You are on page 1of 76

GENERAL AVITON DOUBLE ENGINE

PASSENGER AIRCRAFT
Aircraft design lab - i

Submitted by

ABBAS.S
(090101130001)
Banu priya . p
(090101130008)
Dinesh . r
(090101130014)
Dinesh prabu . m
(090101130015)

AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING
KARPAGAM INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,COIMBATORE.

Karpagam institute of technology


Coimbatore-105

KARPAGAM INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

COIMBATORE-641 105

DEPARTMENT: AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING

Certified

that

this

is

the

bonafide

record

of

work

done

by in the Aircraft Design


Laboratory-I of this institution, as prescribed by Anna University,
for the Third Year / sixth Semester during the year 2011-2012.

Staff-in-charge
Head of the Department
REGISTER No:
Submitted for the Third year / Sixth semester Examination of this
Institution conducted on
Internal Examiner
External Examiner

INDEX
MARKS
EXPT
. NO.

DATE

NAME OF THE
EXPERIMENT

PAGE
NO

Preparat
ion

Recor
d

V
i
v
a

Tot
al

INITIA
L OF
THE
STAFF

CONTENTS

List of symbols

Introduction

Literature survey

10

Weight estimation

24

Engine selection

32

Airfoil selection

33

Wing design

35

Wetted area calculation

40

Drag estimation

48

Lift estimation

54

Takeoff and landing distance calculation

64

Three views of aircraft

70

Reference

80

LISTOF SYMBOLS

R -Range
V -Velocity
C -specific fuel consumption
E -Loitering time
L/D -lift to drag ratio
V alt -Velocity at altitude
alt -Density at altitude
S - wing surface area

b - wing span
alt -coefficient of viscosity at altitude
C HT -Horizontal tail volume coefficient
LHT - Horizontal tail arm moment
S HT - Horizontal tail area
S W -Wing area
CW

-Wing mean chord

LVT -Vertical tail arm moment


S VT

Vertical tail area

CVT -Vertical tail volume coefficient


bW

-Wing span

S W -Wing area
VTO - Vertical take-off distance
STO - Take-off distance
FTO - Take-off thrust
VA - Approach Velocity

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

BASIC DESIGN PROCESS:-

An airplane design is both an art and a science. Airplane design is an intellectual


engineering process of creating on paper a flying machine to
Meet specifications established by users
Pioneer innovative, new ideas and technology.
The design process is an intellectual activity developed via experience, by attention paid to
successful airplane designs that have been used in the past and by design procedures and
databases that are a part of every airplane manufacturer.
PHASES OF AIRPLANE DESIGN:From the time when an airplane materializes as a new thought to the time the finished product is
ready, the complete design undergoes three distinct phases in perfect sequences which are
Conceptual design
Preliminary design
Detail design
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN:The design process starts with a set of specifications or much less frequently to desire to
implement pioneering. There is a concrete goal where we designers are aiming at. The first step
towards it is conceptual design. Within a fuzzy latitude, overall shape, size, weight are
determined for the potential user.
The product of the conceptual design phase is layout of airplane configuration on paper. This
drawing has flexible lines, which can be slightly changed. However we get a detailed account of
the layout configuration at the end of this phase. The major drivers during the conceptual design
process are aerodynamics, propulsion and flight performance.
Structural and control system considerations are not dealt in detail but however they are not dealt
in detail but however they are not totally absent. The designer is influenced by qualitative
aspects. No part of the design process is carried out in total vacuum unrelated to other parts.
PRELIMINARY DESIGN:This phase includes only minor changes to be made in the configuration layout. There is serious
control and structural system analysis and design takes place. During this phase substantial wind
tunnel testing will be carried out and major computational fluid dynamics (CFD) calculations. At
the end of the phase, the airplane configuration is frozen and defined. The drawing process is
called lofting. This process makes precise shape of outside skin of airplane making certain all
sections fit together.

The end of the phase is the decision if the airplane is to be manufactured or not. It is no longer a
critical condition where you bet your company on full scale development of a new airplane.
DETAIL DESIGN:This phase is literally the nuts and bolts phase of airplane design. The aerodynamic, propulsion,
structures, performance, flight control analysis are over in the preliminary phase. The airplane is
to be fabricated and machined. The size, number and location of rivets, fasteners are determined
now. Flight simulators are developed. At the end of this phase, the aircraft is ready to be
fabricated.
THE SEVEN INTELLECTUAL PIVOT POINTS FOR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN:The overall conceptual design is anchored b seven intellectual pivot points seven factors that
anchor the conceptual design thought process. They allow different, detailed thinking to reach
out in all directions from each point.
REQUIREMENTS:The requirements are given by the people who are going to buy the customers. For other
aircrafts, these requirements are usually set by the manufacturer in full appreciation of needs of
owner. Requirements of one airplane are different from the other. There can be no stipulated
specific standard. There must be established requirements that serve as impinge off point for
design process. The requirements that are frequently stipulated are:

Range
Takeoff distance
Stalling velocity
Endurance
Maximum velocity
Rate of climb

For dog fighting combat, maximum turn rate and minimum turn radius

Maximum load factor


Service ceiling
Cost
Reliability and maintainability
Maximum size.

SEVEN INTELEECTUAL PIVOT POINTS FOR DESIGN

REQUIREMENTS

WEIGHT OF AIRPLANE FIRST ESTIMATE

CRITICAL PERFORMANCE PARAMETER

LIFT COEFFICENT (CLMAX)


LIFT-TO-DRAG RATIO (L/DMAX)
WING LOADING (W/S)
THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO(T/W)

CONFIGURATION LAYOUT SHAPE


ANDSIZE OF AIRPLANE ON DRAWING

BETTER WEIGHT ESTIMATE

NO

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS-DOES DESIGN


MEET REQUIREMENTS

YES
OPTIMIZATION IS IT BEST DESIGN?

YES

AIRCRAFT CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PROCESS

BETTER
NEW CONCEPT
SIZING AND
REQUIREMENT
IDEAS
TECHNOLOGY
AVAILABLE
INITIAL
PROPULSIO
PERFORMANCES
AERO
CONCEPT
GUESS
WEIGHTS
S FIRST

REFORMED SIZE
ETC
PRELIMNARY
PERFORMANCE
REVISED
WEIGH
LANDING
AER
PROPULSI
STRUCTUR

COS
T

CRITICAL PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS:Requirements stipulate the performance of the new aircraft. The critical parameters are:

Maximum lift coefficient


Lift to drag ratio (L/D)
Thrust to weight ratio (T/W)
Therefore the next step is to make first estimates of W/S and T/W to achieve the performance as
stipulated by requirements.
CONFIGURATION LAYOUT:The configuration layout is a drawing of the shape and size of the airplane as evolved till stage.
The critical performance parameters along with first weight estimate helps to draw the
configuration and approximate the size of the aircraft.
BETTER WEIGHT ESTIMATE:The overall size and shape of the airplane are better known now. There is now an improved
estimate of weight based on performance parameters. A more detailed estimate of fuel is required
now.
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS:This is the point where the configuration is judged if it can meet all original specifications. An
interactive process is initiated where the configuration is modified. The critical performance
parameters are adjusted for improving performance. In this stage, some mature decisions should
be made as the specifications or cost or unavailable technology.
Hence some specifications might be relaxed so that others might get higher priority.
OPTIMIZATION:When iterative process is over, it has produced a viable airplane. This leads to optimization. The
optimization analysis is carried out may be carried out by a systematic variation of different
parameters T/W, W/S and plotting the performance o graphs which can be found using a sizing
matrix or a carpet plot from which optimum design can be found.
WEIGHT OF AIRPLANCE FIRST ESTIMATE:No airplane can take off the ground unless it produces a lift greater than its weight. There
should be a first estimate of gross takeoff weight. The weight estimate is the next pivot point
after the requirements. Lilienthal, Langley and Wright brothers knew more weight means
more drag. This needed an engine with greater power and hence more weight.

CONSTRAINT DIAGRAM:A constraint diagram is constructed which identifies allowable solution space for airplane design.
A constraint diagram consists of plots o the sea level thrust to take off weight ratio versus wing
loading attakeoff weight ratioTO/WO versuswing loading at takeoff WO /S determined by
intellectual pivot point.

THE DESIGN WHEEL

SIZING AND
TRADE
STUDIES

DESIGN

REQUIREMENT

ANALYSIS

DESIGN
CONCEPT

LITERATURE SURVEY

LITERATURE SURVEY

It is very easy to design an aircraft if we have datas about already existing aircrafts of similar
type. It provides more satisfaction and avoids confusion while choosing some design parameters
for our aircraft. In this detailed survey some many important design drivers like aspect ratio,
wing loading, overall dimensions and engine specifications are determined for our reference. It
assists in proposing a new design and modification in our design which will improve the
performance of the proposed aircraft. This assures the performance of the aircraft as per the
design calculations and easy way of designing an aircraft within particular period of time. So in
this literature survey we have collected some ten already existing 20 seated jet transport aircraft
for our reference of design parameters. Mostly these aircrafts have similar characteristics in
many designs aspects which are shown in the table.

GEOMETRIC SPECIFICATION
S.NO

AIRCRAFTNAM
E

IAI Avara

ASPECTRATIO WINGSPAN(m)

10.06

20.96

WINGAREA(m^2
)
43.68

CASA C 212
Aviocar
De Havilland 300Series

10.03

20.28

41

10.05

19.8

39

De Havilland 400Series

10.05

19.8

39

PZL M28

12.25

22.06

39.72

Antonova An-38

11.48

22.06

42.4

Antonova An-28

12.19

22

39.7

8
9

Dornier 328
Dornier 228

11
9

20.98
16.97

40
32

10

Embraer EMB 120


brasilia

10

19.78

39.4

11

Embraer EMB 110


brasilia

8.07

15.33

29.10

12

Beechcraft 1900

9.52

17.64

32.67

13

Harbin y-12

9.52

17.24

34.67

14

Short sc.7 skyvan

11.15

19.79

35.12

15
16

Short-330
C-23A

12.3
12.3

22.76
22.78

42.1
42.1

17

C-23B/C

12.26

22.8

42.4

18

Jetstream 41

10.47

18.42

32.4

19

Embraer 123
vector

11.5

17.72

20

PZL M28

12.25

22.06

S.NO

AIRCRAFTNAME

27.2

LENGTH(m)

39.72
HEIGHT(m)

IAI Avara

12.69

5.21

16.20

6.3

15.77

5.93

CASA C 212 Aviocar


De Havilland 300Series
De Havilland 400Series

15.77

4.9

PZL M28

13.16

5.06

Antonova An-38

15.67

4.6

Antonova An-28

12.98

7.24

Dornier 328
Dornier 228

21.11

4.86

16.56

6.35

20

4.92

11

Embraer EMB 120


brasilia
Embraer EMB 110
brasilia

15.10

4.72

12

Beechcraft 1900

17.62

5.68

13

Harbin y-12

18.86

4.6

14

Short sc.7 skyvan

12.21

4.95

15

Short-330
C-23A

17.69

4.95

17.69

17.7

5.74

19.25

5.97

18.09

4.9

11.4

4.7

10

16
C-23B/C
17
Jetstream 41
18
Embraer 123 vector
19
20

PZL M28

WEIGHT SPECIFICATION

AIRCRAFTNAME

EMPTY
WEIGHT(kg)

MAX. TAKE OFF


WEIGHT(kg)

IAI Avara

3999

6804

3780

7700

3400

5670

CASA C 212 Aviocar


De Havilland 300Series
De Havilland 400Series

3628

5670

PZL M28

4100

7500

Antonova An-38

5300

9500

Antonova An-28

3900

6100

Dornier 328
Dornier 228

8920

13990

3739

6600

7070

11500

3393

5900

S.NO

11

Embraer EMB 120


brasilia
Embraer EMB 110
brasilia

12

Beechcraft 1900

4732

7764

13

Harbin y-12

2840

5300

14

Short sc.7 skyvan

3331

5670

15

Short-330
C-23A

6680

10387

6440

10387

7276

11610

6416

10880

6230

7711

10

16
C-23B/C
17
Jetstream 41
18
Embraer 123 vector
19

20

PZL M28

3628

7500

POWERPLANT SPECIFICATION
S.NO

AIRCRAFTNAME

IAI Avara

CASA C 212 Aviocar


De Havilland 300-Series

POWER PLANT(hp)

THRUST
POWER(kw)

Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A

559

Garrett AiResearch TPE-331

617

Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A

559

Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A

507

Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A

820

De Havilland 400-Series
4
5

PZL M28

Antonova An-38

Honeywell TPE331

1118

Antonova An-28

Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A

720

Dornier 328
Dornier 228

Garrett AiResearch TPE-331

11
12

Embraer EMB 120


brasilia
Embraer EMB 110
brasilia
Beechcraft 1900

13

10

Garrett AiResearch TPE-331


Pratt &Whitney Canada PW118

578
1340

Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A


Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A

559
955

Harbin y-12

Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A

462

14

Short sc.7 skyvan

Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A

533

15
16

Short-330
C-23A
C-23B/C

Garrett AiResearch TPE-331


Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A

893
894

Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A

1062

AlliedSignal TPE331

1250

Garret TPF351-20A

969

17
Jetstream 41
18
Embraer 123 vector
19

20

PZL M28

Pratt &Whitney Canada PT6A

AIRCRAFTNAME
S.NO

WING
LOADING(kg/m^2)

820

CREW

2
1

IAI Avara

155.77

187.8

145.38

CASA C 212 Aviocar


De Havilland 300Series
De Havilland 400Series

145.38

PZL M28

188.8

Antonova An-38

224

Antonova An-28

146

Dornier 328
Dornier 228

349.75
206.25

11

Embraer EMB 120


brasilia
Embraer EMB 110
brasilia

12

Beechcraft 1900

237.65

13

Harbin y-12

152.87

14

Short sc.7 skyvan

136.6

15

Short-330
C-23A

247

247

274

10

16

291.87

202.75

C-23B/C
17

Jetstream 41
18

336

284

188.8

Embraer 123 vector


19
20

PZL M28

PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION
S.NO

AIRCRAFTNAME

MAXIMUM
SPEED(km/h)

SERVICE
SEILING(km/h)

IAI Avara
CASA C 212 Aviocar

326

7620

370

7925

314

7620

314

7620
7620

De Havilland 300Series
De Havilland 400Series

PZL M28

355

Antonova An-38

405

Antonova An-28

355

6000

Dornier 328
Dornier 228

620

9455

433

8535

608

9085

382

6550

11

Embraer EMB 120


brasilia
Embraer EMB 110
brasilia

12

Beechcraft 1900

546

7620

13

Harbin y-12

328

7000

14

Short sc.7 skyvan

324

6858

15

Short-330
C-23A

352

6400

10

16

352

3500

400

4252

546

7925

593

10670

355

7620

C-23B/C
17
Jetstream 41
18
Embraer 123 vector
19
20

PZL M28

AIRCRAFTNAME

RANGE(km)

RATE OF CLIMB

S.NO
6.6
1

IAI Avara

1056

CASA C 212 Aviocar


De Havilland 300-Series

1811

8.3

1690

8.1

1690

8.1
11

3
De Havilland 400-Series
4
5

PZL M28

1500

Antonova An-38

1750

Antonova An-28

510

Dornier 328
Dornier 228

1850

12

1111

7.5

1750

8.3

1964

8.3

11

Embraer EMB 120


brasilia
Embraer EMB 110
brasilia

12

Beechcraft 1900

707

13.28

13

Harbin y-12

1340

8.1

14

Short sc.7 skyvan

1200

8.3

10

15

Short-330
C-23A

16

695

1239

1907

1433

11.2

1852

8.3

C-23B/C
17
Jetstream 41
18
Embraer 123 vector
19
20

PZL M28

1500

Speed vs Aspect ratio


14
12
10
8

Aspect Ratio

ASPECT RATIO

6
4
2
0
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650

speed

Speed Vs Service ceiling


12
10
8

Service Ceiling

SERVICE CEILING(m)

4
2
0
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650

Speed

Speed Vs b/l
12
10
8

b/l

Rate of climb

4
2
0
250

300

350

400

450

Speed

500

550

600

650

Speed Vs Wing loading(kg/m2)


400
350
300
250

Wing Loading

200

wing loading(kg/m2)

150
100
50
0
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650

Speed

Speed Vs Range(m)
2500
2000
1500

Range

RANGE (km)

1000
500
0
250

300

350

400

450

Speed

500

550

600

650

Speed Vs Rate of climb


12
10
8

Rate of climb

Rate of climb

4
2
0
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650

Speed

RESULT:
From the above literature survey graphs and calculation,
1. Velocity Vs Range
Velocity=370km/h
Range=300km
2. Velocity Vs Service ceiling
Velocity=370km/h
Service ceiling=7925m
3. VelocityVs Wing loading
Velocity=370km/h
Wing loading =187.9kg/m2
4. Velocity Vsb/l

Velocity=370km/h
b/l=1.256
5. VelocityVs Aspect ratio
Velocity=370km/h
Aspect ratio=10.03
6. VelocityVs Rate of climb
Velocity=370km/h
Rate of climb=8.3m/s.

WEIGHT ESTIMATION

PRIMARY WEIGHT ESTIMATION

The major factor that determines the whole design of aircraft especially the selection of overall
weight, airfoil and power plant of the aircraft.
Total weight of an airplane is given by,
WTO =WC+WPL+WF+WE
Where,
WTO = Overall weight of the aircraft
WC = crew weight
WPL = weight of the payload
WF = weight of the fuel
WE = empty weight
To simplify the calculation, both fuel and empty weights can be expressed as fractions of the
total takeoff weight, i.e., Wf/WO. Equation

WF
WTO

WO = WC+WP+

)W +(

WE
WTO

TO

)W

TO

This can be solved for WTO as follows:

WTO

WF
WTO

)W (

WE
WTO

TO

WTO =

)W

TO

= WC+WPL

WC WPL
1 WF / WTO WE / WTO

Now WTO can be determined if (WF/WTO) and (WE/WTO) can be estimated.


These are described below.
According to our design, aircrafts capacity is 10 to 20 passengers. So,
WPL=WPASSENGERS+WBAGGAGE
Assuming that each passenger weight is 80 kg with 15 kg baggage, then the payload weight is,
WPay Load= 952= 190 kg.
Assuming that each crew weight is 80 kg with 15 kg baggage, then,
WCrew= (2 80) + (2 15)
= 190 kg
So,
WTO=

380
1-(W f/WTO) (WE / WTO )

MISSION PROFILE:-

From the figure the various stages of aircraft during mission is as follows,
1 start &warm up
2 Taxiing in the runway
3 Takeoff
4

Climb

Cruising

6 Loiter
7 Descent and
8 Landing.
For subsonic jet transport aircraft weight fuel fraction is,
(W8/W0) =( W1/W0)( W2/W1) ( W3/W2) ( W4/W3) ( W5/W4) ( W6/W5) ( W7/W6)
(W8/W7)
APPROXIMATE WEIGHT ESTIMATION:
Weight fraction for each profile in mission segment,
For Warm up,
(W1/W0) =0.995.
For Taxy,
(W2/W1) =0.997.

For Takeoff,
(W3/W2) =0.998.
For Climb,
(W4/W3) =0.992.
For Cruising,

(W5/W4) =exp

RC
V L / D

Where,
SYMBOL

DESIGN PARAMETERS

DESIGN VALUES

S
R
V
L/D
C
So,

range
velocity
lift to drag ratio
specific fuel consumption

(W5/W4) =exp -1811 0.5


102.7810

1811km
102.78m/s
10
0.5

= 0.414

For loiter,
Assume 10 minutes for loitering,

(W6/W5) =exp

EC
L / D

Where,
SYMBOL

DESIGN PARAMETERS

DESIGN VALUES

S
E
L/D

Loitering time
lift to drag ratio

12s
12

C
So,

(W6/W5) =exp

specific fuel consumption

[ -120.4 ]
12

=0.670
For descent,
(W7/W6) =0.993
For landing,
(W8/W7) =0.993
Then,
(WF/WTO) = (1.06 (1-W8/W0))
=0.775
Assume Empty Weight fraction,
(WE/WTO) = 0.56
So, overall weight,
W TO=

2600
1-(W f/WTO) (WE / WTO)

Approximate Overall weight= 7761.2 kg

0.4

RESULT:
Thus the final Takeoff weight of the proposed aircraft was estimated using FUEL FRACTION
METHOD were as follows,

WAPPROXIMATE

=7761.2 kg.

ENGINE SELECTION

ENGINE SELECTION

h/WTO Ratio for General Aviation- twin turboprop engine is 0.04


Overall weight of aircraft WTO =7761.2 kg.
Then,
Hp=0.17*7761.2*(746*1000)
=984.27 kw.

So, the powerneeded=984.27kw


From the literature survey the nearest value of the thrust corresponding aircraft is Walter Vega

The Walter Vega has the following characteristics,

Thrust per engine =984.27kw


Number of engine = 2
Type of engine =Garrett Ai Research TPE
Total thrust
=984.27kw

RESULT:
Name of engine selected=Garrett Ai Research TPE
Number of engine = 2
Total thrust
= 984.27kw

AIRFOIL SELECTION

AIRFOIL SELECTION
The airfoil is the main aspect and is the heart of the airplane. The airfoils affects the cruise speed
landing distance and take off, stall speed and handling qualities and aerodynamic efficiency during
the all phases of flight
Aerofoil Selection is based on the factors of Geometry & definitions, design/selection, families/types,
design lift coefficient, thickness/chord ratio, lift curve slope, characteristic curves.
The following are the airfoil geometry and definition:
Chord line: It is the straight line connecting leading edge (LE) and trailing edge (TE).
Chord (c): It is the length of chord line.
Thickness (t): measured perpendicular to chord line a % of it (subsonic typical 12%).
Camber (d): It is the curvature of section, perpendicular distance of section mid-points from chord
line as a % of it (sub sonically typically 3%).
Angle of attack (): It is the angular difference between chord line and airflow direction.
The following are airfoil categories:
Early it was based on trial & error.
NACA 4 digit is introduced during 1930s.
NACA 5-digit is aimed at pushing position of max camber forwards for increased C Lmax.
NACA 6-digit is designed for lower drag by increasing region of laminar flow.
Modern it is mainly based upon need for improved aerodynamic characteristics at speeds just below
speed of sound.
NACA 4 Digit
1st digit: maximum camber (as % of chord).
2nd digit (x10): location of maximum camber (as % of chord from leading edge (LE)).
3rd & 4th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord).

NACA 5 Digit
1st digit (x0.15): design lift coefficient.
2nd & 3rd digits (x0.5): location of maximum camber (as % of chord from LE).
4th & 5th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord).
NACA 6 Digit
1st digit: identifies series type.
2nd digit (x10): location of minimum pressure (as % of chord from leading edge (LE)).
3rd digit: indicates acceptable range of CL above/below design value for satisfactory low drag
performance (as tenths of CL).
4th digit (x0.1): design CL.
5th & 6th digits: maximum section thickness (%c)
The airfoil that is to be used is now selected. As indicated earlier during the calculation of the lift
coefficient value, it becomes necessary to use high speed airfoils, i.e., the 6x series, which have been
designed to suit high subsonic cruise Mach numbers.

The airfoil, in many respects, is the heart of the airplane. The airfoil affects the cruise speed,
take-off and landing distances, stall speed, handling qualities, and overall aerodynamic efficiency
during all phases of flight.
Much of the Wright brothers success can be traced to their development of airfoils using a wind
tunnel of their own design, and the in-flight validation of those airfoils in their glider
experiments if 1901-1902. More recently, the low speed airfoils develop by peter Lissaman
contributed much to the success of the man-powered Gosssmer Condor, and the airfoils designed
by John Rontz were instrumental to the success of Burt Rutans radical designs.
The airfoil can be selected for based on the cruising Reynolds number(Re) as follows,
Re =
V alt =Velocity at altitude
alt = Density at altitude
C

S
b

=(s/b)
= wing surface area
= wing span

V alt alt C
alt

alt
And,from standard air table at altitude 4200 m,
T alt =236.23 k.
alt

=5.3195 kg/m2

V alt

=M (R T alt )
1.4 287 236.23

=0.3

=92.42 m/s
Aspect ratio of our aircraft=10.03
From the literature survey for that aspect ratio,
Area=41 m2
Span=20.28 m
And, c =s/b =2.02m-1
And

T alt
= 0 ( T 0 )

alt

17.5 105 (

0.75

236.23
)
288

4
=1.508 10

So, Re =

92.425.3195 2.02
1.508 104

5
=6.6 10

0.75

For the Reynoldss number approximately 6.6 10

,from the THEORY OF WING SECTION

by ABBOT following data can be obtained.


Airfoil type
NACA 65(4)-420

Maximum lift coefficient


1.16

Minimum drag coefficient


0.005

NACA 65(3)-418

1.25

0.0045

NACA 64(2)-415

1.2

0.010

Station

Ordinates
90

2.35

95

1.12

100

1.25

-1.781

2.5

-2.36

-3.217

7.5

-3.87

10

-4.41

15

-5.25

20

-5.877

25

-6.334

30

-6.648

40

-6.856

50

-6.362

60

-4.334

70

-2.603

80

-1.743

90

-0.282

95
100

-0.144
-0

NACA 65-418

RESULT:
From the above analysis NACA 65-418 series type airfoil was selected for our aircraft design.

WING DESIGN

WINGDESIGN
The front of the airfoil is defined by a leading-edge radius that is tangent to the upper and lower
surfaces. An airfoil designed to operate in supersonic will have a sharp or nearly- sharp leading
edge to prevent a drag producing bow shock.
The chord of the airfoil is the straight line from the leading edge to the trailing edge. It is very
difficult to build a perfectly sharp trailing edge, so most airfoils have a blunt trailing edge with
some small finite thickness.
Camber refers to the curvature characteristic of most airfoils. The Mean camber line is the
line equidistant from the upper and lower surface. Total airfoil camber is defined as the
maximum distance of the mean camber line from the chord line, expressed as a percent of the
chord.
In earlier days, most airfoils had flat bottoms, and it was common to refer to the upper surface
shape as the camber. Later, as airfoils with curved bottom came into usage, they were known as
Double cambered airfoils. Also, an airfoil with a concave lower surface was known as UnderCambered airfoils. These terms are technically obsolete but still in common usage.
The thickness distribution of the airfoil is the distance from the upper surface to the lower
surface, measured perpendicular to the mean camber line, and is function of the distance from
the leading edge. The Airfoil thickness ratio refers to the maximum thickness of the airfoil
divided by its chord.
For many aerodynamic calculations, it has been traditional to separate the airfoil into its
thickness distribution and a zero-thickness camber line. The former provides the major influence
on the profile drag, where as the latter provides the major influence upon the lift and the drag due
to lift.
When an airfoil scaled in thickness the camber line must remain unchanged, so the scaled
thickness distribution is added to the original camber line to produce the new, scaled airfoil. In a

similar fashion, an airfoil which is having its camber changed is broken into its camber line and
thickness distribution. The camber line is scaled to produce desire maximum camber; then the
original thickness distribution is added to obtain the new airfoil. In this fashion, airfoil can be
reshaped to change either the profile drag or lift characteristics, without greatly affecting the
other.
Fuselage:
Once the takeoff gross weight has been estimated, the fuselage, the wing. And tail can be sized.
Many methods exist to initially estimate the required fuselage size. For certain types of aircraft,
the fuselage size is determined strictly by real world constraints. For example, a large
passenger aircraft devotes most of its length to the passenger compartment. Once the number of
passengers is known and the number of seats across is selected, the fuselage length and diameter
are essentially determined.
Wing:
Actual wing size can now be determined simply as the takeoff weight divided by takeoff wing
loading. Remember that this reference area of the theoretical, trapezoidal wing, and includes the
area extending into the aircraft center line.
Tail Volume Co-efficient:
For the initial layout, the historical approach is used for the estimation of the tail size. The
effectiveness of a tail in generating a moment about the centre of gravity is proportional to the
force produced by the tail and to the tail moment arm. The primary purpose of the tail is to
counter the moments produced by the wing.

1. Length of fuselage:
LFU = a woc
= 0.37 7761.2

0.5

= 10.87 m.

2. Surface area:
Aspect ratio of our aircraft=10.03

From the literature survey for that aspect ratio,


Area=41 m2
Span=20.28 m.

3.Root:

C tip chord

C root chord

The taper ratio can be defined as,


tip chord
= root chord
And the value for the taper ratio in general from design book is0.4
2s
So, C root chord = b(1+ )
2 41
= 20.28 (1+ 0.5)

=2.696 m.

And, Ctip chord = C root chord


=1.348 m.
4. Aerodynamic mean chord:
CW

2
1+ + 2

C root chord
( (1+ ) )
3

2
1+ 0.5 ..+ 0.52

2.696
3
( 1+ 0.5)

CW =2.097 m.

And, Y =

b (1+2 )
6 (1+ )
20.28 (1+1)
6 (1+0.5)

=3.76 m.

5. Vertical and horizontal volume coefficient:


L HT S HT
CHT = C W SW
Where,
C HT -Horizontal tail volume coefficient
LHT - Horizontal tail arm moment
S HT - Horizontal tail area

SW

-Wing area

CW

-Wing mean chord

LHT

Since,
LHT

is 25% of the fuselage length,


LFU

= 0.25

= 0.2510.87
= 2.7175 m.
For our design,
S W =41 m2
CW =2.097 m.
From Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach by Daniel.P.Raymer 3rd Ed,
C HT =0.9So,

SHT=

SHT=

C W SW C HT
LHT
2.097 41 0.9
= 28.47 m2
2.7175

And,
CVT

LVT S VT
= bW SW

Where ,
LVT -Vertical tail arm moment

S VT Vertical tail area


CVT -Vertical tail volume coefficient
bW

-Wing span

S W -Wing area
Since,

LVT

LVT

= 0.5

is 50% of the fuselage length,


LFU
= 0.510.87

=8.1525 m.
For our design,
S W = 41 m2.
bW = 20.28 m.
From Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach by Daniel.P.Raymer 3rd Ed,
CVT =0.08 m.
So,
S VT

bW SW C VT
=
LVT

20.28 41 0.08
8.1525

= 8.16 m2

RESULT:
Length of fuselage, LFU =10.87 m
Root, C tip chord =1.348 m
Aerodynamic mean chord, C_(W )=3.76 m
Vertical and horizontal volume coefficient,S_(VT )= 8.16 m2

WETTED AREA DETERMINATION

WETTED AREA DETERMINATION

Aircraft wetted area (Swet), the total exposed surface area, can be visualized as the area of the
external parts of the aircraft that would get wet if it were dipped into water. The wetted area must
be calculated for drag estimation, as it the major contributor to friction drag.
The wing and tail wetted areas can be approximated from their platforms. The wetted area is
estimated by multiplying the true view exposed plan form area is estimated by multiplying the
true view exposed planform area (S exposed) times a factor based upon the wing or tail thickness
ratio.
If a wing or tail were paper thin, the wetted area would be exactly twice the true plan form area.
The effect of finite thickness id to increase the wetted area, as approximated by the following
equations.
Note that the true exposed plan form area is the projected area divided by the cosine of the
dihedral angle.
If t/c 0.05,
S wet =2.003 S exposed
If t/c 0.05,
S wet= S exposed [1.977 + 0.52(t/c)]
The exposed area can be measured from the drawing in several ways. A professional designer
will have access to a planimeter a mechanical device for measuring areas. Use of the
planimeter is a dying art as the computer replaces the drafting board. Alternatively the area can
be measured by tracing onto graph paper and counting squares.
The wetted area of the fuselage can be initially estimated using just the side and top views of the
aircraft. The side and top view projected areas of the fuselage are measured from the drawing,
and the values are averaged.
For a long, thin body circular in cross section, this average projected area times will yield the
surface wetted area. If the body is rectangular in cross section, the wetted area will be four times
the average projected area. For typical aircraft the following equation provides a reasonable
approximation.
S wet=3.4 [(A top + A side) / 2) ]
A more accurate estimation of wetted area can be obtained by graphical integration using a
number of fuselage cross sections. If the perimeters of the cross sections are measured and

plotted Vs longitudinal locations, using the same units on the graph, then the integrated area
under the resulting curve gives the wetted area.
Perimeters can be measured using a professionals map-measure, or approximated using a
piece of scrap paper. Simply follow around the perimeter measurements should not include the
portions where components join, such as at the wing fuselage intersection. These areas are not
wetted.

WETTED AREA CALCULATION


1) For fuselage
s f =

d 2f
4

denotes its wetted calculation


From Airplane Design Part II by Dr.Johnroskam,

From wing design calculation

Now,

df =

s f =

10.87
7.2

Lf

=10.87 m,

=1.51 m,

2
d 2f
1.51
=1.79 m2
4
4 =

2) For wing
s w = t w bw
tw
A known relation, croot

= 0.1

From wing design calculation,

t w =0.12.696 = 0.2696 m.

c root is 2.696 m,

lf
d f for passenger twin Engine Aircraft is 7.2,

s w = 0.269620.28 =5.47 m2

3)For horizontal tail


s ht

t ht

bht

=.269616.898 =4.58 m2

t ht = t vt = 10 percent t w =0.10.2696 =0.02696


From Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach by Daniel P.Raymer,

b2ht
(AR)ht= s2 = 10.03
ht
Now,

bht = 10.0328.47 = 16.898 m


4) For vertical tail
b vt =

bht
2 =8.4945 m

s vt

b vt

t vt

= 8.49450.2696 =2.29 m2.

5) Engine area
d 2e
4

s engine =

0.755 2
=
4
=0.447 m2.

6) 1/4 flap deflection


= 15
For Single Engine range, (0.05 to 0.1)
The below is average of above range,

s = 0.075 m2

Since

d
d e = f = 1.51/2 =0.755 m
2

7) 3/4 flap deflection


= 45
For Single Engine range, (0.15 to 0.2)
The below is average of above range,

s = 0.175 m2

8) Undercarriage
s u =1.1 s engine
=1.10.447
=0.4917 m2

RESULT :

S.No

Component

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Fuselage
Wing
Horizontal tail
Vertical tail
Engine
1/4 flap
3/4 flap
Undercarriage

cd

s
0.03
0.08
0.008
0.008
0.01
0.04
0.035
0.0504

(m2)

cd s

1.79
5.47
4.556
2.278
0.447
0.075
0.175
0.4917

0.0522
0.3348
1.983210-3
9.8410-4
4.3610-3
310-3
6.12510-3
0.024110-3

DRAG ESTIMATION

DRAG ESTIMATION
DRAG:

Drag 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 (CD)

Amount of drag generated depends on:


oPlanform area (S), air density (), flight speed (V), drag coefficient (C D)
CD is a measure of aerodynamic efficiency and mainly depends upon:
o Section shape, planform geometry, angle of attack (), 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 forebodyand rear (base) drag
components.

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.

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.

CALCULATION:
Generally for jet aircrafts, it is given that
CD,0= 0.0045
e = 0.8
The general drag equation is given by,
C L2
1
C D , 0+
Ae )
= 2 2

For calculating , we use the formula,


2

16 h
(
)
b
2
=
16 h
1+(
)
b
Where h = height above ground,
b = wing span.
h=3m
b = 16.898 m

3
)
16.898
2 = 0.89
=
3
1+(16
)
16.898
(16

Drag at Cruise
= 5.3195 kg/ m

(at the cruising altitude of 10800m)

V = 102.77 m/s
S = 41 m2
CL(cruise) = 1.25 (from the wing and airfoil estimation)
Substituting all these values in the general drag equation,
2
2
D(cruise) = 1/25.3195 (102.77) 41 (0.0045+0.89 1.25 /3.1410.030.8)
Drag at cruise = 69450.3 N

Drag at Take-off
= 1.225 (at sea altitude)
V = 0.7 x Vlo= 0.7 x 1.2 x Vstall
S = 41 m2
CL(take-off) = 1.25 (flaps extended and kept at the take-off position of

200 )

Substituting all these values in the general drag equation,


2
2
D = 1/21.225 (47.82) 41 (0.0045+0.89 1.25 /3.1410.030.8)
Drag at take-off = 3462.792 N

Drag at Landing
= 1.225 (at sea altitude)
V = 0.7 x Vt = 0.7 x 1.3 x Vstall
S = 41m2
CL(landing) = 1.25 (flaps extended and kept at the landing position of

40 0 )

Substituting all these values in the general drag equation,


2
2
D = 1/21.225 (51.82) 41 (0.0045+0.89 1.25 /3.1410.030.8)

Drag at landing

RESULT:
Drag at cruise

= 69450.3 N

Drag at take-off = 3462.792 N


Drag at landing

= 4046.09 N

4046.09 N

LIFT ESTIMATION

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

Lift Coefficient (CL)


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

1 2
Lift =( 2 v S C L =qS C L
CL is a measure of lifting effectiveness and mainly depends upon:
Section shape, planform geometry, angle of attack (), compressibility effects
(Mach number), viscous effects (Reynolds number).
Generation of Lift
Aerodynamic force arises from two natural sources:
Variable pressure distribution.
Shear stress distribution.
Shear stress primarily contributes to overall drag force on aircraft.
Lift mainly due to pressure distribution, especially on main lifting surfaces, i.e.
wing.
Require (relatively) low pressure on upper surface and higher pressure on
lower surface.
Any shape can be made to produce lift if either cambered or inclined to flow
direction.
Classical aerofoilsection is optimum for high subsonic lift/drag ratio.

Pressure variations with angle of attack


Negative (nose-down) pitching moment at zero-lift (negative ).
Positive lift at =

0o .

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 .
Most lift from near LE on upper surface due to suction.

Lift Curves of Cambered and Symmetrical airfoils

CALCULATION:
General Lift equation is given by,

1 2
v S C L =qS C L
Lift=( 2
Lift at Cruise
= 5.3195 kg/ m

(at the cruising altitude of 10800m)

V = 102.77 m/s
S = 41 m2
CL(cruise) = 1.25 (from the wing and airfoil estimation)
Substituting all these values in the general lift equation,
L(cruise) = 1/25.3195102.77^2411.25
Lift at cruise = 1439684.7 N
Lift at Take-Off
= 1.225 (at sea altitude)
V = 0.7 x Vlo= 0.7 x 1.2 x Vstall
S = 41 kg/m2
CL(take-off) = 1.25 (flaps extended and kept at the take-off position of
Substituting all these values in the general lift equation,

20

L(take-off) = 1/21.225 (4782)

411.25

Lift at take-off = 71782.58


Lift at Landing
= 1.225 (at sea altitude)
V = 0.7 x Vt= 0.7 x 1.3 x Vstall
S = 41 kg/m2
CL(landing) = 1.25 (flaps extended and kept at the landing position of
Substituting all these values in the general lift equation,
2

L(landing) = 1/21.225 (56.94)

411.25

Lift at landing =101773.5

RESULT:
Lift at cruise

= 1439684.7 N

Lift at take-off

= 71782.58

Lift at landing

= 101773.5

40

TAKEOFF AND LANDING DISTANCE


CALCULATION

TAKEOFF AND LANDING DISTANCE CALCULATION


Take-off is initiated when the aircraft first starts to move forwards on the ground and
regarded as completed when aircraft has reach some prescribed altitude. The first stage of aircraft
consists of the V1 when the aircraft is still on the ground. This is known as ground run. During
this run speed varies and so the lift and hence also the reaction of the aircraft wheels with the
ground.

Take off distance:

V2

V1

Ground run

Transition

Climbing

V1 - Velocity to reach the transition from ground run.


V2 Velocity to reach the climbing level.
Take-off is initiated when the aircraft first starts to move forwards on the ground and regarded as
completed when aircraft has reach some prescribed altitude. The first stage of aircraft consists of
the V1 when the aircraft is still on the ground. This is known as ground run. During this run speed
varies and so the lift and hence also the reaction of the aircraft wheels with the ground.

( W-L) = Reaction Force (R).


Where - friction co- efficient,
W Weight.
Take off distance calculation:
Formula for take-off distance calculation is,
STO = (VTO)2
W
2g
FTO Dav - (W-Lav)
Where,
VTO - Vertical take-off distance
STO - Take-off distance
FTO - Take-off thrust
VTO = 1.2Vs
Vs = (2(W/S) / CL max
=(2*4782*9.81/1.225*55.2*1.25)^0.5
=247.53m/s
VTO = 1.2247.53

= 297.03 m/s
Vav =70% VTO
=0.7 297.03
=207.90 m/s
CL max = 3/4( CL max av) + (CL max)flap
=3/4 [1.25+0.2]
=1.08
L av = CL av 1/2 (Vav) 2 S
For 45 of angle of attack, (from the graph)
CL av = 0.175
Lav =0.1751/2 1.225 (207.90)2 41
= 189.9KN
CD av = CDO (take off) + K (CL av) 2 (from drag polar calculation)
= 0.03462 +0.055(0.175)2
= 0.03630

Dav = CD av V2av S
= 0.0363 0.5 1.225 (207.9)2 41
=3.9 KN
From thrust required calculation at altitude sea level,
FTO = 984.27 KN
= 0.03 to 0.05
So let us take =0.04
STO = (297.03)2
29.81
=46.316 m.

7761.29.81
984.27 3.9 - 0.03 (7761.29.81-189.9)

LANDING DISTANCE CALCULATIONS

The analysis of the landing performance of an airplane is somewhat analogous to that


for take-off, only reverse. Consider an airplane on a landing approach. The landing distance, as
sketched begins when the airplanes cleared an obstacle, which is taken to be50 ft in height.
The landing calculated as per FAR-25 instructions as follows,

(The notation used here is as shown above figure)

VA = 1.3 VSL
VA - Approach Velocity.
VSL =

(2W) / S CL max

CL max = (CL max) av + CL max


=1.3 + 0.7 = 2
Vs = (2(W/S) / CL max
=(2*44494.04*9.81/1.225*55.2*1.3)^0.5
=247.53m/s
=891.1knots

VA = 1.3891.1
=1158.4 knots.
Now, SLG =0.265 VSL2
=0.265 891.12
= 210425.6 feet.
And SL = 1.938 SLG
=1.938 210425.6
=407804 feet

RESULT:
Approach Velocity = 891.1knots.
SLG

= 210425.6 feet

Landing Distance

= 407804 feet

THREE VIEWS OF AN AIRCRAFT

FRONT
VIEW:

8.15
m

82 m

TOP
VIEW:

10.87m

82
m
SIDE
VIEW:

10.87
m

REFERENCE
TEXTS:
1. Theory of wing section.
By IRA H.ABBOT and ALBERT E.VON DOENHOFF.
2. Aircraft performance and design
By JOHN D.ANDERSON JR
3. Aircraft design: A conceptual Approach
By DANIEL P.RAYMER
WEBSITES:
www. janesalltheworldaircrafts.com
www.wiki.com/type of aircraft