ADITYA SILVEROAK

INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

PROJECT REPORT

ON

DESIGN & ANALYSIS OF WING

Semester III

Faculty guides: -

Prof. SABHNAM BANO

GROUP ID: 194422

SUBMITTED BY:

PAVAN.R. VERMA 181200101051

NILAY.J. SUTHAR 181200101046

TARUN.A. PANDEY 181200101022

TUSHAR.N. ACHARYA 191203101003

 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Pavan.R. Verma (181200101051), Nilay.J. Suthar (181200101046), Tarun.
A. Pandey (181200101022), Tushar.N. Acharya (191203101003) from Aditya Silver Oak
Institute of Technology. They have completed their Design Engineering under my guidance and
supervision. I further certify their report is a record of literature review related to their Design
Engineering.

Internal Guide:

Shabnam Bano

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Though this report is the result of our own hard work it would have not reached to absolute if
some of the respected personalities would have not helped us. We are very thankful &
acknowledge our deep sense of gratitude to these personalities. Prof. Shabnam Bano, we would
like to thank her for her moral courage. She was the source of encouragement and strengthened
us in accomplishment of this report. She taught us how to complete the task in a logical manner
in order to express our ideas effectively. She has been actively engaged in coaching us and has
used her valuable experience and time to guide us and provide valuable suggestion.

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page no.
I. Certificate
II. Acknowledgement
1 Introduction 4
1.1 What is the Wing?
1.2 Types of Wing
2 Design process 6
2.1 Literature Review
2.2 Design
3 Canvas 10
3.1 AEIOU Canvas
3.2 Mind Mapping canvas
3.3 Empathy Canvas
3.4 Ideation canvas
3.4 Product Development Canvas
References 14

3
CH-1 Introduction: -

1.1 What is the Wing?

A wing is type of fin that produces lift, while moving through air or some
other fluid. As such, wings have streamlined cross-sections that are
subject to aerodynamic forces and act as air foils.
1.2 Types of Wing:

Based on Planform

Based on location:

CH-2 Design process: -

4
 2.1 Literature Review
In cruising condition, Coefficient of lift at angle of attack 0º (C lα=0) should be higher as it

increases the overall lift and coefficient of moment ( C m) should be close to zero at cruising

angle for higher stability. Being concerned regarding abrupt fall in values of lift as it exceeds its

stall angle, it is preferred to select an aerofoil having higher stall angle with a smooth gradient

in lift in the operational range of α. The slope of C m vs α graph should be negative and in an

operational range of α, C mshould be positive for longitudinal stability. The aerofoil which has

Cl
the lower minimum coefficient of drag (C d ) and maximum is preferable. A trade off needs
min
Cd

to be established between the above-mentioned objective in order to achieve optimal result.

High wing configuration facilitates easy loading and unloading of payload providing more space

inside fuselage for payload. It will also increase the dihedral effect ( C lβ ¿ and increases the

lateral stability of an aircraft. The high wing will produce more lift compared with a mid and low

wing.[ CITATION MHS13 \l 2057 ]

Sir A. Lennon says that the aspect ratio for homebuilt aircraft should be between 4-7

and “The center of lift of each wing half is farther from the fuselage for high aspect ratio wings,

resulting in substantial increase in root bending loads”. So, structurally the wing roots need

reinforcing, owing both to narrower root chords and higher bending moment. In combination

of high wing and unswept, dihedral angle for high wing should be between 0º-2º. For

moderate-speed aircraft, wing loading should between 16-22. For aileron, the chord should be

0.25 times of wing root chord, and its span should be 0.35 times of semi-span of the wing and

for the flap, its chord should be 0.25 of wing root chord, its span should be 0.65 times of semi-

span.[ CITATION ALe05 \l 2057 ]

5
 2.5 2.2 DESIGN:
2

1.5
Cl

0.5
0
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
α
CL for GOE 226 CL for E423
fx 74 modsm

6
 Some airfoils like E423, Fx74 mod- -0.05
0.12
-10 -5 0 5 10 15
0.1
-0.1
sm, ch10, Goe 226, were selected and 0.08
-0.15
0.06

CM
CD
-0.2
0.04
compared. In selecting airfoils, the α C =0 l
0.02
-0.25
0
should be more negative, C d should be -10 -5 -0.30 5 10 15 20
AOA
CMCDfor
forGOE
GOE226
226 CD
CMfor
forE E423
423
minimum and the slope of C m Vs α the slope CMCDforfxFX
7474 modsm
modsm
Graph 1 Cl VS α
should have less gradient in operational range.

Fx74 have convincing characteristic but from a structural point of view, its tail section is very

thin, hence it was neglected. As per our requirement, GOE226 is most suitable aero foil that can

be deduced from Graph 1, Graph and Graph . For our aircraft, high wing position and

rectangular planform were implemented. As described above, the calculation for a range of

Graph 1 Cm VS α spans for 4 to 9 aspect ratio having 1.6510 to

1.9558 m span was done from this area of the wing was obtained. After determining wing area

put it into below equation and lift was calculated for a several combinations of span and aspect

ratio. Comparing the results, optimum combination of aspect ratio and span was obtained.

C=S/ b

Where, C = Mean Aerodynamic chord, S = area of wing, b = span

Graph 3 Cd VS α
1
L= ƍ V 2 S C L
2

Where, ƍ = altitude density, V = velocity

Reynolds number for the selected wing was calculated to be 3,48,070. The analysis for

1° and 2° dihedral was done, for additional lateral stability, 2° dihedral was selected. As

required lift was not generated at α =0, analysis for different α were done. Based on results,

the angle of incidence was selected as 2°.

e = 1.78 × ( 1−0.045× AR 0.68 )−0.64

7
 From equation, Ostwald efficiency is obtained which is 0.90070. The span of the

flaperon is decided as 0.90×semi-span and chord as a 0.25×root chord. Due to high Reynolds

number and planform of the wing, the winglets are necessary.

8
9
CH-3 CANVAS: -
3.1 AEIOU Canvas:

In this canvas basically we are talking about our project that in what kind of the
environment our project can be run and what kind of the users can use our
product and for what kind of the purpose they use our project or product.
Our topic is design and analysis of wing, wing designed is useful for the
Aeronautical Engineer, Students can use our wing for competition. There is also
saying about that from what kind of the material our project can be build, so our
wing is made up from the Metal, Wood.

3.2 Empathy
Canvas:
In this canvas
we are talking
about that
what kind of
the users can use
our product and
which
activities can
be done by our
product and who is the
stakeholders and
what is the story of our product.
Our product will be used by
students, industries,
aeronautical
engineers.

3.3 Ideation Canvas:

In this canvas talking

about who use our product and
10
 for what purpose and also what is possible solution for making our product
better as possible.
So for making our product better we take some pre-decisions like we
incorporated winglet to reduce the vortices hence reduce the drag and also gives
the goof lift distribution.

3.4 Product Development Canvas:

In this canvas we are talking about users, purpose, objects but there is one new
topic is that Customer Revalidation.
So, by the customer review we improve the design of our idea or product and
gain more efficiency from the product.

11
3.5 Mind Mapping:
In this canvas all the parameters like in what way we start our design ad in what way we
study all the literature and how we found all the problem and what way they overcome,
so this is the all over view of our design.

12
 Cad Modeling of Wing

References: -
[1] M. H. Sadraey, Aircraft Design System Engineering Approach, A John Wiley & Sons Ltd,
2013.
[2] A. Lennon, BASICS OF R/C MODEL AIRCRAFT DESIGN, Air Age Media Publication,
13
 2005.
[3] R. T. Whitcomb, “A DESIGN APPROACH AND SELECTED WIND TUNNEL
RESULTS AT HIGH SUBSONIC SPEEDS FOR WING TIP MOUNTED WINGLET,”
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), 1976.
[4] D. P. Raymer, AIRCRAFT DESIGN A CONCEPTUAL APPROACH, American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1999.

14