AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

LW
LW

LTLT

W Chapter 2
W Design Process
Aircraft
and
Take Off Mass Estimation
By T. G. Pai
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Design Process and Take Off Weight Estimation

Aircraft Design Process

Conceptual Design
Preliminary Design
Detail Design
Flight Test Evaluation
Aircraft is System of Systems
Take Off Weight Estimation
Aircraft Weight Break down
Mission Profile and Analysis
Statistical Correlation of WEmpty and WTO
Summary
2
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Design Process

3
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Major Milestones of Aircraft Project

4
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Phases of Aircraft Design and Scope of Work

Costs and
Effort Build up
Conceptual Design Phase Base Line design
(Feasibility Study)

Wind Tunnel Testing & CFD

Project Definition Phase
FEM Analysis and Structural Integrity
Stab & Control Analysis, Flight Simulation and HQ
Cost, Maintenance, Marketing
Manufacturing Process
Go Ahead?

5
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Design Flexibility

Process II: Design

flexibility over a longer
time

Process I : Slower in
expenditure in early stages

A B C D
Time
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Preliminary Design Flow Chart

(Lloyd Jenkinson and James Marchman)

7
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design
Funds Committed and Funds Spent
at Various Phases of Project

8
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Systems

9
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Systems

Classical Discipline based Systems

Onboard Aircraft Systems

Aircraft is a “System of Systems”

Multidisciplinary Design Optimization (MDO)

Systems Integration

10
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Systems

Classical Discipline based Systems

Aerodynamics
Structure (Airframe)
Propulsion

11
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Systems
Onboard Aircraft Systems

Flight Control System

Electrical System
Fuel System
Hydraulic System
Avionics System ( Communication, Navigation)
Cockpit
Air Data System
Environmental Control System
Landing Gear
Life Support System……
12
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Systems

Aircraft is a System of Systems belonging to different

disciplines

“Multidisciplinary Design Optimization (MDO)”

and “Systems Integration” play a major role in Aircraft
Design

13
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Take Off Weight Estimation

14
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Take Off Weight Estimation

(Mason, Virginia Tech/Nicolai)
Aircraft Mission Statement
Take off Weight as a design driver
Aircraft Weight break down

Statistical correlation between WTO and WEmpty

Aircraft Mission Profile and Fuel Weight Fraction

Design target and assumptions on (L/D)max, Engine TSFC,
Structural Technology Factor KS

Take off Weight Estimation

Pay Load Vs Range trade off for given WTO
Summary
15
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Design – Mission Statement

What is this Aircraft supposed to do?

How far does it go? How fast ? (Range and Speed)

What and how much does it carry? (Pay Load: Pax/Freight)
What are the Take off and Landing requirements?
Are there any Manoeuvre / Acceleration requirements?
What Design Standards or Specifications - MIL or FAR
must be met?

The set of answers to these questions essentially constitutes

Mission Statement and the Designers think of concepts to
do the job
16
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Basis for Sizing

Possible Design Drivers or Criteria:
Minimise
Direct Operating Cost (DOC)
Flyaway Cost or Acquisition Cost
Life Cycle Cost (LCC)
Take Off Gross Weight WTO

While cost is real Design Driver, it is hard to estimate the

cost in early design phase
For a given class of aircraft Cost/kg is similar. Therefore
minimising WTO seems to be a good choice of Design Driver
and also useful criterion for comparing any alternative
designs

17
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Weight Break Down

Gross Take Off Weight of Aircraft WTO may be broken

down under following broad categories:

Structural Weight: Wstru (includes basic equipment as per

Roskam’s data base)
Propulsion Weight: WProp
Fuel Weight: WFuel
Crew and related allowance Useful Load: W PL
Pax + Baggage + Cargo

WTO = WStru + WProp + WFuel + WPL

WPL = WTO - {WStru + WProp + WFuel }

18
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Gross Take Off Weight Estimation

WPL = WTO - {WStru + WProp + WFuel }

WPL = WTO

WPL
WTO =

0.29 0.15 0.31 typical values

WPL
WTO ≈ = 4 WPL
(1 – 0.75)
Take off Weight: Nearly four times useful load or Pay Load!
The Aircraft TO weight grows by a factor of 4 x Pay Load
Contd… 19
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Gross Take Off Weight Estimation (contd)

Weight constituents regrouped in three broad groups

WTO = WPL + WFuel + WEmpty (*includes basic equipment
WEmpty : Basic Structure* and Propulsion as per Roskam’s data base)
= WStru + WProp

WPL : Weight of {(Crew + allowance) and (Pax + Baggage

+Freight )} or{Weapon Load + External Stores}
: given in Aircraft Mission Statements or requirements

WFuel: Fuel Weight fraction estimated from Mission Analysis

WEmpty: from statistical relationship

= (KS) * A* WTOB (Nicolai ; Roskam)
20
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Standard Flight Attendant Schedule

Average number of PAX per Flight Attendant

First Class Mixed Tourist
International 16 21 31
Flights
Domestic 20 29 36
Flights

21
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Correlation between WEmpty and WTO for Transport Aircraft

Ref.: Nicolai
W*Empty= (KS) x A x WTOB (All Metal Aircraft)

KS : Structural Technology

WEmpty in lbs
Factor
*includes basic equipment as per
Roskam’s data base
A = 0.911 and B = 0.947
are curve fitting constants
for Weights in lbs WEmpty= 0.911WTO0.947

A = 0. 842 & B = 0.947

WTO in lbs
for Weights in N (Log – Log plot)

22
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Statistical Data on Weight – Supersonic Transport

Ref.: Roskam

WEmpty= 0.5 WTO0.9876

WEmpty in lbs

WTO in lbs

23
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Des

Mission Profile for a Transport Aircraft - Domestic

200 nm Diversion to
5 6 alternate airport
Cruise + 1 hour 9
4 7
Descent to 10
destination 8
Climb Descent to
land

Refused landing.
1 2 3 Climb from 3000 ft 11
Warm up/Taxi/TO Land

Mission Profile has 11 flight segments for domestic flight

24
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Des

Weight Fractions for Mission Segments - TurboFan Aircraft

Stage Mission Segment Wi/Wi-1
1 Engine start and warm-up 0.990
2 Taxi 0.990
3 Take-off 0.995
4 Climb 0.980
5 Cruise to full range exp [-RCj/{V(L/D)}]#
6 1 hour additional flight at cruise conditions@ exp [-Cj/(L/D)]
7 Descent to destination and refused landing 0.990
8 Climb 0.980
9 Diversion to alternate airport 200nm* distant exp[370*Cj/{V(L/D)}
10 Descent 0.990
11 Landing 0.992

Segments 6 to 9 are as per FAA requirements for Fuel Reserves

# Units of Cj Engine TSFC to be chosen such that RCj/V is dimensionless
@ Range R = (V km/ hr )x 1 hr = V
*200 nautical miles is 230 miles and 370km
25
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Units of Cj and Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption

A new transport aircraft design often starts with an

assumption of cruise Mach number and altitude. Cruise
Mach number (MCruise ) chosen should be just below Drag
Divergence Mach number (MDD ) of the wing (airfoil section
and wing sweep). (MCruise < MDD )

Cruise speed for specified cruise Mach number from

minimum drag (or max L/D) at given altitude is constant

Weight Fraction for constant speed cruise segment

Wi+1/Wi = exp [-RCj/{V(L/D)}]

26
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Aircraft Drag Polar: CD = CD0 + kCL2

CD0 Vs M k Vs M

27
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Units of Cj and Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption

Weight Fraction for constant speed cruise segment
Wi+1/Wi = exp [-RCj/{V(L/D)}]

The index or the factor [-RCj/{V(L/D)}] is nondimensional

where
R: Range in km
V: Speed in km/hr
TSFC*: kg/kN/h consistent
Cj: g x TSFC/1000 (N/N/hr) set of data

Then index
[-RCj/{V(L/D)}] = [ - R x g x TSFC/{1000 x V(L/D)}]
Typical value of TSFC of General Electric CF6- 80C2B1F Turbofan engine of
Boeing 747 at SL is 31.3056 kg/kN/hr
28
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Units of Cj and Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption

Weight Fraction for constant speed cruise segment

Wi+1/Wi = exp [-RCj/{V(L/D)}]

The index or the factor [-RCj/{V(L/D)}] is nondimensional

where
R: Range in m
V: Speed in m/s consistent
TSFC: kg/N/sec set of data
Cj : g x TSFC (N/N/s)

Then index
[-RCj/{V(L/D)}] = [ - R x g x TSFC/{V(L/D)}]
29
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Engine Thrust (TH) and TSFC at SL and Altitude

Thrust TH of an engine at altitude (h) and the thrust THSL at

sea level are related through density ratio σ :
{TH/THSL}= {ρ/ρSL} = σ

Also thrust specific fuel consumption TSFC at altitude and

TSFCSL at sea level are related through temperature ratio θ:
{TSFC/TSFCSL }= √{T/TSL} = √θ

For a given forward flight speed, while the thrust TH

deteriorates (↓) with altitude, the TSFC is seen to improve (↑).

Typical value of TSFC of General Electric CF6- 80C2B1F

Turbofan engine of Boeing 747 at SL is 31.3056 kg/kN/hr
30
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design
Weight Fractions for Mission Segments for TurboFan Aircraft
Stage Mission Segment Wi/Wi-1
1 Engine start and warm-up 0.990
2 Taxi 0.990
3 Take-off 0.995
4 Climb 0.980
5 Cruise to full range exp [-RCj/{V(L/D)}]
6 exp [-Cj/(L/D)]
1 hour additional flight at cruise conditions *
7 Descent to destination and refused landing 0.990
8 Climb 0.980
9 exp [-370Cj/{V(L/D)}]
Diversion to alternate airport 200n.m. distant **
10 Descent 0.990
11 Landing 0.992
5 6 9

*R = V for 1 hr flight
4
10 ** 1 nm = 1.15 miles
8
7
= 1.85 km

1 2 3 11

31
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design
Mission Fuel - Segmentwise Weight Fraction (Wi+1/Wi)

Mission Fuel = W TO – WLand

= W0 – W11 = W0{ 1 – (W11 /W0)}
where [W11/W0 ] is given by

and the segmentwise weight fraction for successive segments

are given in the Table for TurboFan powered aircraft

In addition to Mission Fuel estimated from Mission Analysis it

is necessary to account for unusable or trapped fuel in the fuel
system (fuel tank, pipeline, valves, pump etc) – a small
percentage ( 0.5 to 1% ) of Mission Fuel
32
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Mission Profile for a Transport Aircraft - Domestic

5 6 9

4
8 10
7

30 min hold at 15000 ft

1 2 3 11

Mission Profile has11 flight segments for domestic flight

For International flights replace segment 6 (1 hour) by 10%

of normal cruise time of segment 5 and add 30 min hold at
alt. of 15000 ft between 10 and 11 (discussed later)
33
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Mission Profile for Transport Aircraft - International Flight

(Applicable for ULH and LH)

For International Flight:

Change Segment 6: Instead of 1 hour cruise segment provide
for 10% of Full Range
After Diversion to neighboring airport and descent for
landing, climb to 15000 ft (11) and hold for 30 minutes (12) for
landing clearance before commencing descent (13) for landing 34
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Des

Mission Profile for Turbo Fan Aircraft for International Flight

Stage Mission Segment Wi/Wi-1
1 Engine start and warm-up 0.990
2 Taxi 0.990
3 Take-off 0.995
4 Climb 0.980
5 Cruise to full range exp [-RCj/{V(L/D)}]
6 10% additional range as in 5 exp[-RCj/{10V(L/D) }]
7 Descent to destination and refused landing 0.990
8 Climb 0.980
9 Diversion to alternate airport 200n.m. distant exp[-370Cj/{V(L/D)}]
10 Descent 0.990
11 Climb to 15000 ft 0.980
12 Hold for 30 min ( half an hour) exp [-0.5 Cj/(L/D)]
13 Descent 0.990
Segments 11, 12 and 13 added for international flights
14 Landing 0.992

35
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design
Mission Analysis for Fuel
In various flight segments, weight ratio W i+1/Wi depends
on (L/D) or CD0 and k (for cruise), CLmax (for TO) & TSFC
(for cruise)

We need to forecast or set design target for these

parameters from the data base of successful aircraft/
engine, extrapolating technology improvements targeted
for new aircraft in specific areas like
(L/D) improvements or reduction in Drag (CD0, k)
improvements in CLmax (high lift devices)
reduction in engine TSFC etc

Above input for Mission Analysis has to be verified at

various stages of Design Cycle as and when the aircraft
data gets generated and refined (CFD/Wind Tunnel etc)
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design
Data on (L/D)Max for Aircraft (Raymer)
20

B747
L/D ~ 17.5

(L/D)Max

10

0
0 1.2 2.4
Aircraft Wetted Area Aspect Ratio : b2/SWetted
37
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Zero Lift Drag CD0 for Transport Aircraft

Nicolai

Present Value

Improved Technology
CD0 ~ 0.015 to 0.018
(Drag Reduction)

Mach Number M

38
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Induced Drag Factor k for Transport Aircraft

We know k = 1/πAe where A is aspect ratio and e is Oswalds

efficiency factor which depends on wing planform
parameters. e = 1 for elliptic lift distribution and is always <
1 for other cases
By increasing A we can reduce induced drag factor k.
For aircraft with improved structural technology, A can be
increased up to 9. Also it is structurally feasible to increase A
to 10 – 11 using Braced Wing with strut support decreasing
cantilever span
Winglets can also give 8 – 10% reduction in induced drag.

39
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Calculation of Aircraft Take Off Weight – WTO

To start with
WPL : Pay Load from Mission Statement
WFuel /WTO: Fuel weight fraction from Mission Analysis
We know WTO = WPL + WFuel + WEmpty
Therefore we have
WEmpty = WTO – {WPL + WFuel }
( 3 to 5 times WPL?)
Select 6 – 8 values of {WTO }i in the expected range of WTO
Calculate {WEmpty Available} i at these {WTO}i values using
{WEmpty Available}i = {WTO }i - {WPL + WFuel i} (1)

Calculate at chosen {WTO}i, the values of{WEmpty Required}i using

statistical curve (all metal aircraft) and assuming factor Ks
{WEmpty Required}i= (KS) x A x {WTO}iB (2)
40
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Calculation of Aircraft Take Off Weight – WTO

( 3 to 5 times WFix?)
Select 6 – 8 values of WTO in the expected range of WTO
Calculate {WEmpty Available} i at these {WTO}i values using
{WEmpty Available}i = {WTO }i - {WPL + Wfuel i} (1)

Calculate at the chosen {WTO}i values of{WEmpty Required}i using

statistical curve (metallic aircraft) and assuming factor Ks
{WEmpty Required}i= (KS) * A* {WTO}iB (2)
{WTO}i {WEmptyAvailable}I (1) {WEmptyRequired }i (2)

41
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Plot WEmpty Available Vs WTO and WEmpty RequiredVs WTO

Ref.: Nicolai
WEmpty Available
(Statistical Data)

WEmpty

WEmpty Required
Solution for WTO

Gross Take Off Weight WTO

Note: WTO Vs WEmpty is a log log plot
42
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Calculation of Aircraft Take Off Weight – WTO (contd)

Plot variation of {WEmpty Available}i with {WTO}i and also

{WEmpty Required}i with {WTO}i at chosen 6 – 8 points.

At intersection of these two curves we have final WTO value

and
WEmpty Required = WEmpty Available = WEmpty

The above scheme is illustrated in the figure giving the two

plots of WEmpty Available and WEmpty Required with WTO

43
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Plots of WEmpty Available Vs WTO and WEmpty RequiredVs WTO

Ref.: Nicolai
WEmpty Available
(Statistical Data)

WEmpty

WEmpty Required
Solution for WTO

Gross Take Off Weight WTO

44
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Calculation of Aircraft Take Off Weight – WTO (contd)

Estimated WTO and WEmpty using Nicolai’s data base for

metallic aircraft (of 70s and 80s) and appropriate Structural
Technology factor KS seem to work reasonably well for LH
and MH aircraft and gives lower values for ULH aircraft
(like A380).

For estimation of WTO for ULH class of aircraft, there is a

need to do some further tweaking of these values of WTO and
WEmpty obtained using Nicolai’s data base, by carrying out
some additional check calculations based on relevant A380
data (L/D, TSFC, range, pay load etc ) including its (A380)
known WTO and WEmpty

45
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Effect of Variation in Range on Gross Take Off Mass

(Mason – AIAA 1992-93)

WTO

Range in nm
(Increasing WFuel )

Calculate WTO for your aircraft for 2 range values -

a) range specified in RFP and b) range of reference aircraft
46
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Weight Fractions for Mission Segments for TurboFan Aircraft

Stage Mission Segment Wi/Wi-1
1 Engine start and warm-up 0.990
2 Taxi 0.990
3 Take-off 0.995
4 Climb 0.980
5 Cruise to full range exp [-RCj/{V(L/D)}]
6 One hour additional flight at cruise conditions exp [-Cj/(L/D)]
7 Descent to destination and refused landing 0.990
8 Climb 0.980
9 Diversion to alternate airport 200n.m. distant exp [-370Cj/{V(L/D)}]
10 Descent 0.990
11 Landing 0.992
5 6 9

4
8
7 10

1 2 3 11

47
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design
Trade Off between Range and Pay Load
Segment AB:
Payload constant , Range increases
WTO increases
Gross Weight increasing
A B
Max Pay Load
ADD Fuel to reach Max Gross Weight
Pay Load

Max Fuel
REMOVE Pay Load
Max Gross Weight REDUCE Gross Weight
Exchange Pay Load with Fuel

Range

48
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Summary of Take Off Weight Estimation

Inputs for Weight Estimation:

Statistical correlation between WTO and WEmpty

Structural Technology parameter KS to modulate Wempty
Aerodynamic and Engine parameters: (L/D) and TSFC
(CD0, k)
Mission Analysis for Fuel

It is possible to evaluate effect of improved Aerodynamics ,

efficient Engine and increasing Range on Take off Weight WTO

For a given class of aircraft Cost/kg is similar. Therefore

minimising WTO is a good choice of Design Driver and also
useful criterion for comparing any alternative designs

49
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

Constraint Analysis - Feasible Design Space

(T/W) Vs (W/S) Plots for Design Requirements

Smaller
Wing All T/W and W/S
Smaller values are referred
Engine to WTO and TSSL

50
 AAE 3104 Aircraft Design

End of
Chapter 2
Aircraft Design Process
and
Take Off Mass Estimation

51