View
237
Download
5
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
AIRCRAFT DESIGN RESEARCH AND AIRCRAFT DESIGN RESEARCH AND EDUCATION AT UNIVERSITY OF NAPLESEDUCATION AT UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES
F. Nicolosi
fabrnico@unina.itfabrnico@unina.it
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Aerospaziale (DIAS)Dipartimento di Ingegneria Aerospaziale (DIAS)www.dias.unina.itwww.dias.unina.it
University of Naples University of Naples ““Federico IIFederico II““, Naples, Italy, Naples, Italy
EWADE 09 – 9° European Workshop on Aircraft Design Education – Sevilla 13-18 May, 2009
LAYOUTLAYOUT
-- RESEARCH ACTIVITIES (Topics)RESEARCH ACTIVITIES (Topics)-- TOOLS FOR AIRCRAFT DESIGNTOOLS FOR AIRCRAFT DESIGN-- AIRCRAFT DESIGN IN NAPLES (History and Link with AIRCRAFT DESIGN IN NAPLES (History and Link with
Companies)Companies)-- A RECENT EXAMPLE : DESIGN OF A LIGHT TWIN A RECENT EXAMPLE : DESIGN OF A LIGHT TWIN ENGINE AIRCRAFTENGINE AIRCRAFT
EWADE 09 – 9° European Workshop on Aircraft Design Education – Sevilla 13-18 May, 2009
University of Naples “Federico II”
Dep. of Aerospace Engineering (DIAS)• About 40 Professors and Researchers• About 6-8 Post-Doc• About 30 PHD students • Research and teaching activities in :
- Aerodynamics- Aerospace structures- Flight Mechanics and Aircraft Design- Aerospace Systems (Space Eng.)- Propulsion
• ABOUT 2 Millions of € /year of research contracts (from EC and from companies)=> About 40 Engineers/year employed
University of Naples “Federico II”Dep. of Aerospace Engineering (DIAS)
ADAG (Aircraft Design and Aeroflightdynamic Group)Research Group
- 4 Professors- 2 Post-Doc- 3 PHD students- About 10 Engineers
ADAG RESEARCH ACTIVITIES (1)
Light Aircraft Design - RPV Design
G97 P92-P96 TLS RPV
EASY-FLY , STOL Ultralight in composite
Wing-fuselage junction design (collaboration with TU Delft, Prof. Boermans)
ADAG RESEARCH ACTIVITIES (1)Aircraft Design TOOLS
AEREO CODE
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
-10 0 10 20
αb [deg]
CL
δ = −18°δ = 0°CLeq
δ
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0.05
CL
CD
Break-down del coefficiente di resistenza
visc wing+visc fus+fus_int
+fus_ind+hor_o
+carr e raffr+ind h (trim)
TOT
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
CL
CM
δ = −18° δ = −15°δ = −12° δ = −9°δ = −6° δ = −3°δ = 0°
δ
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
50 100 150 200 250
V [Km/h]
Livello del mare e percentuali riferite alla potenza massima.
P_disp [hp] 100%P_disp [hp] 90%P_disp [hp] 85%P_disp [hp] 75%Pnec [hp] z=0 m
Wind-Tunnel Tests
α=17°
ADAG RESEARCH ACTIVITIES (2)
• 2-D Airfoil Tests• 3-D aircraft model• 3-D semi-model
WINDWIND--TUNNEL TESTSTUNNEL TESTS
• MAIN LOW-SPEED DPA WIND TUNNEL
Test section dimensions 2.0 m x 1.4 mMaximum speed 150 Km/hTurbulence level 0.1%
WINDWIND--TUNNEL TESTSTUNNEL TESTSAIRFOIL TESTS
More than 20 airfoil tested since 1990• NACA, SM701, internally developed airfoils• Multi-component airfoil tests
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
Cl
α
LIFT CURVERe=1.1 mill.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04
Cd
Cl
DRAG POLARRe=1.1 mill.
UPPER
SURFACE
flow direction
-3.5
-3
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Cp
x/c
α=10°Re=1.1 mill.
SL
RT
SL = SEPARAZIONE LAMINARERT = RIATTACCO TURBOLENTO
Bolla di separazione laminare
WINDWIND--TUNNEL TESTSTUNNEL TESTSAIRCRAFT 3D MODEL WIND-TUNNEL TESTS• Scale of about 1:5 for a light aircraft (Re ~ 0.5 mil.)
More than 20 aircraft (mainly G.A., light and ULM) tested in the last 15 years
Aerodynamic Design / Analysis (num. & experim)ADAG RESEARCH ACTIVITIES (3)
αR
TS
leading-edge bubble
TSR
TS
mid-chord bubble
vortex
wake
boundary-layer edge
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
-6.00
-4.00
-2.00
0.00
2.00
x/c
Cp
VG1-13H airfoilalpha=15 Re=1.1 mil.
Numerical (TBVOR)
DPA wind tunnel tests
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
initialoptimized
Cp
x/c
alpha=0° Re=4e6initial opt
Cl .45 .43
Cd .0069 .0061 xtr up .38 .45xtr low .45 .52
Cmf -.100 -.102
NLF(1) AIRFOIL
Aircraft efficiency emprovement through b.l. unsteady blowing(num. & exp.)
Airfoil analysis, design and optimization
Wing-fuselage junction
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.20 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Cp
x/L
1
2
3
alpha=0 deg.ReL=18e6
TRANSITION LOCATIONS on upper midlineconf. 1 xtr=0.36 CD=0.0285 conf. 2 xtr=0.42 CD=0.0255 conf. 3 xtr=0.33 CD=0.0296
TR
EFFECT OF WING-FUSELAGE RELATIVE POSITION
1 2 3
Fuselage analysis and design Wing-tip and winglet design
AERODYNAMIC DESIGNAERODYNAMIC DESIGN
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
SM701SM701 optimized
SM701 airfoil - alpha=0° Re=2.5e6
Cp
x/c
SM701 SM701 optCl .52 .49Cmf -.116 -.117Cd .00634 .00535xtr up .44 .56xtr low .48 .47
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014
SM701SM701 opt
SM701 exp [ref.17]
SM701 DRAG POLARRe= 2.5 mill.
Cl
Cd
AIRFOIL DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION
FUSELAGES AND LOW DRAG BODIES DESIGN-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.20 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Cp
x/L
higher contractionoriginal
Pressure coeff. distrib. along upper midline
Transition
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.20 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Cp
x/L
alpha=0 deg.ReL=18e6
Pressure coeff. distribution
Original lenght L=7 mCockpit lenght increase = 20 cm
AERODYNAMIC DESIGNAERODYNAMIC DESIGNWING-FUSELAGE JUNCTION DESIGN
turbulentFlap
transition line
separation line
originaldesign
WING UPPER SURFACE
alpha=2.8° CL=1.01
wedge
Design of wing-fuselage junction for Antares Sailplane(@ TU Delft with Prof. L. Boermans)
FUSELAGE AND NACELLE INFLUENCE ON WING SPAN-LOADING
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1eta
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
c*C
l
sperimentale 4 gradinumerico 3.8 gradi
NUMERICAL & APPLIED AERODYNAMICSNUMERICAL & APPLIED AERODYNAMICSTurbulent flow control with unsteady blowing (wind-tunnel tests)
NUMERICAL & APPLIED AERODYNAMICSNUMERICAL & APPLIED AERODYNAMICSInduced drag reduction with multiple winglets
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1 1,1 1,2 1,3 1,4CL
CL3/
2 /CD
Total wing Short wing+5 Remiges Short Wing+3 Remiges
NUMERICAL & APPLIED AERODYNAMICSNUMERICAL & APPLIED AERODYNAMICSLight aircraft and General aviation winglet design
ADAG RESEARCH ACTIVITIES (4)Flight tests – Flight Mechanics - Flight Dynamics
Flight tests:- Light Aircraft Flight test certification (JAR VLA)- Performances flight meas. - AFM- Parametric Identification
Potentiometer
Inertial platform
Stick force
AIR Data Boom
Acquisition and control system
6-DOF flightsimulator
Parametric aerod deriv. Estimation. Flight qualities.
Ground Control Station
Flight simulator ADAG RESEARCH ACTIVITIES (4)
Cockpit Layout
• The Department together with TEST (Company) has recentlyacquired a 6 DOF Flight Simulator • Stick force reproduction
HOW ALL DISCIPLINES ARE INTEGRATED….
RENEWABLE ENERGIES RESEARCH ACTIVITIES
Design, building and testing of horizontal and vertical axis wind and water turbines Nov. 2006 we founded a SPIN-OFF
Company EOLPOWER SrlEOL-H5 5 KW Wind Generator(Production has started in 2009)
KOBOLD TurbineTo exploit tidal currents
Internationally patented
AIRCRAFT DESIGN @ University of Naples … started in early times….
1926 Prof. Gen. Umberto Nobile
AIRCRAFT DESIGN @ University of Naples … in the 50’s
Prof. L. Pascale
PARTENAVIA Company
AIRCRAFT DESIGN @ University of Naples PARTENAVIA company aircrafts
P.48 Astore P.52 TigrottoP.53 AeroscooterP.55 TornadoP.57 FachiroP.59 JollyP.64 Fachiro IIIP.64B OscarP.66B OscarP.66C CharlieP.66D DeltaP.66T CharlieP.68P.70 AlphaP.86 Mosquito
P52
P57
P66
P68 ObserverP68
AIRCRAFT DESIGN @ University of Naples … in the 90’s
TECNAM P92 and P96(Prof. L. Pascale)
G97 Spotter (1997-1999)Prof. V. Giordano
EASY-FLY (2003-2006)
AIRCRAFT DESIGN @ University of Naples … in the new century …
EASY-FLYNew STOL ULM in composite materialADAG – Group
Take-off
Landing40°15°
AIRCRAFT DESIGN @ University of Naples … in the new century …
Many new tecnam ULM and..
TECNAMP2006T(Prof. Pascale)
Many experiences in collaboration with Many experiences in collaboration with TecnamTecnam on design of many ULMon design of many ULM
P92 Echo (1992) P92J (1995) (Cert. VLA) P92 Sea-Sky
P96 Golf (1996)
P92JS
P92 2000 RG
P2002 Sierra (2002)
ADAG ADAG -- AIRCRAFT DESIGN RPV ACTIVITYAIRCRAFT DESIGN RPV ACTIVITY•• UAV and RADIOUAV and RADIO--CONTROLLED (RPV) MODEL DESIGNCONTROLLED (RPV) MODEL DESIGN
- Study an unmanned aircraft for observation-reconnaissance (UAV)- Analysis of canard influences on aircraft aerodynamics, static and dynamic
flying characteristics (the model can fly with and without canard)- Complete and accurate flight instrumentation for flight parameter
measurement and model maneuver analysis
EASY FLY PROJECT Conventional STOL light aircraft are characterized by a very “DIRTY” configuration
YUMA YUMA (foldable(foldable wing)wing)
SavannahSavannah
Zenair CH 701Zenair CH 701
EASY-FLYMAIN RESEARCH ACTIVITIES- 2D and 3-D HIGH LIFT SYSTEM DESIGN
3 1.9 1 01.7 1.32 4.01 4.03 3.971.8 3.83 3.95 3.99 3.931.88 3.87 4 4.02 3.87
2 3.79 4 3.98 3.88
OVERLAP
GA
P
EASY-FLY- 2D and 3-D HIGH LIFT SYSTEM WT TESTS
Wake rake
Slat(carbon fiber)
Wake rake
Slat(carbon fiber)
14 16 18 20 22 24 26alfa (°)
3.4
3.6
3.8
4
4.2
Cl
p1p2p3p4p5
Test Reynolds = 1.3 mil.
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1x/c
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
-9
-10
-11
-12
-13
Cp
alfa: 24°interpolated dataexperimental data
Clslat: 0.97 Clmain: 2.66 Clflap: 0.313
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30alfa (°)
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Cl
25°35°39°
Cl_max=4.0 !
EASY-FLY- 2D and 3-D HIGH LIFT SYSTEM WT TESTS
Test Reynolds = 0.6 mil.
CL_max=3.1 !
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20 24α(°)
1.2
1.6
2
2.4
2.8
3.2
3.6
CL vs α δF= 39° Slat
Wing-bodyTOT δs=0TOT δs=-10TOT δs=-25°
CL
EASY-FLY
DESIGN AND AERODYNAMIC ANALYSIS AND OPTIMIZATION OF A LIGHT TWIN
ENGINE AIRCRAFT
L. Pascale F. Nicolosi
P2006T AIRCRAFTSince 2006 Tecnam has started his intention to enter the market with a new CS 23 certified 4 seat aircraft.
• In the last years, starting from the United States, the General Aviation has been revitalized, due to the necessity to decongest the classical skyway system and to use thousands of small airport in the country (AGATE , SATS).
MARKET ANALYSIS AND P2006 AIRCRAFT DESIGN ASPECTS
• The fast economical growth of developing countries (like in Africa, south-America and in south-east of Asia) that do not have developed transportation systems has pushed the use and the diffusion of light aircraft in those areas.
• In example in some remote area of south Africa the transport through light aircraft can be the only solution, taking into account the absence of asphalt roads and the low acquisition and maintenance costs of these kind of machines.
P2006T design aspects
USE: Tourist, Flight school, Monitoring (i.e. Police)
Rotax 912S (100 hp) used in ULM and VLASimple construction (Light and not expensive)Use of automotive gasoline (instead of AVGAS) (Rotax 912)Short TO and Landing (not prepared)4 seats – twin engines – light (to fly with two Rotax, 100hp
each).
Twin engine with the weight of a single-engine
Similar performances but with lower operative costscompared to single engine 4-seats aircraft.
P2006T
ROTAX 912 S (100 hp)- Certified- Use of automotive fuel
Advantages:
Lower frontal area (small and streamlined nacelle)Lower weight to power ratioLower specific consumptionLower rpm for the propeller (efficiency and noise)Water cooling (stable temp.)
ROTAX vs Lycoming
ROTAX 912S Lycoming IO-360Peso (a secco, senza accessori)
Potenza maxArea frontaleLarghezza massima
149 kg200 hp @2700
0.428 m^2867 mm
59 kg100 hp @2390
0.322 m^2575 mm
Consumo (75%) 46 l/hr19 l/hr
Comparison 2 Rotax vs 1 Lycoming
2 Rotax 912S 100hp + elica Ø1.78m vs
1 Lycoming 200hp + elica Ø1.88m
The higher thrust of Rotax912S is mainly due to the fact that the same engine power is distributed on much larger propeller disk area(area of two disks of 1.78 m diameter). Other small effect arises from lower rpm of Rotax912S (2390 instead of 2700) at maximum power conditions and lower correction due to small nacelles.
THRUST
It is possible to compare a twin-engine aircraft with single-engine ones.
P2006T empty weight is low compared to other twin-engine. The payload is higher !
=> high structural efficiency => good weight/power ratio of Rotax 912=> the two engines lower the flight loads on the wings
From an operating point of view, is worth to consider that the option to use automotive fuel instead of AVGAS allows P2006 operators to dramatically reduce direct costs, making also possible to fly in regional or remote areas where AVGAS is difficult to find or prohibitively expensive.
Aero 45NOT A VERY NEW IDEA !
4-seat aircraft - Two Walter 105 hp engMTOW 1600 Kg. The wing loading 88 Kg/m2
Maximum flight speed 270 Km/h.
P2006 CHARACTERISTICS
Wing span 11.2 m Cabin width 1.20 mMean geometric chord 1.32 m Wing Area S 14.76 m2
Aspect ratio 8.47 Length 8.30 m
Maximum Take-off weight 1160 Kg
P2006 CHARACTERISTICS Wing span 11.4 m Cabin width 1.20 m
Mean geom. chord 1.32 m Wing Area S 14.76 m2
Aspect ratio 8.8 Length 8.70 mMTOW 1180 Kg Empty weight 760 Kg
Design Specifications- Easy cabin access and cabin comfort - Spacious luggage compartment, - Reduced take-off run (<1500 ft) and take-off from not prepared runways- Cruise flight speed of about 140 Kts at flight altitude of 7000-8000 ft- Range higher than 500 nm- Installation of an AFCS (Automatic Flight Control System).
+ Wing pos => opt CG travelA e B
- A , nacelle not stream.- (prop clearance)
- Long nacelle=> High Tors Inertialloads on the wing
Negative aspects A- Cabin access- Higher landing gear
(=> Higher weight)- Possible ingestion
(not prepared runways)
Conf. C+ Cabin access+ Short & stream nacelle+ Aerodynamic (par area)+ Empty weight- CG travel
+ Yaw Mom (Vtail area)Conf. D
- Structural diff and high costs of twin boom- rear engine cooling- parassite area
Conf. E- rear engine cooling- interr flap on the wing- acoustical problems
(propeller behind the wing)
Chosen Configuration
• EASY ACCESS• LOW NACELLE DRAG, STRUCTURALLY SIMPLE, LOW WEIGHT• HIGH SPAN EFFICIENCY FACTOR WITHOUT COMPLEX FAIRING
• GOOD GROUND VISIBILITY• LOW EFFECT OF PROPELLERS ON LONG. STABILITY
• PROPELLERS NOT EXPOSED DURING TAKE-OFF
Disadvantages• CG TRAVEL• REFUELING and ENGINE SERVICING• FUSELAGE PODS FOR THE 2 MAIN LANDING GEARS
• HIGHER WEIGHT FOR THE MAIN LAND-GEAR STRUCTURE
Advantages
WING DESIGN
⇒Wing span b=11.20 mCHOSEN PLANFORM⇒ MAC shift toward aircraft nose⇒ RECTANGULAR FLAP (light and lower-cost flap)⇒ QUITE GOOD induced drag factor.⇒ GOOD and SAFE STALL PATH
Wing span b=11.20 m
Frise AileronNACA 63A412 mod
Slotted flapNACA 63A415 mod
Fuselage3D surfaces …
Tail
Nacelle
Low parassite drag
Low wetted area
Small and streamlined
All mov stabilator
⇒Struct simple⇒ Lower costs
VT Des. for VMC
⇒ VMC 1.1 Vs
WEIGHT
Empty weight Break-Down
Std Empty Weight=750 Kg
AERODYNAMIC NUMERICAL AND EXP ANALYSIS=> At DIAS – Univ of Naples
WIND-TUNNEL TESTS
• Scale 1:6.5• Reynolds = 0.6 mill.
LIFT (nacelle effect)
048.0CLNAC −=∆080.0=αCL
LIFT (stall path)
aileron
Alpha = 12°
WB mom curve
MAC %14 X WB_AC =
MAC %11X NACWB_AC =+
X_CG=25%Z_CG=-22%
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
-0.16
-0.12
-0.08
-0.04
0
0.04
0.08
0.12
0.16
0.2COMPLETE AIRCRAFT (fix trans)HP NEW and NAC NEW w exhaustEffect of stabilator deflection
ds -1.0°ds -3.5°ds -6.0°WB NAC NEW w exh
CM
CL
Long Stab & Control
No = 38% in cruise cond.
Pendular stability
CM_ds = 0.033 [1/°]
1.89 [1/rad]
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1COMPLETE AIRCRAFT (fix trans)HP NEW and NAC NEW w exhaustEffect of stabilator deflection
ds -1.0°ds -3.5°ds -6.0°
CD
CL^2
Trimmed polar
CDo =0.035 e=0.70
Trimmed conditions
Complete aircraft trimmed polar (NO WINGLET)
Flight polarCD0=0.0254 f=0.361m^2
Fuselage and nacelle effect on wing-span load
Numerical analysis
Fuselage and nacelle effect on wing-span loadWind-tunnel tests
Pressure taps on 4 sections along span0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0.8
0.4
0
-0.4
-0.8
-1.2
-1.6
WING-BODY + NACELLECp alpha=4°
st. 4st. 3st. 2st. 1
Cp
x/c
Fuselage and nacelle effect on wing-span loadWind-tunnel tests
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1eta
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
c*C
l
4 gradi sperimentale4.4 gradi numerico
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1eta
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
c*C
l
sperimentale 4 gradinumerico 3.8 gradi
+ experiment (wind-tunnel tests)
+ experiment (wind-tunnel tests)
____ numerical
____ numerical
Wing-body + nacellealpha=4°
Wing-body alpha=4°
Effects on span aerodynamic loading (certification & evaluation of flight loads)D point of Man. Diagram
CL=0.535n=3.8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2
CL=.55WINGW_BODYW_BODY+NAC(CONC.)W_BODY+NAC
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
c*Cl
eta
Effects on span aerodynamic loading (certification & evaluation of flight loads)
Up to 10% differenceIn “bending” moment@ junction
The calculation and experiments were able to demonstrate a possible 10% increase of aircraft weight to cert. authorities
0 1 2 3 4 5 6[ ]
0
1000
2000
3000
Bending Momentwingw_bodyw_body+nac(conc.)w_body+nac
WINGLET DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
⇒ After first flight without winglets it was noticed a low (even accettable for certification) RC in OEI cond.
⇒ Very important to improve induced drag⇒ Minor modification to the wing structure⇒ Contained increase of wing bending moment at root
(about 5-7%).
DESIGN⇒ HEIGHT limited to 60 cm.⇒ To include appropriate wing-winglet fairing wing span was changed from 11.20 to 11.40 m.⇒ The wetted area was only 1% higher of the original
tip⇒ Increase in bending moment was limited to 5%
WINGLET DESIGN
WINGLET A
WINGLET B
WINGLET aerodynamic effectsESTIMATED AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCES (OEI) - 6000 ft
MAX RC increase @ S/L
NO WLET WLET120 ft/min 320 ft/min
(ESTIMATIONS)
WINGLET TESTS• Wind-tunnel tests were performed on similar wingletshape mounted on an elliptical wing semi-model.
A
B
C
1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450
300
200
100
0
Ys [mm]
x [mm]
Winglet A
Winglet B
1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450
300
200
100
0
Ys [mm]
x [mm]
Winglet C
Winglet A
WINGLET WT TESTSAs numerical calculations both winglet A and B (with different and welldesigned root toe angles) showed an oswald factor gain of about 15%.
Wing tip => e=0.84
+ Wlet => e=0.99
WINGLET EFFECTS :=> FLIGHT TESTS The oswald factor should increase from
0.70 (model wt tests, including nacelleeffects) to about 0.85 !!
FINAL ESTIMATED DRAG POLAR CDo=0.027 (f=0.40 m2) e=0.85
WINGLET EFFECTSIn OEI condition RC was increased by 170 to 280 fpm !
(The pilot clearly noticed it !)W=1160 Kg
Assiemi strutturali…
…alla realtà…
…dal CATIA…
…dal CATIA…
…al prototipo…
Flight PerformancesPeso massimo al decolloCarico alareStall speed Stall speed flap downBest Rate-of climb-speed (Vy)
Take-off run - groundTake-off distanceMAX Rate of climb EFF CEILING
Max lev speedCruise 75% @ 7000ft
Autonomia specifica cruise 65%
1180 kg80 kg/m2
56 kts47 kts80 kts
235 m450 m1300 ft/m’ (6.6m/s)>15000 ft (4570m)
151 kts145 kts
7.5 km/ltCruise Range 600 nm
MAX Rate of climb (OEI) 300 ft/m’
General performance parameter introduced by Oswald NACA TR 408 of 1932 3/1
P
3/4TS
λλλ ⋅
=Λ
Weight/propulsive powerλt = W/(ηPa)Weight/effective wing spanλs = W/(eb2)
λp = W/f Weight/parassite areaRatios that indicates:
• Available Thrust energy• Energy used to produce Lift • Energy used to win flight drag
Indicates aircraft performancesLOWER Λ => HIGHER PERFORMANCES
Parametro di performance
APPLIED RESEARCH AND EDUCATION:In both research activities (EASY-FLY and P2006T) :
- 3 research contracts for DIAS - 6 months wind-tunnel tests (3 m. EASY-FLY, 3 m. P2006T)- 10 MSC thesis- 2 PHD thesis- 6 grants for graduated neo-engineers
ALL the research was really applied
2 of them were employed
THANKS FOR THE ATTENTION and…
…. See you soon …..
Recommended