P a g e | 50


Aircraft Design Project - 1


POWERPLANT SELECTION

• From the first weight estimate, we can have a rough idea of the weight of the power-plant
that is to be used.
• The total weight of the power-plant (0.055W) requires being approximately 15,443.5 kg.
• Choice of engine is a Turbofan for obvious reasons such as higher operating fuel
economy & efficiency for high payloads.
• Engines can be used in combination of 2 x 7721.8 kg engines. Or
• 3 x 5147.85 kg engines. Or
• 4 x 3860.6 kg engines providing enough thrust for Take-off.
• Most of the aircraft in the 250-350 passenger category were found to have 2 engines and
4 engines. Hence the preference is towards having three engines (Trijet).
A list of engines with weight and thrust matching our requirements are chosen and are
tabulated below.
Engine Name
Dry weight
(kg)
Max Thrust
(kN)
Thrust to
Weight ratio
Bypass
Ratio
Rolls Royce
Trent 772B-60
4788 320 6.8:1
5
Pratt & Whitney
PW4000-100
4270 310 7.4:1
5
CFM
International
CFM56-5C4
3990 151 3.9:1
6.4
General Electric
CF6-50
4104 240 6:1
4.4
Pratt & Whitney
JT9D-7R4H1
4030 250 6.3:1
4.8

The preferable choice of engine, from those listed above would be the Rolls Royce Trent
772B-60 engine which meets our demand of weight and powers. Airbus A330 and Boeing
777 aircrafts uses these engines which are similar in payload capabilities such as the one
under design.
P a g e | 51


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Details about the selected engine:
Rolls Royce Trent 772B-60
Since its launch with Cathay Pacific in 1995, the Trent 700 has built up the greatest service
experience on the A330. As the only engine specifically designed for the A330 it delivers the
greatest performance over the widest range of operational and environmental conditions.



The Trent 700 marked the birth of a new family of engines; it incorporates revolutionary
advances in wide chord hollow titanium fan blade technology, Full Authority Digital Engine
Control (FADEC) and 3-D aerodynamics, whilst maintaining the three-shaft design
characteristics of low weight, high strength and exceptional performance retention.
As part of a successful and expanding family, the Trent 700 has benefited through continuous
improvement as technology has flowed from later generation family members. Incorporation
of the HP module from the Trent 800 enabled the Trent 700 to deliver the best performance
of any engine on the A330 whilst delivering long on-wing life and low maintenance costs.
Improvements in the LP turbine and other technology flowed from the Trent 1000 will ensure
the Trent 700 delivers the lowest fuel burn on the A330. Having been selected by over 40
operators of the A330, the Trent 700 is the most popular engine on the aircraft. This is
apparent in China where 100 per cent of A330 operators have selected the Trent 700 and in
P a g e | 52


Aircraft Design Project - 1


the Middle East it has 80 per cent market share. The engine’s unrivalled high and hot
performance gives Trent 700 customers a distinct operating advantage. All this contributes to
a leading market share of around 50 per cent. In addition to its capability the Trent 700 has
superb environmental credentials as the cleanest and quietest engine on the A330.
As a complete package the Trent 700 provides any customer with the greatest flexibility.

Technical Details
Engine : Trent 772B-60
Thrust : 71,100lb
Bypass ratio : 5.0
Inlet mass flow : 2030lb/sec
Fan diameter : 97.4in
Length : 154in
Stages : Fan, 8 IPC, 6 HPC, 1 HPT, 1 IPT, 4 LPT
Certification : Jan 1994
EIS : Mar 1995
P a g e | 53


Aircraft Design Project - 1














FUEL WEIGHT VALIDATION

P a g e | 54


Aircraft Design Project - 1


FUEL WEIGHT VALIDATION
The choice of a suitable engine, having been made, it is now possible to estimate the amount
of fuel required for a flight at the given cruising speed for the given range.
W
fuel
=
∗ ∗∗∗.


The factor of 1.2 is provided for reserve fuel.

Thrust at altitude is calculated using the relation:





Altitude = 10800m = 35433ft
=

0
= 0.3715/1.225 = 0.303
Cruise velocity = 872km/hr = 242.2m/s
T
o
= 320kN

= 320×0.303
1.2

= 76.363kN = 7784.2kg
SFC = 0.4hr
-1
(at medium thrust setting)
Number of engines = 3

CALCULATION:
W
fuel
=
3×7784.2×7200×0.4×1.2
872


W
fuel
= 92,553.42 kg
2 . 1
0
*o
o
T T =
0
p
p
o
alt
=
P a g e | 55


Aircraft Design Project - 1














WING SELECTION

P a g e | 56


Aircraft Design Project - 1


WING SELECTION
INTRODUCTION
After the final weight estimation of the aircraft, the primary component of the aircraft
to be designed is the wing. The wing weight and its lifting capabilities are in general, a
function of the thickness of the airfoil section that is used in the wing structure. The first step
towards designing the wing is the thickness estimation. The thickness of the wing, in turn
depends on the critical mach number of the airfoil or rather, the drag divergence Mach
number corresponding to the wing section.

The critical Mach number can well be delayed by the use of an appropriate Sweep-
back angle to the wing structure. The natural choice of the standard series is the 65 series
which is designed specifically for use in high-speeds.

WING GEOMETRY DESIGN
• The geometry of the wing is a function of four parameters, namely the Wing loading
(W/S), Aspect Ratio (b
2
/S), Taper ratio (λ) and the Sweepback angle at quarter chord
(Λqc).
• The Take-off Weight that was estimated in the previous analysis is used to find the
Wing area S (from W/S).The value of S also enables us to calculate the Wingspan b
(using the Aspect ratio). The root chord can now be found using the equation.


The tip chord is given by,


POSITION OF WING
The location of the wing in the fuselage (along the vertical axis) is very important.
Each configuration (Low, High and mid) has its own advantages but in this design, the Low-
wing offers significant advantages such as
- Uninterrupted Passenger’s cabin.
- Placement of Landing gear in the wing structure itself.
- Location of the engine on a low-wing makes Engine-overhaul easier.
) 1 (
2
ì + ×
×
=
b
S
C
root
tip root
C C ì = ×
P a g e | 57


Aircraft Design Project - 1


- Permits usage of the Wing carry through box which alone can admit the amount of
fuel that we require to carry.
- Landing gear usually becomes high in such wing configurations and therefore,
provides greater ground clearance ad reduces the amount of fuselage upsweep that is
to be provided.
- Low wing affects the flow over the horizontal tail to minimum extent.
- The low-wing requires that some-amount of dihedral angle is provided for lateral
stability. As of now, the dihedral angle is assumed to be 5 degrees, but it may be
subject to change in the stability analysis.

WING PLANFORM

WING SETTING ANGLE
The wing has to be set at angle to the fuselage center line such that during cruise, the
fuselage is in a level condition (parallel to the direction of the velocity vector). This requires
that the wing setting angle correspond to the angle which will produce the desired C
L
for
cruise. The C
L
that will be obtainable from an airfoil section (for a given angle of attack) is
given by:
C
L
=0.9 x C
l
x cosΛ.
C
l
=

×
2
×


P a g e | 58


Aircraft Design Project - 1


DESIGN CALCULATION
(First Estimation)
C
root
Calculation:


C
root
=
2 × 395.48
58.32× (1+0.25)
= 10.85m

C
tip
Calculation:


C
tip
= 0.25 x 10.85 = 2.7m

C
mean
Calculation:
C
m
=
2
3
×

×
(1+λ+λ
2
)
(1+λ)

C
m
=
2
3
×10.85×1.05 = 7.6m

Coefficient of Lift Calculation:
Section Lift Coefficient:
C
l
=

×
2
×

C
l
=
2×710×9.8
0.3715×242.2
2
= 0.638
Wing Lift Coefficient:
C
L
=0.9 x C
l
x cosΛ
C
L
=0.9 x 0.638 x cos35
o
= 0.47


) 1 (
2
ì + ×
×
=
b
S
C
root
tip root
C C ì = ×
P a g e | 59


Aircraft Design Project - 1


It is to be found graphically the following parameters were estimated for the aircraft
designed.

DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS VALUES
W/S (kg/m
2
) 710
Wing area S (m
2
) 395.48
Aspect Ratio 8.6
Span b (m) 58.32
Taper ratio () 0.25
Root Chord (m) 10.85
Mean Chord (m) 7.6
Tip chord (m) 2.7
Lift coefficient (C
L
) 0.47
Sweepback Angle(∆) 35°


P a g e | 60


Aircraft Design Project - 1













AIRFOIL SELECTION

P a g e | 61


Aircraft Design Project - 1


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 as a % of it (subsonic typically 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 (α): 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 1930’s.
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
– 1
st
digit: maximum camber (as % of chord).
– 2
nd
digit (x10): location of maximum camber (as % of chord from leading
edge (LE)).
– 3
rd
& 4
th
digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord).

P a g e | 62


Aircraft Design Project - 1


NACA 5 Digit
– 1
st
digit (x0.15): design lift coefficient.
– 2
nd
& 3
rd
digits (x0.5): location of maximum camber (as % of chord from LE).
– 4
th
& 5
th
digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord).
NACA 6 Digit
– 1
st
digit: identifies series type.
– 2
nd
digit (x10): location of minimum pressure (as % of chord from leading
edge (LE)).
– 3
rd
digit: indicates acceptable range of C
L
above/below design value for
satisfactory low drag performance (as tenths of C
L
).
– 4
th
digit (x0.1): design C
L
.
– 5
th
& 6
th
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.

t/c Calculation:


=
0.3

1

−∆
1
3
[1 −
5 +∆
2

5 +(
#
)
2

3.5
]
2
3

Taking
#
= 1.05 - 0.25 C
L (cruise)

Where,
M = Drag Divergence Cruise Mach Number = 0.85
∆ = Sweep Back Angle = 35° at Quarter Chord
C
L (cruise)
= 0.47

Substituting the values in the above equation, we get,


= 0.12

P a g e | 63


Aircraft Design Project - 1


NACA 6-series Airfoils having t/c ratio of 0.12
Name
Thickness
(%)
Camber
(%)
Lift Coeff.
(C
L
)
Lift-to-Drag
(L/D)
Stall Angle
(deg)
TE
Angle
(deg)
LE
Radius
(%)
NACA 63-212 12 1.1 1.035 36.2 5.5 11.7 1.5
NACA 63-412 12 2.2 1.159 44.3 5.5 11.6 1.5
NACA 64(1)-112 12 0.6 0.936 32.1 4.5 9 1.5
NACA 64(1)-212 12 1.1 1.008 37.5 4.5 12.3 1.5
NACA 65(1)-212 12 1.1 0.971 31.7 3.5 10.8 1.3
NACA 65(1)-412 12 2.2 1.107 44.8 4 10.8 1.3
NACA 66(1)-212 12 1.1 0.957 32.5 -0.5 14 1.3

From the above list of airfoils, the one chosen is the 65(1)-412 airfoil which has the
suitable lift coefficient for the current design.
In order to obtain better span-wise distribution of lift and to have better stalling
characteristics (the root should stall before the tip so that the pilot may realize and avoid a
stall by sensing the vibrations on his control stick), it is usually necessary to provide a lower
t/c to the tip section and a higher t/c to the root section.
Hence,
Section used at the mean aerodynamic chord - 65(1)-412
Section used at the tip - 65-410
Section used at the root - 65(2)-415
CHORD AIRFOIL (

)max
ROOT 65(2)-415 1.238
MEAN 65(1)-412 1.107
TIP 65-410 1.015

P a g e | 64


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Airfoil Geometry

NACA 65-410 (tip)



NACA 65(1)-412 (mean)



NACA 65(2)-415 (root)


P a g e | 65


Aircraft Design Project - 1



Angle of Attack (vs) Lift Coefficient of NACA 65-410



Angle of Attack (vs) Lift Coefficient of NACA 65(2)-415


P a g e | 66


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Performance curves for the chosen airfoil NACA 65(1)-412

Angle of Attack (α) vs Coefficient of Lift (C
L
)



Angle of Attack (α) vs Coefficient of Drag (C
D
)

P a g e | 67


Aircraft Design Project - 1



Angle of Attack (α) vs Lift-to-Drag ratio (

)



CALCULATIONS:

Available

=
1.238
3
+
1.107
3
+
1.015
3
= 1.12

max
= 0.9 ×

max
= 0.9 × 1.12 = 1.008

Flaps Selection
For the current design, double slotted flap is selected. ∆

of the double slotted flap
for different configurations is given in the table below:
FLAPS TAKE OFF LANDING
Double slotted flap 20
o
40
o

/∆ 1.825 2.5

1.5 2.05

P a g e | 68


Aircraft Design Project - 1


=
max
-
max

max
=
max
+ ∆


max
(Take Off) = 1.008+1.5 = 2.508

max
(Landing) = 1.008+2.05 = 3.058

= 0.25×

= 60.55 m/s
We Have,
W/S=700.722 kg/m
2

From this,
S = 400.72
2

b = 58.32 m (from table)


DESIGN CALCULATION
(Second Estimation)

C
root
Calculation:


C
root
=
2 × 400.72
58.32× (1+0.25)
= 11m

C
tip
Calculation:


C
tip
= 0.25 x 11 = 2.75m

) 1 (
2
ì + ×
×
=
b
S
C
root
tip root
C C ì = ×
P a g e | 69


Aircraft Design Project - 1


C
mean
Calculation:
C
m
=
2
3
×

×
(1+λ+λ
2
)
(1+λ)

C
m
=
2
3
×11×1.05 = 7.7m

Coefficient of Lift Calculation:
Section Lift Coefficient:
C
l
=

×
2
×

C
l
=
2×700.72×9.8
0.3715×242.2
2
= 0.63022
Wing Lift Coefficient:
C
L
=0.9 x C
l
x cosΛ
C
L
=0.9 x 0.63022 x cos35
o
= 0.4646

DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS VALUES
W/S (kg/m
2
) 700.72
Wing area S (m
2
) 400.72
Aspect Ratio 8.6
Span b (m) 58.32
Taper ratio () 0.25
Root Chord (m) 11
Tip chord (m) 2.75
Mean chord (m) 7.7
Sweepback Angle(∆) 35°
Cruise Lift Coefficient (

) 0.63022

P a g e | 70


Aircraft Design Project - 1














LIFT ESTIMATION

P a g e | 71


Aircraft Design Project - 1


LIFT ESTIMATION
LIFT:
Component of aerodynamic force generated on aircraft perpendicular to flight
direction.

Lift Coefficient (C
L
)
• Amount of lift generated depends on:
– Planform area (S), air density (p), flight speed (V), lift coefficient (C
L
)

• C
L
is a measure of lifting effectiveness and mainly depends upon:
– Section shape, planform geometry, angle of attack (o), 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 aerofoil section is optimum for high subsonic lift/drag ratio.
2
1
Lift ( )
2
L L
V SC qSC p = =
P a g e | 72


Aircraft Design Project - 1





Pressure variations with angle of attack
– Negative (nose-down) pitching moment at zero-lift (negative o).
– Positive lift at o = 0
o
.
– Highest pressure at LE stagnation point, lowest pressure at crest on upper surface.
– Peak suction pressure on upper surface strengthens and moves forwards with
increasing o.
– Most lift from near LE on upper surface due to suction.

P a g e | 73


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Lift Curves of Cambered and Symmetrical airfoils



CALCULATION:
General Lift equation is given by,


Lift at Cruise
= 0.3715 (at the cruising altitude of 10800m)
V = 242.2 m/s
S = 400.72 kg/m
2
C
L(cruise)
= 0.63022 (from the wing and airfoil estimation)

Substituting all these values in the general lift equation,
L
(cruise)
=
1
2
× 0.3715 × 242.2
2
× 400.72 × 0.63022
Lift at cruise = 2751761.6 N
2
1
Lift ( )
2
L L
V SC qSC p = =
P a g e | 74


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Lift at Take-Off
= 1.225 (at sea altitude)
V = 0.7 x V
lo
= 0.7 x 1.2 x V
stall

S = 400.72 kg/m
2
C
L(take-off)
= 2.508 (flaps extended and kept at the take-off position of 20
o
)

Substituting all these values in the general lift equation,
L
(take-off)
=
1
2
× 1.225 × (0.7 × 1.2 × 66.86)
2
× 400.72 × 2.508
Lift at take-off = .
Lift at Landing
= 1.225 (at sea altitude)
V = 0.7 x V
t
= 0.7 x 1.3 x V
stall

S = 400.72 kg/m
2
C
L(landing)
= 3.058 (flaps extended and kept at the landing position of 40
o
)

Substituting all these values in the general lift equation,
L
(landing)
=
1
2
× 1.225 × (0.7 × 1.3 × 60.55)
2
× 400.72 × 3.058
Lift at landing = .

P a g e | 75


Aircraft Design Project - 1














DRAG ESTIMATION

P a g e | 76


Aircraft Design Project - 1


DRAG ESTIMATION
DRAG:
- Drag is the resolved component of the complete aerodynamic force which is
parallel to the flight direction (or relative oncoming airflow).
- It always acts to oppose the direction of motion.
- It is the undesirable component of the aerodynamic force while lift is the desirable
component.

Drag Coefficient (C
D
)
- Amount of drag generated depends on:
o Planform area (S), air density (p), flight speed (V), drag coefficient (C
D
)

- C
D
is a measure of aerodynamic efficiency and mainly depends upon:
o Section shape, planform geometry, angle of attack (o), compressibility effects
(Mach number), viscous effects (Reynolds’ number).

Drag Components
- Skin Friction:
o Due to shear stresses produced in boundary layer.
o Significantly more for turbulent than laminar types of boundary layers.

- Form (Pressure) Drag
o Due to static pressure distribution around body - component resolved in
direction of motion.
o Sometimes considered separately as forebody and rear (base) drag
components.
P a g e | 77


Aircraft Design Project - 1




- 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.



P a g e | 78


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Typical streamlining effect


Lift induced (or) trailing vortex drag

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.

P a g e | 79


Aircraft Design Project - 1


CALCULATION:
Generally for jet aircrafts, it is given that
C
D,0
= 0.0030
e = 0.8

The general drag equation is given by,
=
1
2

2

,0
+

2

For calculating Ø, we use the formula,
Ø =

16

2
1 +
16

2


Where h = height above ground, b = wing span.
h = 2m
b = 58.32m
Ø =
16×
2
58.32

2
1 + (16×
2
58.32
)
2

= 0.2314
Drag at Cruise
= 0.3715 (at the cruising altitude of 10800m)
V = 242.2 m/s
S = 400.72 kg/m
2
C
L(cruise)
= 0.63022 (from the wing and airfoil estimation)

Substituting all these values in the general drag equation,
D
(cruise)
=
1
2
× 0.3715 × (242.2)
2
× 400.72 (0.0030 +
0.2314×0.63022
2
3.14×8.6×0.8
)
Drag at cruise = 31674.846 N
P a g e | 80


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Drag at Take-off
= 1.225 (at sea altitude)
V = 0.7 x V
lo
= 0.7 x 1.2 x V
stall

S = 400.72 kg/m
2
C
L(take-off)
= 2.508 (flaps extended and kept at the take-off position of 20
o
)

Substituting all these values in the general drag equation,
D =
1
2
× 1.225 × (0.7 × 1.2 × 66.86)
2
× 400.72 (0.0030 +
0.2314×2.508
2
3.14×8.6×0.8
)
Drag at take-off = 54482.6 N

Drag at Landing
= 1.225 (at sea altitude)
V = 0.7 x V
t
= 0.7 x 1.3 x V
stall

S = 400.72 kg/m
2
C
L(landing)
= 3.058 (flaps extended and kept at the landing position of 40
o
)

Substituting all these values in the general drag equation,
D =
1
2
× 1.225 × (0.7 × 1.3 × 60.55)
2
× 400.72 (0.0030 +
0.2314×3.058
2
3.14×8.6×0.8
)
Drag at landing = 76876.7 N

P a g e | 81


Aircraft Design Project - 1














LANDING GEAR
ARRANGEMENT

P a g e | 82


Aircraft Design Project - 1


LANDING GEAR SELECTION
In aviation, the undercarriage or landing gear is the structure (usually wheels) that
supports an aircraft and allows it to move across the surface of the earth when it is not in
flying. So more importance is to be given as it carries the entire load on the ground.

OVERVIEW
The design and positioning of the landing gear are determined by the unique
characteristics associated with each aircraft, i.e., geometry, weight, and mission requirements.
Given the weight and cg range of the aircraft, suitable configurations are identified and
reviewed to determine how well they match the airframe structure, flotation, and operational
requirements.

The essential features, e.g., the number and size of tires and wheels, brakes, and shock
absorption mechanism, must be selected in accordance with industry and federal standards
discussed in the following chapters before an aircraft design progresses past the concept
formulation phase, after which it is often very difficult and expensive to change the design.

Three examples of significant changes made after the initial design include the DC-10-30,
which added the third main gear to the fuselage, the Airbus A340, where the main gear center
bogie increased from two to four wheels in the -400 series, and the Airbus A-300, where the
wheels were spread further apart on the bogie to meet LaGuardia Airport flotation limits for
US operators.

The purpose of Landing Gears is to move the aircraft on ground. After take-off the
landing gear is retracted, before landing it is extended and locked into position.

Liebherr provides system architecture for gear actuation control, steering control,
wheel and brake integration and position and status control, as well as system integration,
series production and of course product support.
Liebherr acquired knowledge and experience based on the realization of different
landing gear programs. The integration of various technologies and use of new material for
individual landing gear concepts lead to competitive products:
- Landing Gear Systems
- Nose Landing Gear Subsystem
- Main Landing Gear Subsystem
- Brake and Brake Control Subsystem
- Research and Development Technology

P a g e | 83


Aircraft Design Project - 1




TYPES OF GEAR ARRANGEMENTS
Wheeled undercarriage comes in two types: conventional or tail dragger
undercarriage, where there are two main wheels towards the front of the aircraft and a single,
much smaller, wheel or skid at rear; tricycle undercarriage where there are two main wheels
under the wings and a third smaller wheel in the nose. Most modern aircraft have tricycle
undercarriage. Sometimes a small tail wheel or skid is added to aircraft with tricycle
undercarriage arrangements.

RETRACTABLE GEAR
To decrease drag in flight some undercarriages retract into the wings and/or
fuselage with wheels flush against or concealed behind doors, this is called retractable gear. It
was in late 1920s and 1930s that such retractable landing gear became common. This type of
gear arrangement increased the performance of aircraft by reducing the drag.

LARGE AIRCRAFT
As the size of aircraft grows larger, they employ more wheels to with the
increasing weight. The airbus A340-500/-600 has an additional four wheel undercarriage
bogie on the fuselage centerline. The Boeing 747 has five sets of wheels, a nose-wheel and
four sets of four wheel bogies. A set is located under each wing, and two inner sets located in
the fuselage, a little rearward of outer bogies.

MAIN FUNCTIONS
• Carry aircraft max gross weight to take off runway
• Withstand braking during aborted take off
• Retract into compact landing gear bay
P a g e | 84


Aircraft Design Project - 1


• Damp touchdown at maximum weight.
Total LG weight typically 3% of MTOW for commercial airliners.

STEERING
The steering mechanism used on the ground with wheeled landing gear varies by
aircraft, but there are several types of steering.
- RUDDER STEERING
- DIRECT STEERING
- TILLER STEERING

Configuration Selection
The nose wheel tricycle undercarriage has long been the preferred configuration for
passenger transports. It leads to a nearly level fuselage and consequently the cabin floor when
the aircraft is on the ground. The most attractive feature of this type of
undercarriages is the improved stability during braking and ground maneuvers. Under
normal landing attitude, the relative location of the main assembly to the aircraft cg
produces a nose-down pitching moment upon touchdown.
This moment helps to reduce the angle of attack of the aircraft and thus the lift
generated by the wing. In addition, the braking forces, which act behind the aircraft cg, have
a stabilizing effect and thus enable the pilot to make full use of the brakes. These factors all
contribute to a shorter landing field length requirement.
The primary drawback of the nose wheel tricycle configuration is the restriction
placed upon the location where the main landing gear can be attached. With the steady
increase in the aircraft takeoff weight, the number of main assembly struts has grown
from two to four to accommodate the number of tires required to distribute the weight over a
greater area.


Landing Gear Disposition:
The positioning of the landing gear is based primarily on stability considerations
during taxiing, liftoff and touchdown, i.e., the aircraft should be in no danger of turning over
on its side once it is on the ground.

Compliance with this requirement can be determined by examining the takeoff/landing
performance characteristics and the relationships between the locations of the landing gear
and the aircraft cg.

P a g e | 85


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Stability at Touchdown and During Taxiing
Static stability of an aircraft at touchdown and during taxiing can be determined by
examining the location of the applied forces and the triangle formed by connecting the
attachment locations of the nose and main assemblies.

Whenever the resultant of air and mass forces intersects the ground at a point outside
this triangle, the ground will not be able to exert a reaction force which prevents the aircraft
from falling over. As a result, the aircraft will cant over about the side of the triangle that is
closest to the resultant force/ground intersect.


Braking and Steering Qualities
The nose assembly is located as far forward as possible to maximize the flotation and
stability characteristics of the aircraft. However, a proper balance in terms of load distribution
between the nose and main assembly must be maintained.

When the load on the nose wheel is less than about eight percent of the maximum
takeoff weight (MTOW),controllability on the ground will become marginal, particularly in
cross-wind 21 conditions. This value also allows for fuselage length increase with aircraft
growth. On the other hand, when the static load on the nose wheel exceeds about 15 percent
of the MTOW, braking quality will suffer, the dynamic braking load on the nose assembly
may become excessive, and a greater effort may be required for steering.


Ground Operation Characteristics:
Besides ground stability and controllability considerations, the high costs associated
with airside infrastructure improvements, e.g., runway and taxiway extensions and
pavement reinforcements, have made airfield compatibility issues one of the primary
considerations in the design of the landing gear. In particular, the aircraft must be able to
maneuver within a pre-defined space as it taxies between the runway and passenger
terminal. For large aircraft, this requirement effectively places an upper limit on the
dimension of the wheelbase and track.

P a g e | 86


Aircraft Design Project - 1


LANDING GEAR TYPES
During landing and take-off, the undercarriage supports the total weight of the airplane.
Undercarriage is of three types
- Bicycle type
- Tricycle type
- Tricycle tail wheel type




















From the above list of landing gear types, the tricycle type is chosen which is the
most suitable configuration for the current design.
P a g e | 87


Aircraft Design Project - 1














FUSELAGE DESIGN

P a g e | 88


Aircraft Design Project - 1


FUSELAGE DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
The fuselage is an aircraft's main body section that holds crew and passengers
or cargo. In single-engine aircraft it will usually contain an engine, although in
some amphibious aircraft the single engine is mounted on a pylon attached to the fuselage
which in turn is used as a floating hull. The fuselage also serves to position control and
stabilization surfaces in specific relationships to lifting surfaces, required for aircraft stability
and manoeuvrability.
Common practice to modularise layout:
- Crew compartment, power plant system, payload configuration, fuel volume, landing
gear stowage, wing carry-through structure, empennage, etc.
- Or simply into front, centre and rear fuselage section designs.
Functions of fuselage:
- Provision of volume for payload.
- Provide overall structural integrity.
- Possible mounting of landing gear and power plant.
Once fundamental configuration is established, fuselage layout proceeds almost
independently of other design aspects.
PRIMARY CONSIDERATIONS
Most of the fuselage volume is occupied by the payload, except for:
- Single and two-seat light aircraft.
- Trainer and light strike aircraft.
- Combat aircraft with weapons carried on outer fuselage & wing.
- High performance combat aircraft.
Payload includes:
- Passengers and associated baggage.
- Freight.
- Internal weapons (guns, free-fall bombs, bay-housed guided weapons).
- Crew (significant for anti-sub and early-warning aircraft).
- Avionics equipment.
- Flight test instrumentation (experimental aircraft).
- Fuel (often interchangeable with other payload items on a mass basis).

P a g e | 89


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Pressurisation:
- If required, has a major impact upon overall shape.
- Overall effect depends on level of pressurisation required.
Low Differential Pressurisation:
- Defined as no greater than 0.27 bar (4 psi).
- Mainly applicable to fighters where crew are also equipped with pressure suits.
- Cockpit pressurisation primarily provides survivable environment in case of suit
failure at high altitude.
- Also used on some general aviation aircraft to improve passenger comfort at moderate
altitude.
- Pressure compartment has to avoid use of flat surfaces.
Normal (High) Differential Pressurisation:
- Usual requirement is for effective altitude to be no more than 2.44 km (8000 ft) ISA
for passenger transports.
- Implied pressure differentials are:
o 0.37 bar (5.5 psi) for aircraft at 7.6 km (25,000 ft).
o 0.58 bar (8.5 psi) for aircraft at 13.1 km (43,000 ft).
o 0.65 bar (9.4 psi) for aircraft at 19.8 km (65,000 ft).
- High pressure differential required across most of fuselage for passenger transports so
often over-riding fuselage structural design requirement.
- Particular need to base outer shell cross-section on circular arcs to avoid significant
mass penalties.
- Pure circular sections best structurally but “double-bubbles” sometimes give best
compromise with internal layout.

Circular Section Examples:

P a g e | 90


Aircraft Design Project - 1



Fuselage Aerodynamics:
- Aim is to achieve reasonably streamlined form together with minimum surface
area to meet required internal volume.
- Both drag and mass heavily influenced by surface area.
- Require absence of steps and minimum number of excrescences.
- Fundamental differences between subsonic and supersonic applications.
- Concerned with: cross-section shape, nose shape & length, tail shape/length,
overall length.
Cross-Section Shape – Subsonic Aircraft:
- Not too critical aerodynamically, but should:
o avoid sharp corners
o provide fairings for protuberances
- Constant cross-section preferable for optimized volume utilization and ease of
manufacture.

Nose Shape:
- Should not be unduly “bluff”.
- Local changes in cross-section needed to accommodate windscreen panels.
- Windscreen angle involves compromise between aerodynamics, bird-strike, reflection
and visibility requirements.
- Windscreen panel sizes should be less than 0.5 m
2
each.
- Starting point for front fuselage layout is often satisfactory position for pilot’s eye.
- Reasonable nose length is about:
o 1.1 to 2.0 x fuselage diameter (subsonic).
o 4 x fuselage diameter (supersonic).

Tail Shape:
- Smooth change in section required, from maximum section area to ideally zero.
- Minimisation of base area especially important for transonic/supersonic aircraft.
- Important parameter for determining tail upsweep angle is ground clearance required
for take-off and landing rotation.
- Typically 12
o
to 15
o
.

P a g e | 91


Aircraft Design Project - 1




- Typical tail section lengths are:
o 2.5 to 3.0 x diameter (subsonic)
o 6 to 7 x diameter (supersonic)
Centre Fuselage & Overall Length - Subsonic Aircraft:
- Theoretically minimum drag for streamlined body with fineness ratio
(length/diameter) of 3.
- In reality, typical value is around 10, due to:
o Need to utilise internal volume efficiently.
o Requirement for sufficiently large moment arm for stability/control purposes.
o Suitable placement of overall CG.

Wing Location - Aerodynamics Considerations:
- Mid-wing position gives lowest interference drag, especially well for supersonic
aircraft.
- Top-mounted wing minimises trailing vortex drag, especially good for low-speed
aircraft.
- Low wing gives improved landing gear stowage & more usable flap area.
From the above given locations of wings, the one chosen is the Low wing configuration
which gives improved landing gear stowage & more usable flap area.
Empennage Layout
Vertical Surface:
- Single, central fin most common arrangement, positioned as far aft as possible.

Horizontal Surface:
- Efficiency affected by wing downwash, thus vertical location relative to wing
important.
- Usually mounted higher than wing except on high wing design or with small moment
arm – low tail can give ground clearance problems.

P a g e | 92


Aircraft Design Project - 1


Avionics & APU:
- Including navigation, communications and flight control/management
equipment.
- Provision necessary for adequate volume in correct location with ease of
access.
- Location of radar, aerials, etc also important
o Sensors often have to face forward/down in aircraft nose.
o Long range search & early warning scanners sometimes located on
fuselage.
- Auxiliary power unit (APU) commonly located at extreme rear of
fuselage on transport aircraft.

TYPICAL FLIGHT DECK LAYOUT:



P a g e | 93


Aircraft Design Project - 1


SEATING ARRANGEMENTS:

- Typical split of classes:
o 8% first, 13% business, 79% economy
BAGGAGE AND FREIGHT:


It is to be found graphically the following parameters were estimated for the aircraft
designed.
DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS VALUES
Overall Length (m) 55.0
Fuselage Width (m) 5.26
Cabin Width (m) 5.0
Length/Width 10.456


SEATING ARRANGEMENT:

P a g e | 94


Aircraft Design Project - 1














PERFORMANCE
CHARACTERISTICS

P a g e | 95


Aircraft Design Project - 1


PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS
TAKE-OFF PERFORMANCE:
• Distance from rest to clearance of obstacle in flight path and usually considered in
two parts:
– Ground roll - rest to lift-off (S
LO
)
– Airborne distance - lift-off to specified height (35 ft FAR, 50 ft others).
• The aircraft will accelerate up to lift-off speed (V
lo
= about 1.2 x V
stall
) when it will
then be rotated.
• A first-order approximation for ground roll take-off distance may be made from:

=
1.44
2

,

• This shows its sensitivity to W (W
2
) and p (1/ p
2
since T also varies with p).
• S
lo
may be reduced by increasing T, S or C
l,max
(high lift devices relate to latter two).
• An improved approximation for ground roll take-off distance may be made by
including drag, rolling resistance and ground effect terms.

=
1.44
2

,
− +

• The bracketed term will vary with speed but an approximation may be made by using
an instantaneous value for when V = 0.7 x V
lo
.
• In the above equation:
=
1
2

2

,0
+

2

• Where o accounts for drag reduction when in ground effect:
Ø =

16

2
1 +
16

2


• Where h = height above ground, b = wing span.
• u
r
= 0.02 for smooth paved surface, 0.1 for grass.


P a g e | 96


Aircraft Design Project - 1


CALCULATION:
Ø =
16×
2
58.32

2
1 + (16×
2
58.32
)
2

= 0.2314
D =
1
2
× 1.225 × (0.7 × 1.2 × 66.86)
2
× 400.72 (0.0030 +
0.2314×2.508
2
3.14×8.6×0.8
) = 54482.6 N

S
lo
=
1.44×(280792×9.81)
2

9.8×1.225×400.72×2.508×{(3×320000 )−[54482.6+.02280792×9.81−1941627.7]}

Take-off runway distance = 1018.38m

CLIMBING
• Consider aircraft in a steady unaccelerated climb with vertical climb speed of V
c
.
• Force balance gives:

=

= +

=
( −) ×

R/C
max
=
(

)

=
3×320000×60.55−(40382.15×60.55)
280792×9.81

R/C
max
= 20.2 m/s
P a g e | 97


Aircraft Design Project - 1


MANOEUVRES / TURNING FLIGHT
An aircraft is capable of performing many different types of turns and manoeuvres.
• Three of the more common turns will be considered here in simplistic terms:
– Constant altitude banked turn.
– Vertical pull-up manoeuvre.
– Vertical pull-down manoeuvre.
• In the case of a commercial transport aircraft, it is capable of performing only a
constant altitude banked turn and not any vertical pull-up or pull-down manoeuvre.
CONSTANT ALTITUDE BANKED TURN
• In steady condition:
– T = D
• Force balance gives:
– W = mg = Lcosu
– F
r
= mV
2
/r = Lsinu
• tan u = V
2
/(Rg)
• So for given speed and turn radius there is only one correct bank angle for a co-
ordinate (no sideslip) turn.
• Maneuverability equations simplified through use of normal load factor (n) = L/W.
• In the turn, n = L/W = secu > 1 and is therefore determined by bank angle.
• Turn radius (R) and turn rate (e) are good indicators of aircraft maneuverability.
• V
2
/ (Rg) = tanu = \(sec
2
u - 1) = \(n
2
- 1)
• R = V
2
/ (g \(n
2
- 1)) and e = V/R = (g \(n
2
- 1)) / V
CALCULATION:
W = Lcosu
Let u = 30
0
n =

= 1.1547
R =
V
2
g n
2
− 1
= 10357.16 m
e =

= 0.0234 rad/s
P a g e | 98


Aircraft Design Project - 1


GLIDING
Similar to the steady unaccelerated case but with T = 0.



Force balance gives:

=
÷
D
L
1
tan
1
o

=
÷
15
1
tan
1
o
= o 3.814
o

LANDING PERFORMANCE
APPROACH & LANDING
• Consists of three phases:
– Airborne approach at constant glide angle (around 3
o
) and constant speed.
– Flare - transitional manoeuvre with airspeed reduced from about 1.3 V
stall

down to touch-down speed.
– Ground roll - from touch-down to rest.

P a g e | 99


Aircraft Design Project - 1


• Ground roll landing distance (s
3
or s
l
) estimated from:

=
1.69
2

,
+

• Where V
av
may be taken as 0.7 x touch-down speed (V
t
or V
2
) and V
t
is assumed as
1.3 x V
stall
.
• u
r
is higher than for take-off since brakes are applied - use u
r
= 0.4 for paved surface.
• If thrust reversers (T
r
) are applied, use:

=
1.69
2

,

+ +

CALCULATION:
D =
1
2
× 1.225 × (0.7 × 1.3 × 60.55)
2
× 400.72 (0.0030 +
0.2314×3.058
2
3.14×8.6×0.8
) = 76876.7 N

S
l
=
1.69×(280792×9.81)
2

9.8×1.225×400.72×3.058×{3×320000+[76876.7+0.4280792×9.81−2278744 .7]}


Landing Runway distance = 710.3 m

P a g e | 100


Aircraft Design Project - 1














3-VIEW DIAGRAM

P a g e | 101


Aircraft Design Project - 1


3-VIEW DIAGRAM


























5
8
.
3
2
m


1
5
.
7
m

55m
P a g e | 102


Aircraft Design Project - 1




P a g e | 103


Aircraft Design Project - 1



P a g e | 104


Aircraft Design Project - 1














CONCLUSION

P a g e | 105


Aircraft Design Project - 1


CONCLUSION

Design is a fine blend of science, creativity, presence of mind and the application of
each one of them at the appropriate time. Design of anything needs experience and an
optimistic progress towards the ideal system. The scientific society always looks for the best
product design. This involves the strong fundamentals in science and mathematics and their
skilful applications, which is a tough job endowed upon the designer.
We have enough hard work for this design project. A design never gets completed in a
flutter sense but it is one step further towards ideal system. But during the design of this
aircraft, we learnt a lot about aeronautics and its implications when applied to an aircraft
design.



















P a g e | 106


Aircraft Design Project - 1














BIBLIOGRAPHY

P a g e | 107


Aircraft Design Project - 1


BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Introduction to Flight by J.D.Anderson
2. Aerodynamics by Clancy
3. Fundamentals of Aerodynamics by J.D.Anderson
4. The Design of the Aeroplane by Darrol Stinton
5. Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft
6. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach by Daniel. P. Raymer
WEBSITE REFERENCES
1. www.wikipedia.org
2. www.naca/aerofoil.gov
3. www.worldaircraftdierctory.com
4. www.boeing.com
5. www.airbus.com
6. www.airliners.net
7. And other websites related to design of aircrafts.

Page |1

HINDUSTAN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

AIRCRAFT DESIGN PROJECT – 1 REPORT

NAME OF THE STUDENT: NAME OF THE PROJECT : DEPARTMENT :

Certified that this a bonafide record of the work done by of VI semester AERO (B.E.) during the year 2009-2010 on DESIGN OF INTERNATIONAL MEDIUM RANGE 280 SEATER PASSENGER AIRCRAFT.

INT. Examiner EXT. Examiner

Staff Member Incharge

Name of examination: B.E. DEGREE Registration number: 305071010

Aircraft Design Project - 1

Page |2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to extent my heartfelt thanks to Prof . P. K. Dash (Head of Aeronautical Department) for giving me his able support and encouragement. At this juncture I must emphasis the point that this DESIGN PROJECT would not have been possible without the highly informative and valuable guidance by Prof. P. S. Venkatanarayanan, whose vast knowledge and experience has must us go about this project with great ease. We have great pleasure in expressing our sincere & whole hearted gratitude to them. It is worth mentioning about my team mates, friends and colleagues of the Aeronautical department, for extending their kind help whenever the necessity arose. I thank one and all who have directly or indirectly helped me in making this design project a great success.

Aircraft Design Project - 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Topic Aim of the Project Abstract Introduction Comparative Data Sheet Graphs Mean Design Parameters Weight Estimation Powerplant Selection Fuel Weight Validation Wing Selection Airfoil Selection Lift Estimation Drag Estimation Landing Gear Arrangement Fuselage Design Performance Characteristics 3 – View Diagram Conclusion Bibliography Page No.1 . 5 7 9 16 20 39 41 49 53 55 60 70 75 81 87 94 100 104 106 Aircraft Design Project .Page |3 INDEX Serial No.

B C C root C tip C Cd Cd.Page |4 ABBREVIATION A.0 Cp CL D E E L (L/D)loiter (L/D)cruise M Mff R Re S Sref Swet Sa Sf Sfr Sg T Tcruise Ttake-off (T/W)loiter (T/W)cruise (T/W)take-off Vcruise Vstall Vt Wcrew Wempty Wfuel Wpayload W0 W/S  R/C   - Aspect Ratio Wing Span (m) Chord of the Airfoil (m) Chord at Root (m) Chord at Tip (m) Mean Aerodynamic Chord (m) Drag Co-efficient Zero Lift Drag Co-efficient Specific fuel consumption (lbs/hp/hr) Lift Co-efficient Drag (N) Endurance (hr) Oswald efficiency Lift (N) Lift-to-drag ratio at loiter Lift-to-drag ratio at cruise Mach number of aircraft Mission fuel fraction Range (km) Reynolds Number Wing Area (m²) Reference surface area Wetted surface area Approach distance (m) Flare Distance (m) Free roll Distance (m) Ground roll Distance (m) Thrust (N) Thrust at cruise (N) Thrust at take-off (N) Thrust-to-weight ratio at loiter Thrust-to-weight ratio at cruise Thrust-to-weight ratio at take-off Velocity at cruise (m/s) Velocity at stall (m/s) Velocity at touch down (m/s) Crew weight (kg) Empty weight of aircraft (kg) Weight of fuel (kg) Payload of aircraft (kg) Overall weight of aircraft (kg) Wing loading (kg/m²) Density of air (kg/m³) Dynamic viscosity (Ns/m²) Tapered ratio Rate of Climb Aircraft Design Project .R.1 .

1 .Page |5 AIM OF THE PROJECT Aircraft Design Project .

To produce a commercial analysis of the aircraft project. To provide the passengers with high levels of safety and comfort. To use advanced and state of the art technologies in order to reduce the operating costs. Also necessary graphs need to be plotted and diagrams have to be included wherever needed. To operate from regional and international airports. The following design requirements and research studies are set for the project:        Design an aircraft that will transport 280 passengers and their baggage over a design range of 7200 km at a cruise speed of about 872 km/h.1 . To offer a unique and competitive service to existing scheduled operations. Aircraft Design Project .Page |6 AIM OF THE PROJECT The aim of this design project is to design a 280 seater passenger aircraft by comparing the data and specifications of present aircrafts in this category and to calculate the performance characteristics. To assess the development potential in the primary role of the aircraft.

Page |7 ABSTRACT Aircraft Design Project .1 .

It must possess turbofan engines to provide the required amount of speed. The aircraft will possess three engines.1 . The aircraft will possess a low wing. range and fuel economy for the operator. Such an aircraft must possess a wide body configuration to provide sufficient seating capacity.Page |8 ABSTRACT The purpose of the project is to design a 280 seater Medium Range International passenger aircraft. tricycle landing gear and a conventional tail arrangement. Aircraft Design Project .

1 .Page |9 INTRODUCTION Aircraft Design Project .

The engines.P a g e | 10 INTRODUCTION At the instant time there are different types of aircrafts with latest technology. but all modern airplanes have certain components in common. wing. Designs for fuselages vary widely. aiming to form a partnership to share the limited market. landing gear. It may also carry armaments of various sorts. and drag control. They include the tail assembly. McDonnell Douglas pursued a similar strategy with its ultimately unsuccessful MD-12 design. To generate lift. depend upon the airplane mission and the best compromise necessary in the overall airplane design. as had been demonstrated by the simultaneous debut of the Lockheed L-1011 and the McDonnell Douglas DC-10: both planes met the market’s needs. In January 1993. lift. So here in this report. The wing provides the principal lifting force of an airplane. both to complete its own range of products and to break the dominance that Boeing had enjoyed in this market segment since the early 1970s with its 747. The fuselage is generally streamlined as much as possible to reduce drag. the passengers. which are usually located beneath the wings. tail assembly and control surfaces. The fuselage houses the cockpit where the pilot and flight crew sit and it provides areas for passengers and cargo. The planform shape of the wing (the shape of the wing as viewed from above) and placement of the wing on the fuselage (including the angle of incidence). the structures at the rear of the airplane that serve to control and maneuver the aircraft and structures forming part of the tail and attached to the wing. The wings generate most of the lift to hold the plane in the air. and powerplant. an engine may be housed in the fuselage. Lift is obtained from the dynamic action of the wing with respect to the air. The control surfaces include all those moving surfaces of an airplane used for attitude. but the market could profitably sustain only one model. This report gives the different aspects of specifications like wing specification. weight specification. Airplanes come in many different shapes and sizes depending on the mission of the aircraft. We intend to implant the differentiation among the aircrafts having sitting capacity of 250-350 members. eventually resulting in Lockheed's departure from the civil airliner business. its fuel. Aircraft Design Project . as well as the airfoil section shape. Some aircraft carry fuel in the fuselage. others carry the fuel in the wings. Airbus started the development of a very large airliner (termed Megaliner by Airbus in the early development stages) in the early 1990s. These are the fuselage.1 . Boeing and several companies in the Airbus consortium started a joint feasibility study of an aircraft known as the Very Large Commercial Transport (VLCT). power plant specification and performance specification. As each manufacturer looked to build a successor to the 747. the airplane must be pushed through the air. For any airplane to fly. Every year there is a great competition for making an aircraft of having higher capacity of members inside the aircraft. and the cargo. they knew there was room for only one new aircraft to be profitable in the 600 to 800 seat market segment. In addition. provide the thrust to push the airplane forward through the air. Each knew the risk of splitting such a niche market. it must be able to lift the weight of the airplane. The cross-sectional shape of the wing as viewed from the side is known as the airfoil section. The fuselage is the body of the airplane that holds all the pieces of the aircraft together and many of the other large components are attached to it.

in an ingenious fashion.  ACTUAL PROCESS OF DESIGN      Selection of aircraft type and shape Determination of geometric parameters Selection of power plant Structural design and analysis of various components Determination of aircraft flight and operational characteristics . 3 DISTINCT STAGES OF AIRCRAFT DESIGN    Project Feasibility Study Preliminary Design Design Project PROJECT FEASIBILITY STUDY (to evolve a satisfactory specification)        Comprehensive market survey Studies on operating conditions for the airplane to be designed Studies on relevant design requirements (specified by Airworthiness Authorities) Evaluation of similar existing designs Studies on possibilities of introducing new concepts Collection of data on relevant power plants Laying down PRELIMINARY SPECIFICATIONS PRELIMINARY DESIGN It consists of the initial stages of design. resulting in the presentation of a BROCHURE containing preliminary drawings and clearly stating the operational capabilities of the Aircraft Design Project .1 . Trial and Error. OPERATIONAL and SAFETY requirements set out OR acceptable to the USER.P a g e | 11 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF AIRPLANE DESIGN OBJECTIVES To meet the FUNCTIONAL. Role of Design Laboratories and R&D Institutions.  How to get the BEST POSSIBLE solution to meet the simultaneous requirements?     Very complex and long drawn-out process Meeting higher performance requirements than similar aircraft already in service.

g. which will consist of Construction of Mock-up Structural layout of all the individual units. This Brochure has to be APPROVED by the manufacturer and/or the customer.1 . limits Final performance calculation Aircraft Design Project . The steps involved:         Layout of the main components Arrangement of airplane equipment and control systems Selection of power plant Aerodynamic and stability calculations Preliminary structural design of MAJOR components Weight estimation and c. travel Preliminary and Structural Testing Drafting the preliminary 3-view Drawings DESIGN PROJECT              Internal discussions Discussions with prospective customers Discussions with Certification Authorities Consultations with suppliers of power plant and major accessories Deciding upon a BROAD OUTLINE to start the ACTUAL DESIGN.P a g e | 12 airplane being designed.g. and their stress analysis Drafting of detailed design drawings Structural and functional testing Nomenclature of parts Supplying key and assembly diagrams Final power plant calculations Final weight estimation and c.

P a g e | 13 SEVEN INTELLECTUAL POINTS FOR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN Aircraft Design Project .1 .

Preliminary c. Weight Estimation 5. Tail b. Loiter g. Define the mission 2. Wing b. Engine selection b. Aerodynamics a. Shape 4. Climb e. Speed c. Parametric selection a. Flaps c. Drag 6. Stability and control a. Altitude d. Location 7. Propulsive device a. Fuel weight b. Descent f. Conceptional b.1 . Configuration a. Compare the past design 3. Geometry b. Detailed design 9. Performance a.P a g e | 14 DESIGN SEQUENCE 1. Cruise 8. Take-off distance c. Control surfaces Aircraft Design Project . Landing distance d.

Monocoque 12. Flying model 13. Design report a.P a g e | 15 10. Prototype model g. Design details d. Test model f. Manufacturing plan Aircraft Design Project . Testing 17. Construction a. Tertiary 11. Life cycle cost → Minimize the owning cost 14. Management summary c. Scale in/out d. Fake model e. Truss b. Modification and refinement 18. Secondary c. Executive summary b. Manufacturing → Models a. Iteration → Refine the weight and design 15. Training model c. Simulation → Flight envelope 16. Primary b. Semi-monocoque c.1 . Structure a. Mock up model b.

1 .P a g e | 16 COMPARATIVE DATASHEET Aircraft Design Project .

497 9.85 5.3 439.000 903 945 2 374 Aircraft Dimensions degree m m Km Km/h Km/h (no unit) kN x10 Kg x103 Kg Kg/m litre 2 3 Performance Design Weights 171.7 17.1 748.2 5.3 6.1 .96 1.P a g e | 17 Comparative Datasheet .137 15.810 268 115.8 7.5 9.29.060 881 913 4 249 5 A350-800 270 60.9° 12.1 Airbus Aircrafts Parameter Name Total Seating Capacity Length Height Fuselage Diameter Wing Span Chord Aspect Ratio Wing Area Wing Sweep Cruising Altitude Service ceiling Range Cruising Speed Max Speed Number of Engines Max thrust capability MTO Weight Empty Weight Wing Loading Max Fuel Capacity Units (no unit) (no unit) m m m m m (no unit) m 2 1 A300-600R 266 54 16.470 233 124.36 97.62 5.4 31.1° 10.9 660.7 90.7 604.3 361.5 3 A330-300 295 63.8 9.14.1 5.4 2 A310-300 240 46.8 7 9.6 30° 10.6 15.5 644.150 164 83.64 60.61 2.6 16.540 829 871 2 311.7 260 28° 10.527 16.64 7.96 64.9 17.64 43.000 7.64 63.668 12.527 10.192 13.86 75.500 871 913 2 320 4 A340-500 313 67.972 12.000 Aircraft Design Project .998 12.25 443 31.972 12.170 372 170.64 44.9 5.9 846.45 6.38 68.600 850 901 2 262.78 219 28° 9.85 5.8 5.

802 7.160 115.1 .02 8.18 638.8 31.887 7.05 4.5 6.058 11.8 577.7 35° 10.2° 12.300 851 913 2 222 9 777-200 301 63.98 181.76 44.37 127.8 16.9 60.25 7.64° 10.32 66.23 43.1 6.2 60.000 903 945 2 320 Aircraft Dimensions degree m m Km Km/h Km/h (no unit) kN x10 Kg x103 Kg Kg/m litre 2 3 Performance Design Weights 151.67 427.192 13.490 142.000 248 115 762.000 Aircraft Design Project .668 13.84 117.4 9.650 972 1.34 90.88 81.695 905 950 2 330 10 787-9 280 62.010 4 320.6 5.600 850 935 2 193 8 767-200 290 48.4 552.668 12.2 Boeing Aircrafts Parameter Name Total Seating Capacity Length Height Fuselage Diameter Wing Span Chord Aspect Ratio Wing Area Wing Sweep Cruising Altitude Service ceiling Range Cruising Speed Max Speed Number of Engines Max thrust capability MTO Weight Empty Weight Wing Loading Max Fuel Capacity Units (no unit) (no unit) m m m m m (no unit) m 2 6 707-320B 202 46.668 11.1 273.25 25° 10.770 247.4 7 757-200 234 47.68 57.5° 10.3 32.887 10.4 325.87 90.3 31.1 38.99 283.32 13.76 7.61 12.03 47.56 4.5 16.93 3.95 7.137 9.9 5.42 6.23 504.106 15.P a g e | 18 Comparative Datasheet .2 134.8 5.9 7.7 18.

420 935 990 3 222.0 47.9 32° 10.668 12.668 7.5 15 Tupolev Tu-114 220 54.44 4.11 5.588 5.36 592.3 17.08 8.87 6.9 4.82 10.73 45.3 14 Douglas DC-8-63CF 259 57.1 35° 8.98 321.650 830 900 2 158.100 12.28 152.1 13.2 30° 12.P a g e | 19 Comparative Datasheet .257 10.35 6.106 10.11 99.78 6.000 161 66.15 16.48 184.08 60.445 876 965 4 84.52 71.615 Aircraft Design Project .32 350 30° 10.12 66.1 6.1 13.887 6.991 11.1 15.1 35° 10.24 6.5 6.1 41.1 .4 714.620 103 60 559.39 311.01 7.52 271.40 9.11 3.8 4.2 51.668 13.1 657.935 250 120.497 3.4 12 Ilyushin IL-96-300 300 55.200 770 870 4 60 Aircraft Dimensions Performance Design Weights 211 105.3 Other Aircrafts Parameter Name Total Seating Capacity Length Height Fuselage Diameter Wing Span Chord Aspect Ratio Wing Area Wing Sweep Cruising Altitude Service ceiling Range Cruising Speed Max Speed Number of Engines Max thrust capability MTO Weight Empty Weight Wing Loading Max Fuel Capacity Units (no unit) (no unit) m m m m m (no unit) m2 degree m m Km Km/h Km/h (no unit) kN x103 Kg x10 Kg Kg/m litre 2 3 11 Lockheed L-1011-200 263 54.243 175 91 to 93 562.400 860 900 4 157 13 Tupolev Tu-204-100 210 46.17 41.

P a g e | 20 GRAPHS Aircraft Design Project .1 .

Length Length = 55.1 .0m Aircraft Design Project .P a g e | 21 Graph 1 Cruising Speed vs.

7m Aircraft Design Project . Height Height = 15.P a g e | 22 Graph 2 Cruising Speed vs.1 .

1 .P a g e | 23 Graph 3 Cruising Speed vs. Fuselage Diameter Fuselage Diameter = 5.26m Aircraft Design Project .

5m Aircraft Design Project .1 . Wing Span Wing Span = 51.P a g e | 24 Graph 4 Cruising Speed vs.

1 .P a g e | 25 Graph 5 Cruising Speed vs. Chord Chord = 6.0m Aircraft Design Project .

P a g e | 26

Graph 6 Cruising Speed vs. Aspect Ratio

Aspect Ratio = 8.6

Aircraft Design Project - 1

P a g e | 27

Graph 7 Cruising Speed vs. Wing Area

Wing Area = 348m2

Aircraft Design Project - 1

P a g e | 28

Graph 8 Cruising Speed vs. Wing Sweep

Wing Sweep = 31.5°

Aircraft Design Project - 1

P a g e | 29 Graph 9 Cruising Speed vs. Cruising Altitude Cruising Altitude = 10800m Aircraft Design Project .1 .

Service Ceiling Service Ceiling = 12000m Aircraft Design Project .P a g e | 30 Graph 10 Cruising Speed vs.1 .

P a g e | 31 Graph 11 Cruising Speed vs. Range Range = 7200m Aircraft Design Project .1 .

Maximum Speed Max Speed = 940km/h Aircraft Design Project .P a g e | 32 Graph 12 Cruising Speed vs.1 .

P a g e | 33 Graph 13 Cruising Speed vs.1 . Number of Engines Number of Engines = 3 Aircraft Design Project .

P a g e | 34 Graph 14 Cruising Speed vs.1 . Maximum Thrust Capability Maximum Thrust Capability = 265kN Aircraft Design Project .

1 .P a g e | 35 Graph 15 Cruising Speed vs. Maximum Take Off Weight Maximum Take Off Weight = 272000 kg Aircraft Design Project .

Empty Weight Empty Weight = 85000 kg Aircraft Design Project .1 .P a g e | 36 Graph 16 Cruising Speed vs.

1 .P a g e | 37 Graph 17 Cruising Speed vs. Wing Loading Wing Loading = 710 kg/m3 Aircraft Design Project .

P a g e | 38 Graph 18 Cruising Speed vs. Maximum Fuel Capacity Maximum Fuel Capacity = 100000 litre Aircraft Design Project .1 .

P a g e | 39 MEAN DESIGN PARAMETERS Aircraft Design Project .1 .

5° 10800 12000 7200 940 3 265 272000 85000 710 100000 Unit km/h m m m m m (no unit) m2 degree m m km km/h (no unit) kN kg kg kg/m2 litre Aircraft Design Project .7 5.6 348 31.0 15. No.0 8.26 51. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Design Parameter Cruising Speed Length Height Fuselage Diameter Wing Span Chord Aspect Ratio Wing Area Wing Sweep Cruising Altitude Service Ceiling Range Maximum Speed Number of Engines Maximum Thrust Capability Maximum Take Off Weight Empty Weight Wing Loading Maximum Fuel Capacity Value 872 55.5 6.1 .P a g e | 40 Mean Design Parameters S.

P a g e | 41 WEIGHT ESTIMATION Aircraft Design Project .1 .

We /W0 for the aircrafts shown in the comparative data sheet the values of We /W0 tend to cluster around a horizontal line at We /W0 Aircraft Design Project .weight of the fuel load at beginning of the flight W0 = 𝑤 𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑤 +𝑊 𝑝𝑎𝑦𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 1− 𝑊 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑊 0 − 𝑊 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑦 𝑊 0 𝑊𝑓 𝑊0 𝑊𝑒 𝑊0 .Empty weight fraction ESTIMATION OF We /W0: In the plot of W0 vs.Fuel weight fraction . It includes the weight of all the fuel on board at the beginning of the flight.P a g e | 42 WEIGHT ESTIMATION FIRST WEIGHT ESTIMATION: The design take off gross weight Wo is the weight of the airplane at the instant it begins its mission. W0 = { Wcrew +Wpayload + Wfuel + Wempty } Wfuel .1 .

995 0.992 From Table 1.990 1. we get the following values: For takeoff.985 0.995 0.97 For climb.000 0.990 0. segment 1-2 historical data shows that. Suggested Fuel Fractions For Several Mission Phases Table 1 Airplane Type Business Jets Transport Military Trainers Supersonic Cruise Take Off 0.980 0. Normal mission profile for passenger aircraft Cruise 2 Climb Take off 0 1 𝑊𝑓 𝑊0 3 Glide Loiter Landing 4 5 The fuel weight ratio can be obtained from the product of mission segment weight at the end of the segment divided by the weight at the beginning of segment.87 Descent 0. segment 0-1 historical data’s shows that. 𝑊2 𝑊1 = 0.990 0.995 Climb 0.992 0.P a g e | 43 Estimation of Wf / W0: The amount of fuel to carry out the mission depends critically on the efficiency of the propulsion device. It also depends on L/D ratio. 𝑊1 𝑊0 = 0.1 .985 Aircraft Design Project . the engine specific fuel consumption.92-0.970 0.985 Landing 0.980 0.995 0.

14 6–9 14 – 18 7–9 From the Table 2.P a g e | 44 For loiter. segment 3-4 ignoring the fuel consumption during descent we assume. segment 4-5 based on historical data we assume that. L/D values of similar type of aircrafts we come to know that the approximate the value of L/D for our aircraft to be 15. 𝑊4 𝑊3 =1 For landing.18 10 . As we all know that maximum range is covered during cruise we considering this equation.10 10 – 12 11 – 13 13 – 15 8 – 10 4–7 13 – 15 4-6 loiter 10 . bombers & transports Supersonic cruise cruise 8 .995 𝑤 3 𝑤 2 The Brequet’s range equation is used to calculate the value of . 𝐿 = 15 𝐷 Aircraft Design Project . So.14 14 – 16 14 . R= 𝑣∞ 𝐿 𝑐 𝑗 𝐷 ln 𝑤 2 𝑤 3 Initial Estimates of Lift/Drag Ratio (L/D) Table 2 Aircrafts Homebuilt & single-engine Business jets Regional turboprops Transport jets Military trainers Fighters Military patrol. 𝑊5 𝑊4 = 0.1 .12 12 .

we found the values of cj as 0.1.4 . flying boats Supersonic cruise Cruise 0.0.0.0.0.0.6 .6 .5 .6 . 𝑤 5 𝑤 0 = 𝑤 1 𝑤 0 x 𝑤 5 𝑤 0 𝑤 2 𝑤 1 x 𝑤 3 𝑤 2 x 𝑤 4 𝑤 3 x 𝑤 5 𝑤 4 = 0.68327 Aircraft Design Project .6 0.39135 = 0. R= 𝑤 2 𝑤 3 𝑤 3 𝑤 2 𝑣∞ 𝐿 𝑐 𝑗 𝐷 ln 𝑤 2 𝑤 3 = 1. bombers.4 0.5 0.7 – 1.6 0. V∞ = 872 km/hr R = 7200 km From Table 3.P a g e | 45 Specific Fuel Consumption Table 3 Aircrafts Business & transport jets Military trainers Fighters Military patrol.4 .9 Loiter 0.0 0. transports.8 From the comparative data sheet.5 .718726 Now using all the fuel fractions.0.8 0.6 hr-1 So now substituting these values in the Brequet’s range equation.1.4 .9 0.5 – 0.1 .6 0.

632 kg (Or) We assume that the airplane occupies 280 passengers (with average weight of 180kg per passenger including baggage) and 12 crew (with average weight 100kg).P a g e | 46 If at end of the flight.256W=69.1 . 𝑊 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑊 0 W0 = − 𝑊 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑦 𝑊 0 W0 = 280(180) + 12(100) 1− 0.475 = 272626.475 By substituting these values in: 𝑤 𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑤 +𝑊 𝑝𝑎𝑦𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 1− We get W0 as.33573 Wpayload + Wcrew= 0.600 kg From the graph we get values of 𝑊𝑒 𝑊0 as 0. 𝑤 𝑓 𝑤 0 = 1. Aircraft Design Project .4 kg This is only the first estimation.33573 − 0. Now by doing iterations. making six percent of allowance for reserve and trapped fuel. Wpayload + Wcrew= 280(180) + 12(100) =51.06 1 − 𝑤 𝑓 𝑤 0 𝑤 5 𝑤 0 = 0. we can get a fairly accurate value of the Maximum Take Off Weight (W0). the fuel tanks are not completely empty.

06 𝑊0 FIRST: We = 1.977 Aircraft Design Project .1 .4−0.02 × 272626.572−0.02 × 𝑊0 −0. we use the given formula.285−0.06 𝑊0 We 𝑊0 = 0.P a g e | 47 ITERATION PROCESS (W0) For the iteration process.4805251 W0 = 280824.4803702 W0 = 280587.481355676 W0 = 282099.285 SECOND: We = 1.02 × 280587.1−0.02 × 282099.1 FOURTH: We = 1.06 𝑊0 We 𝑊0 = 0.4805008 W0 = 280786. We = 1.02 × 280824.06 𝑊0 We 𝑊0 = 0.572 THIRD: We = 1.06 𝑊0 We 𝑊0 = 0.

801 SIXTH: We = 1.1 .02 × 280792.792 kg.480504 W0 = 280791.977−0.801−0.P a g e | 48 FIFTH: We = 1.06 𝑊0 We 𝑊0 =0.767. 𝑤 𝑓 𝑤 0 = 0. we can see that the value of We Wo starts to converge on 0.02 × 280791. So we can take the value W0 = 280792 as the final estimate of the W0.887−0. We know that.3 kg Weight of the Fuel (Wf)= 94.3375 × 280792 = 94767.480504 W0 = 280792 After doing seven iterations.02 × 280786.887 SEVENTH: We = 1.3 kg.33573 So.480504.06 𝑊0 We 𝑊0 =0. Aircraft Design Project .4805046 W0 = 280792. Max Take Off Weight (W0) = 280. we get the first estimation value of Wf. Wf = 0. substituting the value of W0.06 𝑊0 We 𝑊0 = 0.

P a g e | 49 POWERPLANT SELECTION Aircraft Design Project .1 .

8 The preferable choice of engine. A list of engines with weight and thrust matching our requirements are chosen and are tabulated below.8 kg engines. Engine Name Rolls Royce Trent 772B-60 Pratt & Whitney PW4000-100 CFM International CFM56-5C4 General Electric CF6-50 Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4H1 Dry weight (kg) 4788 Max Thrust (kN) 320 Thrust to Weight ratio 6.443.6 kg engines providing enough thrust for Take-off. Hence the preference is towards having three engines (Trijet). Or 3 x 5147.4:1 5 3990 151 3. Airbus A330 and Boeing 777 aircrafts uses these engines which are similar in payload capabilities such as the one under design. from those listed above would be the Rolls Royce Trent 772B-60 engine which meets our demand of weight and powers. The total weight of the power-plant (0.3:1 4.055W) requires being approximately 15. Or 4 x 3860. Choice of engine is a Turbofan for obvious reasons such as higher operating fuel economy & efficiency for high payloads.85 kg engines. Most of the aircraft in the 250-350 passenger category were found to have 2 engines and 4 engines. we can have a rough idea of the weight of the power-plant that is to be used.8:1 Bypass Ratio 5 4270 310 7.4 4030 250 6.5 kg.1 .9:1 6.4 4104 240 6:1 4.P a g e | 50 POWERPLANT SELECTION • • • • • • • From the first weight estimate. Engines can be used in combination of 2 x 7721. Aircraft Design Project .

the Trent 700 is the most popular engine on the aircraft. Improvements in the LP turbine and other technology flowed from the Trent 1000 will ensure the Trent 700 delivers the lowest fuel burn on the A330. Incorporation of the HP module from the Trent 800 enabled the Trent 700 to deliver the best performance of any engine on the A330 whilst delivering long on-wing life and low maintenance costs. the Trent 700 has built up the greatest service experience on the A330. As the only engine specifically designed for the A330 it delivers the greatest performance over the widest range of operational and environmental conditions. The Trent 700 marked the birth of a new family of engines. whilst maintaining the three-shaft design characteristics of low weight. it incorporates revolutionary advances in wide chord hollow titanium fan blade technology.P a g e | 51 Details about the selected engine: Rolls Royce Trent 772B-60 Since its launch with Cathay Pacific in 1995. high strength and exceptional performance retention. Having been selected by over 40 operators of the A330. the Trent 700 has benefited through continuous improvement as technology has flowed from later generation family members.1 . This is apparent in China where 100 per cent of A330 operators have selected the Trent 700 and in Aircraft Design Project . Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) and 3-D aerodynamics. As part of a successful and expanding family.

All this contributes to a leading market share of around 50 per cent. In addition to its capability the Trent 700 has superb environmental credentials as the cleanest and quietest engine on the A330. The engine’s unrivalled high and hot performance gives Trent 700 customers a distinct operating advantage. Technical Details Engine Thrust Bypass ratio Inlet mass flow Fan diameter Length Stages Certification EIS : Trent 772B-60 : 71.100lb : 5.0 : 2030lb/sec : 97. 1 HPT. 8 IPC. 4 LPT : Jan 1994 : Mar 1995 Aircraft Design Project .4in : 154in : Fan.1 . 1 IPT. As a complete package the Trent 700 provides any customer with the greatest flexibility.P a g e | 52 the Middle East it has 80 per cent market share. 6 HPC.

P a g e | 53 FUEL WEIGHT VALIDATION Aircraft Design Project .1 .

2 𝑇𝜍 = 76. Wfuel = 𝑵𝒖𝒎𝒃𝒆𝒓 𝒐𝒇 𝒆𝒏𝒈𝒊𝒏𝒆𝒔∗𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝒂𝒕 𝒂𝒍𝒕𝒊𝒕𝒖𝒅𝒆∗𝑹𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒆∗𝑺𝑭𝑪∗𝟏.2    a lt 0 Altitude = 10800m = 35433ft 𝜍 = 𝜌 𝑎𝑙𝑡 𝜌 0 = 0. having been made.42 kg Aircraft Design Project .4hr-1 (at medium thrust setting) Number of engines = 3 CALCULATION: Wfuel = 3×7784.P a g e | 54 FUEL WEIGHT VALIDATION The choice of a suitable engine.3715/1.553.𝟐 𝑪𝒓𝒖𝒊𝒔𝒆 𝑽𝒆𝒍𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒕𝒚 The factor of 1.2 is provided for reserve fuel.4×1.363kN = 7784. it is now possible to estimate the amount of fuel required for a flight at the given cruising speed for the given range.225 = 0.2 872 Wfuel = 92. Thrust at altitude is calculated using the relation: T  T0 * 1.3031.2kg SFC = 0.1 .2m/s To = 320kN 𝑇𝜍 = 320×0.303 Cruise velocity = 872km/hr = 242.2×7200 ×0.

1 .P a g e | 55 WING SELECTION Aircraft Design Project .

The natural choice of the standard series is the 65 series which is designed specifically for use in high-speeds. Location of the engine on a low-wing makes Engine-overhaul easier. Each configuration (Low.1 . WING GEOMETRY DESIGN • The geometry of the wing is a function of four parameters. namely the Wing loading (W/S). Aspect Ratio (b2/S). High and mid) has its own advantages but in this design. the Lowwing offers significant advantages such as    Uninterrupted Passenger’s cabin. The thickness of the wing. Taper ratio (λ) and the Sweepback angle at quarter chord (Λqc). The critical Mach number can well be delayed by the use of an appropriate Sweepback angle to the wing structure. Aircraft Design Project .P a g e | 56 WING SELECTION INTRODUCTION After the final weight estimation of the aircraft. 2 S b  (1   ) Ctip    Croot POSITION OF WING The location of the wing in the fuselage (along the vertical axis) is very important. The first step towards designing the wing is the thickness estimation. The wing weight and its lifting capabilities are in general. • Croot  The tip chord is given by. the primary component of the aircraft to be designed is the wing. the drag divergence Mach number corresponding to the wing section. in turn depends on the critical mach number of the airfoil or rather. Placement of Landing gear in the wing structure itself. The root chord can now be found using the equation. The Take-off Weight that was estimated in the previous analysis is used to find the Wing area S (from W/S).The value of S also enables us to calculate the Wingspan b (using the Aspect ratio). a function of the thickness of the airfoil section that is used in the wing structure.

P a g e | 57   Permits usage of the Wing carry through box which alone can admit the amount of fuel that we require to carry. The CL that will be obtainable from an airfoil section (for a given angle of attack) is given by: CL =0. Cl= 2×𝑊 𝜌×𝑣 2 ×𝑆 Aircraft Design Project .  Low wing affects the flow over the horizontal tail to minimum extent. Landing gear usually becomes high in such wing configurations and therefore. the dihedral angle is assumed to be 5 degrees.  The low-wing requires that some-amount of dihedral angle is provided for lateral stability. the fuselage is in a level condition (parallel to the direction of the velocity vector). This requires that the wing setting angle correspond to the angle which will produce the desired CL for cruise. WING PLANFORM WING SETTING ANGLE The wing has to be set at angle to the fuselage center line such that during cruise.1 .9 x Cl x cosΛ. but it may be subject to change in the stability analysis. As of now. provides greater ground clearance ad reduces the amount of fuselage upsweep that is to be provided.

1 .85 = 2.8 0.638 CL =0.25) = 10.9 x Cl x cosΛ CL =0.25 x 10.3715×242.638 x cos35o = 0.7m Cmean Calculation: Cm = 2 3 × 𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑡 × 2 3 (1+λ+λ 2 ) (1+λ) Cm = ×10.32× (1+0.85m Ctip Calculation: 2 × 395.47 Aircraft Design Project .48 Ctip    Croot Ctip = 0.05 = 7.6m Coefficient of Lift Calculation: Section Lift Coefficient: Cl= Cl = Wing Lift Coefficient: 2×𝑊 𝜌×𝑣 2 ×𝑆 2×710×9.22 = 0.9 x 0.85×1.P a g e | 58 DESIGN CALCULATION (First Estimation) Croot Calculation: Croot  2 S b  (1   ) Croot = 58.

DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS W/S (kg/m2) Wing area S (m2) Aspect Ratio Span b (m) Taper ratio (𝛌) Root Chord (m) Mean Chord (m) Tip chord (m) Lift coefficient (CL) Sweepback Angle(∆) VALUES 710 395.32 0.6 2.1 .85 7.6 58.48 8.25 10.47 35° Aircraft Design Project .P a g e | 59 It is to be found graphically the following parameters were estimated for the aircraft designed.7 0.

1 .P a g e | 60 AIRFOIL SELECTION Aircraft Design Project .

1 . NACA 6-digit is designed for lower drag by increasing region of laminar flow. perpendicular distance of section mid-points from chord line as a % of it (sub sonically typically 3%). NACA 4 digit is introduced during 1930’s. Chord (c): It is the length of chord line. Angle of attack (α): It is the angular difference between chord line and airflow direction. thickness/chord ratio. design lift coefficient. Camber (d): It is the curvature of section. lift curve slope. characteristic curves. Modern it is mainly based upon need for improved aerodynamic characteristics at speeds just below speed of sound.P a g e | 61 AIRFOIL SELECTION The airfoil is the main aspect and is the heart of the airplane. stall speed and handling qualities and aerodynamic efficiency during the all phases of flight Aerofoil Selection is based on the factors of Geometry & definitions. – 2nd digit (x10): location of maximum camber (as % of chord from leading edge (LE)). – 3rd & 4th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord). The following are the airfoil geometry and definition: Chord line: It is the straight line connecting leading edge (LE) and trailing edge (TE). Aircraft Design Project . NACA 4 Digit – 1st digit: maximum camber (as % of chord). families/types. design/selection. The following are airfoil categories: Early it was based on trial & error. NACA 5-digit is aimed at pushing position of max camber forwards for increased CLmax. Thickness (t): measured perpendicular to chord line as a % of it (subsonic typically 12%). The airfoils affects the cruise speed landing distance and take off.

the 6x series.3 1 = − 𝑀𝑐𝑜𝑠∆ 𝑐 𝑀 𝑀𝑐𝑜𝑠∆ Taking 𝑀# = 1.05 . NACA 6 Digit – 1st digit: identifies series type.e. As indicated earlier during the calculation of the lift coefficient value. it becomes necessary to use high speed airfoils.15): design lift coefficient.P a g e | 62 NACA 5 Digit – 1st digit (x0.25 CL (cruise) Where.85 ∆ = Sweep Back Angle = 35° at Quarter Chord CL (cruise) = 0. – 2nd & 3rd digits (x0. – 4th & 5th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord). – 4th digit (x0. M = Drag Divergence Cruise Mach Number = 0.0. 𝑡 𝑐 = 0. – 3rd digit: indicates acceptable range of CL above/below design value for satisfactory low drag performance (as tenths of CL). we get. – 5th & 6th digits: maximum section thickness (%c) The airfoil that is to be used is now selected. t/c Calculation: 𝑡 0.. which have been designed to suit high subsonic cruise Mach numbers.5): location of maximum camber (as % of chord from LE).5 ]3 2 Substituting the values in the above equation.12 Aircraft Design Project . i.1 . – 2nd digit (x10): location of minimum pressure (as % of chord from leading edge (LE)).47 1 3 [1 − 5 + 𝑀𝑐𝑜𝑠∆ 5 + (𝑀# )2 2 3.1): design CL.

8 32.1 1.1 .936 1.3 Name NACA 63-212 NACA 63-412 NACA 64(1)-112 NACA 64(1)-212 NACA 65(1)-212 NACA 65(1)-412 NACA 66(1)-212 From the above list of airfoils.008 0.65(2)-415 (𝑪𝒍 )max 1.1 2.8 10.5 TE Angle (deg) 11.5 4.5 1.3 32.5 31.107 0.6 9 12. In order to obtain better span-wise distribution of lift and to have better stalling characteristics (the root should stall before the tip so that the pilot may realize and avoid a stall by sensing the vibrations on his control stick).5 4. Section used at the mean aerodynamic chord Section used at the tip Section used at the root CHORD ROOT MEAN TIP AIRFOIL 65(2)-415 65(1)-412 65-410 .2 44.2 1.7 44.159 0.7 11.971 1.238 1.5 3.957 36.5 1.5 5.3 1.1 1.3 10.035 1.107 1. the one chosen is the 65(1)-412 airfoil which has the suitable lift coefficient for the current design.P a g e | 63 NACA 6-series Airfoils having t/c ratio of 0. it is usually necessary to provide a lower t/c to the tip section and a higher t/c to the root section.015 Aircraft Design Project .1 37.5 5.5 4 -0.1 2. Hence.6 1.3 1.5 1.8 14 LE Radius (%) 1.65(1)-412 .5 1.12 Thickness Camber Lift Coeff.65-410 . Lift-to-Drag Stall Angle (%) (%) (CL) (L/D) (deg) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 1.2 0.

P a g e | 64 Airfoil Geometry NACA 65-410 (tip) NACA 65(1)-412 (mean) NACA 65(2)-415 (root) Aircraft Design Project .1 .

P a g e | 65 Angle of Attack (vs) Lift Coefficient of NACA 65-410 Angle of Attack (vs) Lift Coefficient of NACA 65(2)-415 Aircraft Design Project .1 .

1 .P a g e | 66 Performance curves for the chosen airfoil NACA 65(1)-412 Angle of Attack (α) vs Coefficient of Lift (CL) Angle of Attack (α) vs Coefficient of Drag (CD) Aircraft Design Project .

9 × 1. double slotted flap is selected. ∆𝐶𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑥 of the double slotted flap for different configurations is given in the table below: FLAPS Double slotted flap TAKE OFF 20o 1.015 3 = 1.12 𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙 = 0.107 3 + 1.008 Flaps Selection For the current design.238 3 + 1.12 = 1.05 ∆𝑪𝒍 𝒎𝒂𝒙/𝒄𝒐𝒔∆ ∆𝑪𝒍 𝒎𝒂𝒙 1.9 × 𝐶𝑙max 𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙 = 0.5 2.5 Aircraft Design Project .1 .825 LANDING 40o 2.P a g e | 67 Angle of Attack (α) vs Lift-to-Drag ratio ( ) 𝐷 𝐿 CALCULATIONS: Available 𝐶𝑙𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝐶𝐿max 1.

508 𝐶𝐿 max 𝑟𝑒𝑞 (Landing) = 1.25) = 11m Ctip Calculation: Ctip    Croot Ctip = 0.5 = 2.25 x 11 = 2.P a g e | 68 ∆𝐶𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝐶𝐿 max 𝑟𝑒𝑞 . S = 400.008+2.75m Aircraft Design Project .1 .32 m (from table) DESIGN CALCULATION (Second Estimation) Croot Calculation: Croot  2 S b  (1   ) 2 × 400.55 m/s We Have.722 kg/m2 From this.72 𝑚2 b = 58. W/S=700.𝐶𝐿 max 𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝐶𝐿 max 𝑟𝑒𝑞 = 𝐶𝐿 max 𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 + ∆𝐶𝑙 𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝐶𝐿 max 𝑟𝑒𝑞 (Take Off) = 1.008+1.058 𝑉𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 0.32× (1+0.72 Croot = 58.05 = 3.25× 𝑉𝐶𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒 = 60.

P a g e | 69 Cmean Calculation: Cm = 2 3 × 𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑡 × 2 3 (1+λ+λ 2 ) (1+λ) Cm = ×11×1.63022 Aircraft Design Project .25 11 2.8 0.4646 DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS W/S (kg/m2) Wing area S (m2) Aspect Ratio Span b (m) Taper ratio (𝛌) Root Chord (m) Tip chord (m) Mean chord (m) Sweepback Angle(∆) Cruise Lift Coefficient (𝑪𝒍 ) VALUES 700.6 58.75 7.9 x 0.7 35° 0.7m Coefficient of Lift Calculation: Section Lift Coefficient: Cl= Cl = Wing Lift Coefficient: 2×𝑊 𝜌×𝑣 2 ×𝑆 2×700.72×9.3715×242.9 x Cl x cosΛ CL =0.05 = 7.63022 CL =0.32 0.72 8.1 .72 400.22 = 0.63022 x cos35o = 0.

P a g e | 70 LIFT ESTIMATION Aircraft Design Project .1 .

Any shape can be made to produce lift if either cambered or inclined to flow direction. compressibility effects (Mach number). viscous effects (Reynolds’ number).1 . – Shear stress distribution. flight speed (V). • • • • • Aircraft Design Project . planform geometry.P a g e | 71 LIFT ESTIMATION LIFT: Component of aerodynamic force generated on aircraft perpendicular to flight direction. especially on main lifting surfaces. Generation of Lift • Aerodynamic force arises from two natural sources: – Variable pressure distribution. Lift Coefficient (CL) • Amount of lift generated depends on: – Planform area (S). Lift mainly due to pressure distribution. air density (). Classical aerofoil section is optimum for high subsonic lift/drag ratio. wing. i. Require (relatively) low pressure on upper surface and higher pressure on lower surface. Shear stress primarily contributes to overall drag force on aircraft.e. lift coefficient (CL) • 1 V 2 ) SCL  qSCL 2 CL is a measure of lifting effectiveness and mainly depends upon: Lift  ( – Section shape. angle of attack ().

Most lift from near LE on upper surface due to suction. Peak suction pressure on upper surface strengthens and moves forwards with increasing . Aircraft Design Project .1 .P a g e | 72 Pressure variations with angle of attack – – – – – Negative (nose-down) pitching moment at zero-lift (negative ). Highest pressure at LE stagnation point. Positive lift at  = 0o. lowest pressure at crest on upper surface.

1 .63022 (from the wing and airfoil estimation) Substituting all these values in the general lift equation. Lift  ( 1 V 2 ) SCL  qSCL 2 Lift at Cruise 𝜌 = 0.2 m/s S = 400.6 N Aircraft Design Project .22 × 400.3715 (at the cruising altitude of 10800m) V = 242.72 kg/m2 CL(cruise) = 0.72 × 0.3715 × 242.63022 Lift at cruise = 2751761.P a g e | 73 Lift Curves of Cambered and Symmetrical airfoils CALCULATION: General Lift equation is given by. L(cruise) = 1 2 × 0.

55)2 × 400.225 (at sea altitude) V = 0.225 (at sea altitude) V = 0.2 × 66. 𝟕 𝐍 Lift at Landing 𝜌 = 1.72 kg/m2 CL(landing) = 3. L(landing) = 2 × 1.7 x Vt = 0.225 × (0.058 Lift at landing = 𝟐𝟐𝟕𝟖𝟕𝟒𝟒.72 × 3.3 x Vstall S = 400. 𝟕 𝐍 1 Aircraft Design Project .3 × 60.508 (flaps extended and kept at the take-off position of 20o) Substituting all these values in the general lift equation.7 x 1.7 × 1.1 .72 kg/m2 CL(take-off) = 2.7 x 1.508 Lift at take-off = 𝟏𝟗𝟒𝟏𝟔𝟐𝟕.2 x Vstall S = 400.72 × 2.7 x Vlo = 0.7 × 1.86)2 × 400. L(take-off) = 2 × 1.058 (flaps extended and kept at the landing position of 40o) 1 Substituting all these values in the general lift equation.P a g e | 74 Lift at Take-Off 𝜌 = 1.225 × (0.

1 .P a g e | 75 DRAG ESTIMATION Aircraft Design Project .

component resolved in direction of motion. o Significantly more for turbulent than laminar types of boundary layers.1 . Drag Coefficient (CD)  Amount of drag generated depends on: o Planform area (S). compressibility effects (Mach number). Aircraft Design Project . viscous effects (Reynolds’ number). flight speed (V). air density (). drag coefficient (CD)  CD is a measure of aerodynamic efficiency and mainly depends upon: o Section shape. It is the undesirable component of the aerodynamic force while lift is the desirable component.P a g e | 76 DRAG ESTIMATION DRAG:    Drag is the resolved component of the complete aerodynamic force which is parallel to the flight direction (or relative oncoming airflow). planform geometry. angle of attack (). Drag Components  Skin Friction: o Due to shear stresses produced in boundary layer. o Sometimes considered separately as forebody and rear (base) drag components.  Form (Pressure) Drag o Due to static pressure distribution around body . It always acts to oppose the direction of motion.

 Thickness or Volume. Aircraft Design Project .1 . o Often decomposed into portions related to:  Lift.P a g e | 77  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.

Aircraft Design Project .1 .P a g e | 78 Typical streamlining effect Lift induced (or) trailing vortex drag 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.

63022 2 3.72 kg/m2 CL(cruise) = 0. we use the formula.0030 e = 0. 2 1 2 ∅𝐶𝐿 𝐷 = 𝜌𝑉 𝑆 𝐶𝐷.P a g e | 79 CALCULATION: Generally for jet aircrafts.8 ) Drag at cruise = 31674.72 (0.63022 (from the wing and airfoil estimation) Substituting all these values in the general drag equation.0030 + 2 1 0.8 The general drag equation is given by. it is given that CD. D(cruise) = × 0.6×0.0 = 0.32m 2 2 58.2)2 × 400.3715 (at the cruising altitude of 10800m) V = 242. h = 2m b = 58.1 . 16𝑕 2 𝑏 16𝑕 2 + 𝑏 Ø= 1 Where h = height above ground.14×8.3715 × (242.32 16× Drag at Cruise 𝜌 = 0.846 N Aircraft Design Project .2314 2 1 + (16× )2 58.32 Ø= = 0.0 + 2 𝜋𝐴𝑒 For calculating Ø.2314 ×0.2 m/s S = 400. b = wing span.

P a g e | 80 Drag at Take-off 𝜌 = 1.2 x Vstall S = 400.14×8.225 × (0.14×8.8 ) Drag at take-off = 54482.508 2 3.72 kg/m2 CL(take-off) = 2.0030 + 2 1 0.7 N Aircraft Design Project .7 x 1.3 x Vstall S = 400.1 .058 2 3.7 x Vlo = 0.7 × 1.0030 + 2 1 0.2314 ×3.72 (0.72 (0.72 kg/m2 CL(landing) = 3.86)2 × 400.7 × 1.7 x Vt = 0.6×0.3 × 60.508 (flaps extended and kept at the take-off position of 20o) Substituting all these values in the general drag equation.6 N Drag at Landing 𝜌 = 1.2 × 66. D = × 1.225 (at sea altitude) V = 0.058 (flaps extended and kept at the landing position of 40o) Substituting all these values in the general drag equation.225 × (0.2314 ×2.7 x 1. D = × 1.6×0.55)2 × 400.8 ) Drag at landing = 76876.225 (at sea altitude) V = 0.

P a g e | 81 LANDING GEAR ARRANGEMENT Aircraft Design Project .1 .

So more importance is to be given as it carries the entire load on the ground.. and shock absorption mechanism. as well as system integration. weight. wheel and brake integration and position and status control. e. which added the third main gear to the fuselage. after which it is often very difficult and expensive to change the design. suitable configurations are identified and reviewed to determine how well they match the airframe structure. and operational requirements. OVERVIEW The design and positioning of the landing gear are determined by the unique characteristics associated with each aircraft. series production and of course product support. the Airbus A340. Liebherr provides system architecture for gear actuation control. i. the number and size of tires and wheels. The essential features. steering control. the undercarriage or landing gear is the structure (usually wheels) that supports an aircraft and allows it to move across the surface of the earth when it is not in flying. After take-off the landing gear is retracted. before landing it is extended and locked into position.e. geometry.P a g e | 82 LANDING GEAR SELECTION In aviation. where the wheels were spread further apart on the bogie to meet LaGuardia Airport flotation limits for US operators. where the main gear center bogie increased from two to four wheels in the -400 series. and mission requirements.. and the Airbus A-300. Liebherr acquired knowledge and experience based on the realization of different landing gear programs. brakes. The purpose of Landing Gears is to move the aircraft on ground.g. Three examples of significant changes made after the initial design include the DC-10-30. Given the weight and cg range of the aircraft.1 . must be selected in accordance with industry and federal standards discussed in the following chapters before an aircraft design progresses past the concept formulation phase. The integration of various technologies and use of new material for individual landing gear concepts lead to competitive products:  Landing Gear Systems  Nose Landing Gear Subsystem  Main Landing Gear Subsystem  Brake and Brake Control Subsystem  Research and Development Technology Aircraft Design Project . flotation.

This type of gear arrangement increased the performance of aircraft by reducing the drag. Sometimes a small tail wheel or skid is added to aircraft with tricycle undercarriage arrangements. tricycle undercarriage where there are two main wheels under the wings and a third smaller wheel in the nose. The Boeing 747 has five sets of wheels. they employ more wheels to with the increasing weight. wheel or skid at rear. The airbus A340-500/-600 has an additional four wheel undercarriage bogie on the fuselage centerline. a nose-wheel and four sets of four wheel bogies.P a g e | 83 TYPES OF GEAR ARRANGEMENTS Wheeled undercarriage comes in two types: conventional or tail dragger undercarriage. much smaller. where there are two main wheels towards the front of the aircraft and a single. and two inner sets located in the fuselage. LARGE AIRCRAFT As the size of aircraft grows larger. this is called retractable gear. a little rearward of outer bogies. A set is located under each wing. It was in late 1920s and 1930s that such retractable landing gear became common. Most modern aircraft have tricycle undercarriage.1 . MAIN FUNCTIONS • • • Carry aircraft max gross weight to take off runway Withstand braking during aborted take off Retract into compact landing gear bay Aircraft Design Project . RETRACTABLE GEAR To decrease drag in flight some undercarriages retract into the wings and/or fuselage with wheels flush against or concealed behind doors.

This moment helps to reduce the angle of attack of the aircraft and thus the lift generated by the wing. liftoff and touchdown. the braking forces. the number of main assembly struts has grown from two to four to accommodate the number of tires required to distribute the weight over a greater area. Landing Gear Disposition: The positioning of the landing gear is based primarily on stability considerations during taxiing. the relative location of the main assembly to the aircraft cg produces a nose-down pitching moment upon touchdown. Compliance with this requirement can be determined by examining the takeoff/landing performance characteristics and the relationships between the locations of the landing gear and the aircraft cg. It leads to a nearly level fuselage and consequently the cabin floor when the aircraft is on the ground.P a g e | 84 • Damp touchdown at maximum weight. but there are several types of steering. With the steady increase in the aircraft takeoff weight. Aircraft Design Project . which act behind the aircraft cg. the aircraft should be in no danger of turning over on its side once it is on the ground. The primary drawback of the nose wheel tricycle configuration is the restriction placed upon the location where the main landing gear can be attached. STEERING The steering mechanism used on the ground with wheeled landing gear varies by aircraft. Total LG weight typically 3% of MTOW for commercial airliners. have a stabilizing effect and thus enable the pilot to make full use of the brakes. The most attractive feature of this type of undercarriages is the improved stability during braking and ground maneuvers. Under normal landing attitude. i.1 . In addition.e. These factors all contribute to a shorter landing field length requirement..    RUDDER STEERING DIRECT STEERING TILLER STEERING Configuration Selection The nose wheel tricycle undercarriage has long been the preferred configuration for passenger transports.

P a g e | 85 Stability at Touchdown and During Taxiing Static stability of an aircraft at touchdown and during taxiing can be determined by examining the location of the applied forces and the triangle formed by connecting the attachment locations of the nose and main assemblies. particularly in cross-wind 21 conditions. Whenever the resultant of air and mass forces intersects the ground at a point outside this triangle. the dynamic braking load on the nose assembly may become excessive. when the static load on the nose wheel exceeds about 15 percent of the MTOW. e. When the load on the nose wheel is less than about eight percent of the maximum takeoff weight (MTOW). This value also allows for fuselage length increase with aircraft growth. braking quality will suffer. a proper balance in terms of load distribution between the nose and main assembly must be maintained.controllability on the ground will become marginal. the high costs associated with airside infrastructure improvements. the aircraft will cant over about the side of the triangle that is closest to the resultant force/ground intersect.. have made airfield compatibility issues one of the primary considerations in the design of the landing gear. the ground will not be able to exert a reaction force which prevents the aircraft from falling over. Aircraft Design Project .g. this requirement effectively places an upper limit on the dimension of the wheelbase and track. In particular.1 . Ground Operation Characteristics: Besides ground stability and controllability considerations. runway and taxiway extensions and pavement reinforcements. and a greater effort may be required for steering. However. On the other hand. the aircraft must be able to maneuver within a pre-defined space as it taxies between the runway and passenger terminal. Braking and Steering Qualities The nose assembly is located as far forward as possible to maximize the flotation and stability characteristics of the aircraft. As a result. For large aircraft.

Undercarriage is of three types    Bicycle type Tricycle type Tricycle tail wheel type From the above list of landing gear types.P a g e | 86 LANDING GEAR TYPES During landing and take-off.1 . Aircraft Design Project . the tricycle type is chosen which is the most suitable configuration for the current design. the undercarriage supports the total weight of the airplane.

1 .P a g e | 87 FUSELAGE DESIGN Aircraft Design Project .

although in some amphibious aircraft the single engine is mounted on a pylon attached to the fuselage which in turn is used as a floating hull. landing gear stowage. High performance combat aircraft. Or simply into front.P a g e | 88 FUSELAGE DESIGN INTRODUCTION The fuselage is an aircraft's main body section that holds crew and passengers or cargo. power plant system. except for:     Single and two-seat light aircraft. Internal weapons (guns. Freight. required for aircraft stability and manoeuvrability.  Provide overall structural integrity. Common practice to modularise layout:   Crew compartment.1 . Once fundamental configuration is established. The fuselage also serves to position control and stabilization surfaces in specific relationships to lifting surfaces. bay-housed guided weapons). PRIMARY CONSIDERATIONS Most of the fuselage volume is occupied by the payload. In single-engine aircraft it will usually contain an engine. Fuel (often interchangeable with other payload items on a mass basis). Aircraft Design Project . Trainer and light strike aircraft. Payload includes:        Passengers and associated baggage. Avionics equipment. free-fall bombs. centre and rear fuselage section designs. Flight test instrumentation (experimental aircraft). Combat aircraft with weapons carried on outer fuselage & wing.  Possible mounting of landing gear and power plant. fuselage layout proceeds almost independently of other design aspects. etc. Crew (significant for anti-sub and early-warning aircraft). fuel volume. Functions of fuselage:  Provision of volume for payload. wing carry-through structure. empennage. payload configuration.

44 km (8000 ft) ISA for passenger transports.37 bar (5. Also used on some general aviation aircraft to improve passenger comfort at moderate altitude.4 psi) for aircraft at 19. has a major impact upon overall shape.000 ft).6 km (25. Pressure compartment has to avoid use of flat surfaces. Particular need to base outer shell cross-section on circular arcs to avoid significant mass penalties.27 bar (4 psi). Overall effect depends on level of pressurisation required.000 ft).P a g e | 89 Pressurisation:   If required.8 km (65. Cockpit pressurisation primarily provides survivable environment in case of suit failure at high altitude.000 ft). High pressure differential required across most of fuselage for passenger transports so often over-riding fuselage structural design requirement. o 0.1 km (43.5 psi) for aircraft at 7. Mainly applicable to fighters where crew are also equipped with pressure suits. Pure circular sections best structurally but “double-bubbles” sometimes give best compromise with internal layout.1 .    Circular Section Examples: Aircraft Design Project .58 bar (8. Implied pressure differentials are: o 0. Normal (High) Differential Pressurisation:   Usual requirement is for effective altitude to be no more than 2.5 psi) for aircraft at 13. Low Differential Pressurisation:      Defined as no greater than 0.65 bar (9. o 0.

Windscreen angle involves compromise between aerodynamics. Starting point for front fuselage layout is often satisfactory position for pilot’s eye.1 .0 x fuselage diameter (subsonic). Cross-Section Shape – Subsonic Aircraft:  Not too critical aerodynamically. Important parameter for determining tail upsweep angle is ground clearance required for take-off and landing rotation.  Nose Shape:       Should not be unduly “bluff”. Typically 12o to 15o. Both drag and mass heavily influenced by surface area. tail shape/length.1 to 2. Require absence of steps and minimum number of excrescences. Tail Shape:     Smooth change in section required. from maximum section area to ideally zero. nose shape & length. Fundamental differences between subsonic and supersonic applications. but should: o avoid sharp corners o provide fairings for protuberances Constant cross-section preferable for optimized volume utilization and ease of manufacture. Local changes in cross-section needed to accommodate windscreen panels.5 m2 each.P a g e | 90 Fuselage Aerodynamics:      Aim is to achieve reasonably streamlined form together with minimum surface area to meet required internal volume. Aircraft Design Project . Windscreen panel sizes should be less than 0. Minimisation of base area especially important for transonic/supersonic aircraft. o 4 x fuselage diameter (supersonic). Concerned with: cross-section shape. bird-strike. overall length. reflection and visibility requirements. Reasonable nose length is about: o 1.

From the above given locations of wings. Horizontal Surface:   Efficiency affected by wing downwash. Top-mounted wing minimises trailing vortex drag. o Suitable placement of overall CG. thus vertical location relative to wing important.5 to 3. Wing Location . Low wing gives improved landing gear stowage & more usable flap area. Aircraft Design Project . Empennage Layout Vertical Surface:  Single.1 .0 x diameter (subsonic) o 6 to 7 x diameter (supersonic) Centre Fuselage & Overall Length . the one chosen is the Low wing configuration which gives improved landing gear stowage & more usable flap area.P a g e | 91  Typical tail section lengths are: o 2. drag for streamlined body with fineness ratio In reality. due to: o Need to utilise internal volume efficiently. especially good for low-speed aircraft. central fin most common arrangement.Aerodynamics Considerations:    Mid-wing position gives lowest interference drag. especially well for supersonic aircraft. positioned as far aft as possible. typical value is around 10. o Requirement for sufficiently large moment arm for stability/control purposes.Subsonic Aircraft:   Theoretically minimum (length/diameter) of 3. Usually mounted higher than wing except on high wing design or with small moment arm – low tail can give ground clearance problems.

 Auxiliary power unit (APU) commonly located at extreme rear of fuselage on transport aircraft.  Location of radar. TYPICAL FLIGHT DECK LAYOUT: Aircraft Design Project .  Provision necessary for adequate volume in correct location with ease of access. etc also important o Sensors often have to face forward/down in aircraft nose.P a g e | 92 Avionics & APU:  Including navigation. communications and flight control/management equipment.1 . aerials. o Long range search & early warning scanners sometimes located on fuselage.

26 5. DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS Overall Length (m) Fuselage Width (m) Cabin Width (m) Length/Width VALUES 55.456 SEATING ARRANGEMENT: Aircraft Design Project .P a g e | 93 SEATING ARRANGEMENTS:  Typical split of classes: o 8% first.0 5. 13% business.0 10. 79% economy BAGGAGE AND FREIGHT: It is to be found graphically the following parameters were estimated for the aircraft designed.1 .

1 .P a g e | 94 PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS Aircraft Design Project .

• A first-order approximation for ground roll take-off distance may be made from: 𝑆𝐿𝑂 = • • • 1. 𝑆𝐿𝑂 = 𝑔𝜌𝑆𝐶𝐿.7 x Vlo.02 for smooth paved surface.lift-off to specified height (35 ft FAR. Slo may be reduced by increasing T.0 + 2 𝜋𝐴𝑒 • Where  accounts for drag reduction when in ground effect: 16𝑕 2 𝑏 16𝑕 2 + 𝑏 Ø= 1 • • Where h = height above ground.rest to lift-off (SLO) – Airborne distance . rolling resistance and ground effect terms.P a g e | 95 PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS TAKE-OFF PERFORMANCE: • Distance from rest to clearance of obstacle in flight path and usually considered in two parts: – Ground roll . In the above equation: 2 1 2 ∅𝐶𝐿 𝐷 = 𝜌𝑉 𝑆 𝐶𝐷. An improved approximation for ground roll take-off distance may be made by including drag.max (high lift devices relate to latter two). b = wing span.2 x Vstall) when it will then be rotated. Aircraft Design Project .44𝑊 2 𝑇 − 𝐷 + 𝜇𝑟 𝑊 − 𝐿 𝑎𝑣 • • The bracketed term will vary with speed but an approximation may be made by using an instantaneous value for when V = 0.𝑚𝑎𝑥 1.1 .𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑇 • This shows its sensitivity to W (W2) and  (1/ 2 since T also varies with ). The aircraft will accelerate up to lift-off speed (Vlo = about 1.44𝑊 2 𝑔𝜌𝑆𝐶𝐿. S or Cl. 0. 50 ft others). r = 0.1 for grass.

508×{(3×320000 )−[54482 .8×1.72×2.14×8.2 m/s Aircraft Design Project .86)2 × 400.81)2 9.32 2 + (16× )2 58.81 R/Cmax = (𝑇𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙 −𝐷𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙 ) 𝑊 = R/Cmax = 20.15×60.1 .508 2 3.7 × 1.72 (0.225×400.6+.7 ]} Take-off runway distance = 1018.6×0.38m CLIMBING • • Consider aircraft in a steady unaccelerated climb with vertical climb speed of Vc.55) 280792 ×9.55 −(40382 .02 280792 ×9.8 D = 2 × 1.2 × 66.225 × (0.2314 0.6 N Slo = 1.0030 + ) = 54482.32 16× 1 = 0.81−1941627 .P a g e | 96 CALCULATION: Ø= 1 2 2 58. Force balance gives: 𝐿 = 𝑊 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛾𝑐 𝑇 = 𝐷 + 𝑊 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝛾𝑐 𝑉 = 𝑐 (𝑇 − 𝐷) × 𝑉 𝑊 3×320000 ×60.44×(280792 ×9.2314 ×2.

Turn radius (R) and turn rate () are good indicators of aircraft maneuverability.1 .1)  R = V2 / (g (n2 . In the turn. Vertical pull-up manoeuvre. • Three of the more common turns will be considered here in simplistic terms: – – – • Constant altitude banked turn.1)) and  = V/R = (g (n2 .1)) / V CALCULATION: W = Lcos Let  = 300 n = 𝑊 = 1.1) = (n2 . In the case of a commercial transport aircraft.16 m  = 𝑅 = 0.1547 R= V2 g n2 − 1 𝑉 𝐿 = 10357. Vertical pull-down manoeuvre. n = L/W = sec > 1 and is therefore determined by bank angle. V2 / (Rg) = tan = (sec2  . CONSTANT ALTITUDE BANKED TURN • In steady condition: – • T=D Force balance gives: – – W = mg = Lcos Fr = mV2/r = Lsin • • • • • • •  tan  = V2/(Rg) So for given speed and turn radius there is only one correct bank angle for a coordinate (no sideslip) turn. Maneuverability equations simplified through use of normal load factor (n) = L/W.P a g e | 97 MANOEUVRES / TURNING FLIGHT An aircraft is capable of performing many different types of turns and manoeuvres.0234 rad/s Aircraft Design Project . it is capable of performing only a constant altitude banked turn and not any vertical pull-up or pull-down manoeuvre.

from touch-down to rest.transitional manoeuvre with airspeed reduced from about 1.814o LANDING PERFORMANCE APPROACH & LANDING • Consists of three phases: – – – Airborne approach at constant glide angle (around 3o) and constant speed. Aircraft Design Project . Force balance gives:   1   tan 1   L D   tan 1  1  15    3. Flare .P a g e | 98 GLIDING Similar to the steady unaccelerated case but with T = 0.3 Vstall down to touch-down speed.1 . Ground roll .

81−2278744 . r is higher than for take-off since brakes are applied .69𝑊 2 𝑇𝑅 + 𝐷 + 𝜇𝑟 𝑊 − 𝐿 • • 𝑎𝑣 CALCULATION: D = 2 × 1.058×{ 3×320000 +[76876 .8×1.72×3.225×400.225 × (0.4 for paved surface.2314 ×3.058 2 3.55)2 × 400.𝑚𝑎𝑥 1.1 .3 x Vstall.69×(280792 ×9.72 (0.3 × 60.7 x touch-down speed (Vt or V2) and Vt is assumed as 1.7 × 1.8 ) = 76876.P a g e | 99 • Ground roll landing distance (s3 or sl) estimated from: 𝑆𝐿𝑂 = 𝑔𝜌𝑆𝐶𝐿.7 ]} Landing Runway distance = 710.14×8.use r = 0.7+0. If thrust reversers (Tr) are applied.81)2 9.6×0.𝑚𝑎𝑥 1.4 280792 ×9.7 N Sl = 1.0030 + 1 0.69𝑊 2 𝐷 + 𝜇𝑟 𝑊 − 𝐿 𝑎𝑣 • Where Vav may be taken as 0.3 m Aircraft Design Project . use: 𝑆𝐿𝑂 = 𝑔𝜌𝑆𝐶𝐿.

P a g e | 100 3-VIEW DIAGRAM Aircraft Design Project .1 .

32m 55m 15.1 .7m Aircraft Design Project .P a g e | 101 3-VIEW DIAGRAM 58.

P a g e | 102

Aircraft Design Project - 1

P a g e | 103

Aircraft Design Project - 1

P a g e | 104

CONCLUSION

Aircraft Design Project - 1

presence of mind and the application of each one of them at the appropriate time. The scientific society always looks for the best product design. creativity. Aircraft Design Project . A design never gets completed in a flutter sense but it is one step further towards ideal system.1 . This involves the strong fundamentals in science and mathematics and their skilful applications. But during the design of this aircraft. We have enough hard work for this design project. which is a tough job endowed upon the designer.P a g e | 105 CONCLUSION Design is a fine blend of science. we learnt a lot about aeronautics and its implications when applied to an aircraft design. Design of anything needs experience and an optimistic progress towards the ideal system.

1 .P a g e | 106 BIBLIOGRAPHY Aircraft Design Project .

Raymer WEBSITE REFERENCES 1. 6.airliners. 4.com www. 6. 7.worldaircraftdierctory.net And other websites related to design of aircrafts.P a g e | 107 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. 3.D. 2. 2. www.1 .com www.airbus.com www. 5. 5.D.Anderson Aerodynamics by Clancy Fundamentals of Aerodynamics by J.gov www.org www. Aircraft Design Project . P.Anderson The Design of the Aeroplane by Darrol Stinton Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach by Daniel. Introduction to Flight by J.wikipedia.boeing. 3.naca/aerofoil. 4.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.