97
Page | 1 INTRODUCTION In today’s world there are different types of aircrafts with the latest technology. Every year there is a great competition for making an aircraft capable of carrying a large no:of passengers in the aircraft. So, in this report we intend to implant the differentiation among the aircrafts having a sitting capacity of 60-70 passengers. This report gives the different aspects of specifications like wing configuration, weigh specification, power plant specification and performance specification. In 2007 Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and the National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL) were planning to jointly design and develop a 70-seater civil regional aircraft. NAL had held discussions with Pratt and Whitney (Canada) and General Electric (U.S.) for an engine. The NAL-designed RTA-70 is meant to ply short-haul routes and compete with planes of French- Italian aircraft maker Avions de Transport Régional (ATR), a leading exporter of turbo-prop aircraft to the Indian sub-continent. In 2008, the Indian government through the Ministries of Defence and Civil Aviation have approved the plan and have asked HAL to prepare a roadmap for the project. It will not be an indigenous venture as the government is planning to enter into a memorandum of understanding with major names in the industry like Embraer, Bombardier Aerospace or United Aircraft Corporation. The aircraft was expected to fly in six to seven years. In 2010 at the India Aviation exhibition held in Hyderabad, a proposed cabin was on display and more details on the specifications of the aircraft have been revealed. On 23 December 2010, it was announced that the Indian government had asked NAL to consider the use of turbofan engines on the RTA-70. According to an NAL official, the use of a jet engine was seen as "a stepping stone to the high end" by the government Airplanes come in many different shapes and sizes depending on the mission of the aircraft, but all modern airplanes have certain components in common. An aircraft design is a separate discipline of aeronautical engineering. It is very different from the analytical aspect such as aerodynamics, structures, control and propulsion. Actually the design is an iterative process as shown in the design wheel. Requirements are set by the prior design trade studies. Concepts are developed to meet the requirements. Design analysis frequently point towards the new concepts and technologies which can initiate a new design effort. However, once a particular design under progress, all these activities are equally important in producing a good aircraft concept. KARAN GROVER

ADP PROJECT - final

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 1

INTRODUCTION In today’s world there are different types of aircrafts with the latest technology. Every year there is a great competition for making an aircraft capable of carrying a large no:of passengers in the aircraft. So, in this report we intend to implant the differentiation among the aircrafts having a sitting capacity of 60-70 passengers. This report gives the different aspects of specifications like wing configuration, weigh specification, power plant specification and performance specification.

In 2007 Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and the National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL) were planning to jointly design and develop a 70-seater civil regional aircraft. NAL had held discussions with Pratt and Whitney (Canada) and General Electric (U.S.) for an engine. The NAL-designed RTA-70 is meant to ply short-haul routes and compete with planes of French- Italian aircraft maker Avions de Transport Régional (ATR), a leading exporter of turbo-prop aircraft to the Indian sub-continent.

In 2008, the Indian government through the Ministries of Defence and Civil Aviation have approved the plan and have asked HAL to prepare a roadmap for the project. It will not be an indigenous venture as the government is planning to enter into a memorandum of understanding with major names in the industry like Embraer, Bombardier Aerospace or United Aircraft Corporation. The aircraft was expected to fly in six to seven years.

In 2010 at the India Aviation exhibition held in Hyderabad, a proposed cabin was on display and more details on the specifications of the aircraft have been revealed.

On 23 December 2010, it was announced that the Indian government had asked NAL to consider the use of turbofan engines on the RTA-70. According to an NAL official, the use of a jet engine was seen as "a stepping stone to the high end" by the government

Airplanes come in many different shapes and sizes depending on the mission of the aircraft, but all modern airplanes have certain components in common. An aircraft design is a separate discipline of aeronautical engineering. It is very different from the analytical aspect such as aerodynamics, structures, control and propulsion.

Actually the design is an iterative process as shown in the design wheel. Requirements are set by the prior design trade studies. Concepts are developed to meet the requirements. Design analysis frequently point towards the new concepts and technologies which can initiate a new design effort. However, once a particular design under progress, all these activities are equally important in producing a good aircraft concept.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 2: ADP PROJECT - final

AIRCRAFT DESIGN CYCLE

Figure 1 Aircraft design is a separate discipline of aeronautical engineering- different from the analytical disciplines such as aerodynamics, structures, controls and propulsion. An aircraft designer needs to be well versed in these and many such analyses. A good aircraft designs seems to miraculously glide through subsequent evaluations by specialists without major changes being required.

Design is not just the actual layout, but also the analytical processes used to determine what should be designed and how the design should be modified to better meet the requirements. Sometimes a design will begin as an innovative idea rather than as a response to a given requirements.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 3: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 3

THE DESIGN WHEEL

Figure 2 Those involved in design can never quite agree as to just where the design process begins. The designer thinks it starts with a new airplane concept. The sizing specialist knows that nothing can begin until an initial estimate of the weight is made. The customer, civilian or military feels that the design with requirements. All concept over above is mean to be correct.

Actually, design is an iterative effort, as shown in “Design Wheel”. Concepts are developed to

meet requirements. Design analysis frequently points toward new concepts and technologies, which can initiate a whole new design effort.

CYCLES OF DESIGN PROCESS:

Figure 3

Aircraft design can be broken into three major phases, 1.Conceptual design 2.Preliminary design 3.Detail design

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 4: ADP PROJECT - final

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN:

Conceptual design is a very fluid process. New ideas and problems emerge as a design is investigated in ever increasing detail. Each time the latest design is analyzed and sized, it must be redrawn to reflect the new gross weight, fuel weight, wing size, engine size, and other changes.

Conceptual design will usually begin with either a specific set of design requirements established by the prospective customer or a company -generated guess as to what future customers need. Design requirements include aircraft range and payload, take-off and landing distances, and maneuverability and speed requirements.

The actual design effort usually begins with conceptual sketch. A good conceptual sketch will include the approximate wing and tail geometries, the fuselage shape, and the internal locations of the major components such as the engine, cockpit, payload/passenger compartment, landing gear and fuel tanks.

PRELIMINARY DESIGN:

It can be said to begin when the major changes are over. The big questions such as whether to use a canard or an aft tail have been resolved. At some point late in preliminary design, even minor changes are stopped when a decision is made to freeze the configuration. During this design the specialists in areas such as structures, landing gear, and control systems will design and analyze their portion of the aircraft. Testing is initiated in areas such as aerodynamics, propulsion, structures, and stability and control.

A key activity during this type of design is “LOFTING’. Lofting is the mathematical modeling of the outside skin of the aircraft with sufficient accuracy to insure proper fit between its different parts, even if they are designed by different designers and possibly fabricated in different locations. The ultimate objective during this design is to ready the company for the detail stage, also called “FULL-SCALE DEVELOPMENT”.

DETAIL DESIGN:

Assuming a favorable decision for entering full-scale development, the detail design phase begins in which the actual pieces to be fabricated are designed. For example, during conceptual and preliminary design the wing box will be designed and analyzed as a whole. During detail design, that whole will be broken down into individual ribs, spars, and skins, each of which must be separately designed and analyzed.

Another important part of detail design is called production design. Specialists determine how the airplane will be fabricated, starting with smallest and simplest subassemblies and building upto the final assembly process. Production designers frequently wish to modify the design for ease of manufacture; that can have a major impact on performance or weight. Compromises are inevitable, but the design must still meet the original requirements.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 5: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 5

During detail design, the testing effort intensifies. Actual structure of the aircraft is fabricated and tested. Control laws for the flight control system are tested on an “iron-bird” simulator, a detailed working model of the actuators and flight control surfaces. Flight simulators are developed and flown by both company and customer test pilots. Detail design ends with fabrication of the aircraft. Frequently the fabrication begins on part of the aircraft before the entire detail-design effort is completed.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 6: ADP PROJECT - final

DATA COLLECTION AND REQUIREMENTS

In this section we present the design specifications of various aircrafts which comes under the same category as of our project. The data has been organized in tabular form and graphs have been made to depict the required value for our project. The various aircrafts taken into considerations are:

1. XAC Y-7 100 2. IPTN N-250-100 3. ATR-72-200 4. ATR-72-500 5. ILYUSHIN II-114 6. SAAB 2000 7. ANTONOV AN-140 8. De Havilland Dash 8 Q300

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 7: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 7

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 8: ADP PROJECT - final

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 9: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 9

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 10: ADP PROJECT - final

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 11: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 11

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 12: ADP PROJECT - final

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 13: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 13

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 14: ADP PROJECT - final

Graphs showing the chosen values..

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 15: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 15

Max

.Fue

l(kgf

) M

ax. p

ay lo

ad(k

gf)

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

Series1

2000

1000

0 0 200 400 600 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

Series1

2000

1000

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max. Cruise Speed(kmph)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 16: ADP PROJECT - final

Max

.To

Wei

ght(

Kgf)

M

ax.L

andi

ng W

eigh

t(Kg

f) 30000

25000

20000

15000 Series1

10000

5000

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

30000

25000

20000

15000 Series1

10000

5000

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 17: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 17

Prop

elle

r Di

a.(m

) Ai

lero

ns(m

2)

6

5

4

3

Series1

2

1

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

4

3.95

3.9

3.85

3.8

3.75

3.7

Series1

3.65

3.6

3.55

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 18: ADP PROJECT - final

Ove

rall

Heig

ht(m

) O

vera

ll Le

ngth

(m)

30

25

20

15

Series1

10

5

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

10

9

8

7

6

5

4 Series1

3

2

1

0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 19: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 19

Fuse

lage

Max

.Wid

th(m

)

Fuse

lage

Ma x

.Dep

th(m

)

3.5

3

2.5

2

1.5 Series1

1

0.5

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

3.5

3

2.5

2

1.5 Series1

1

0.5

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 20: ADP PROJECT - final

Rang

e(km

)

Land

ing

run(

m)

1400

1200

1000

800

600

Series1

400

200

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Cruise Speed(Kmph)

2500

2000

1500

1000 Series1

500

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Cruise Speed(kmph)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 21: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 21

Whe

el T

rack

(m)

W/S

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

Series1

100

50

0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

9

8

7

6

5

4 Series1

3

2

1

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 22: ADP PROJECT - final

Ope

ratin

g em

pty

wei

ght(

kgh)

W

heel

Bas

e(m

)

12

10

8

6

Series1

4

2

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

18000

16000

14000

12000

10000

8000

6000

Series1

4000

2000

0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 23: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 23

Win

gs g

ross

Are

a(m

2)

Win

g Sp

an(m

)

35

30

25

20

15 Series1

10

5

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

100

90

80

70

60

50

40 Series1

30

20

10

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 24: ADP PROJECT - final

Tape

r Rat

io(W

ing)

As

pect

Rat

io

35

30

25

20

15 Series1

10

5

0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3 Series1

0.2

0.1

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(kmph)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 25: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 25

Max

.Zer

o fu

el w

eigh

t(kg

f)

Max

.pay

load

(kgf

) 8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

Series1

2000

1000

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(m)

25000

20000

15000

10000 Series1

5000

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(m)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 26: ADP PROJECT - final

Max

.Win

g lo

adin

g(kg

/m2)

M

ax.p

ower

load

ing(

kgf/

kw)

450

400

350

300

250

200

Series1

150

100

50

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise speed(m)

7

6

5

4

3 Series1

2

1

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise speed(m)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 27: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 27

Mai

n W

heel

Size

(m)

Serv

ice

Ceili

ng(m

) 10000

9000

8000

7000

6000

5000

4000

Series1

3000

2000

1000

0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Max.Cruise speed(m)

300

250

200

150 Series1

100

50

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise Speed(m)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 28: ADP PROJECT - final

Nos

e W

heel

Siz

e(m

)

160

140

120

100

80

Series1 60

40

20

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Max.Cruise speed(m)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 29: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 29

1 . Initial design specifications 1.1 Introduction

In this section, we present an application of the preliminary design procedure. A

60 seater airplane cruising at M = 0.45, at 4.5 km altitude and having a gross still

air range (GSAR) of 2000 km is considered. The presentation is divided into eight

sections

• Data collection

• Preliminary weight estimation

• Optimization of wing loading and thrust loading

• Wing design

• Fuselage design, preliminary design of tail surface and preliminary layout

• CG calculation

• Control surface design

• Performance estimation and presentation of results

1.1 Design Philosophy In this report the aim is to design a 60 seater aircraft for regional transportation purpose. The infrastructural growth, in road and the rail transportation is not in the pace with the country’s GDP growth. The only alternative is air transportation. A sector of upper middle class people would prefer to commute at fast between cities. For this sector of people the airfare which is near first class AC train is comfortable. So the aircraft should be efficient to reduce the per passenger cost, should able to operate in small airports and should be reasonably fast. Considering all the facts in the present design projects we are concentrating on the aircrafts with turboprops.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 30: ADP PROJECT - final

The requirements are as mentioned bellow

1. Gross Still Air Range = 2000 km

2. No. of Passenger = 60

3. Flight Cruise speed = 500 km/h

4. Service ceiling = 9000 m

5. Takeoff Distance = 900 m

6. Landing Distance = 900 m

Certification requirements

All commercial aircrafts must satisfy the airworthy requirements to fly in various

countries. Typically each country has its own aviation authority to qualify.

India - DGCA (Director General of Civil Aviation)

UK - CAA (Civil Aviation Authority)

USA - FAA (Federal Aviation Authority)

Russia- CIS

In all the regulation the following aspects should be covered, the severity may

vary.

1. Flight :- This includes performance like stall, take off, climb, cruise,

descent, landing, response to gust etc. Also included are requirements of

stability, controllability and maneuverability.

2. Structural :- Flight loads, ground loads, emergency landing condition,

fatigue evaluation, damage tolerant design and failsafe designs.

3. Power plant :- Fire protection, auxiliary power unit, air intake/exhaust, fuel

system, cooling

4. Others :- Material quality regulations, bird strike, Propeller blade

dismantling and hitting the fuselage etc.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 31: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 31

All these regulation and test are meant for the at most safety of the passengers. Apart

from above said qualifications the environment concerns like emission and noise

pollution needs to be met.

1.2 Preliminary Design

To begin with data is collected for the existing commercial aircrafts available in

service. The following preliminary configurations are taken.

Power plant - To meet the short range, medium speed, short take off and

landing requirements it is preferred to choose turboprops.

Wing Mounting - The wing is mounted on the top of the fuselage. This

configuration is best for the turboprops. The engine can be mounted on the

bottom surface of the wing. This configuration is highly efficient because bottom

surface of the wing generates small amount of lift as compared to the top.

Anything on the top surface of the wing reduces lift considerably.

Landing gear - The aircraft has a retractable tricycle landing gear

Wing and Empennage - The conventional tapered wing configuration will be

used. The T-tail configuration is good from aerodynamic point of view and

conventional tail configuration is good from structural point of view. The tail plane

surfaces are kept well out of the airflow behind the wing, giving smoother flow,

more predictable design characteristics, and better pitch control. This is

especially important for planes operating at low speed, where clean airflow is

required for control.

The effective distance between wing and tailplane can be increased without a

significant increase in the weight of the aircraft. The distance between the two planes

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 32: ADP PROJECT - final

gives the "leverage" by which the tailplane can control the aircraft's pitch attitude -

with a greater distance, smaller, lighter tailplanes and elevators can be used.

KARAN G

ROVER

toshiba
Stamp
Page 33: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 33

The tail surfaces are mounted well out of the way of the rear fuselage, permitting this

site to be used for the aircraft's engines. This is why the T-tail arrangement is also

commonly found on airliners with rear-mounted engines.

The horizontal stabilizer is kept farther away from the ground, which helps reduce

damage to it by objects on the ground when taking off or landing.

1.2.1 Preliminary Weight Estimate

For the given number of passenger the pay load estimation is done as follows

1. One crew member for every 30 passengers. Total of 2-crew member for

60 passengers.

2. Flight pilot and co-pilot

3. As per the practiced standards 102 kg per passenger( 80 kg passenger

weight and 22 Kg check in luggage)

Thus the total payload becomes 64 x 102 = 6528 Kg

This 102 kg is considered after referring to similar airplanes.

A database is prepared referring to various aircrafts similar to the aircraft under

design and is presented in Table.1. In this report we will be referring to this table very

often. The design will follow ATR-72 aircraft. Referring to Table.1 we can consider

WTo = 22000 Kg and

WGross=22200 Kg

Calculation

S = W/(W/S) W/S =344 kg/m2 from data collection.

S = 22000/344 ≈ 64 m2

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 34: ADP PROJECT - final

b = √(AxS) b=27.71 ≈ 28 m

The Root chord Cr =

Taper ratio λ = 0.4 (Ref. from the data table for Aircrafts) Cr

= 3.26 m

Ct = λ X Cr =1.31 m

Referring to Table.1 we can consider

Sv / S =0.21 and Sh / S = 0.25

Sv = 0.21 x 64

= 13.44 m2 Sh = 0.25 x 64

=

16.0 m2

To find the aspect ratio of the vertical tail and horizontal tail

Referring to Table 4.3 of Ref (Raymer Ref.2). for taper ratio and aspect ratio. Horizontal tail Vertical

tail Ah λh Av λv

Fighter 3 -4 0.2 – 0.4 0.6 – 1.4 0.2 – 0.4

Sail plane 6-10 0.3 – 0.5 1.5 – 2.0 0.4 – 0.6

Others 3 - 5 0.3 – 0.6 1.3 – 2.0 0.3 – 0.6

T-tail - - 0..7 – 1.2 0.6 – 1.0

Aspect ratio Av = 1.5 Taper ratio λv = 0.0.35

Ah =

5.5 λh = 0.5

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 35: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 35

bv = 4.5 m

bh = 9.4 m

Crv =

Crv = 4.42 m

Ctv = λvCrv = 1.55 m

Crh = 2.27m

Cth = λhCrh = 1.13m

Control Surfaces:

A number of aircrafts and their 3-view drawings are studied and the following

parameters are chosen.

S_flap / S = 0.2

b_flap / b = 0.4

S_ele / S_ht = 0.33

S_rud / S_vt = 0.32

Therefore the following parameters are calculated:

S_ele = 5.28 m2

S_rud = 4.30 m2

b_flap = 11.2 m

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 36: ADP PROJECT - final

Fuselage:

Length: Referring to ATR-72-200 aircraft whose capacity is 66 passengers and the

length is 27.17.

The overall length of the aircraft is taken as 27 m (our Aircraft capacity is of 64)

lf =27 m

Diameter:

Referring to ATR-72-200, the width of the fuselage is taken as 2.6 m. df

=2.6 m and height of 1.9 m

Overall height:

Based on the dimensions of different aircrafts the overall height is taken as 7.7 m

Engine Location:

Engines will be mounted on the bottom surface of the wing. The upper surface

contributes more for generation of lift. So clean upper surface is an advantage.

Landing gear:

Tricycle retracting type landing gear will be located on the belly of the fuselage.

Main wheel size 863x250 mm

Nose Wheel size 450x190 mm

Wheel Track (m) 4.1 m

Wheel Base (m) 10.77 m

Power Plant:

2 Pratt and Witney 123D Each rated 1604 kW (According to the table.1) and

referring to company website.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 37: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 37

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 38: ADP PROJECT - final

Fig 1.1Antonov- AN-140

Fig 1.2 XAC Y-7 100

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 39: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 39

Fig 1.3 ATR 72-500

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 40: ADP PROJECT - final

Fig 1.4 Proposed Aircraft under design KARAN G

ROVER

Page 41: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 41

2. Revised weight estimation

In the previous section ,an initial estimate for the aircraft parameters has been done

.The weight estimate is being revised using refined estimates of fuel weight and empty

eight. The fuel fractions for various phases are worked out in the following steps .The fuel

fractions for warm up, take off ,climb and landing are taken from Raymer Ref.2(4),chapter 3 .

FUEL FRACTION ESTIMATION

The fuel weight depends on the mission profile and the fuel required as reserve. The mission

profile for a civil turbo prop transport aircraft involves Take off

Climb

Cruise

Loiter before landing

Descent and landing

2.1.1 Warm up and Take off

The value for this stage is taken by following the standards given in Raymer Ref.2(4)

,chapter 3

W 1 = 0.97 W 0

W 0 is the weight at take-off and W 1 is the weight at the end of the take-off phase.

2.1.2 Climb

The weight ratio for this stage is chosen by following the standards given in Raymer

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 42: ADP PROJECT - final

Ref.2(4), chapter 3.

W 2 = 0.985 W 1

2.1.3 Cruise

Derivation for Range:-

The weight ratio for the cruise phase of flight is calculated using the following

Breguet equation Where,

BSFC = 3 N/kW-hr = 0.5 lb/BHP-hr

Gross still air range = 2000 km. Hence

Cruise safe air range = GSAR = 2000 = 1333.33 km 1.5 1.5

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 43: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 43

From figure 3.5 of Raymer Ref.2 (4), the Swet Sref value is 5.2.

Therefore the corresponding wetted Aspect ratio is

Aspect ratio/( Swet

Sref ) = 12/5.2=2.3

Corresponding to this value of wetted aspect ratio, ( L D )max is taken as 17

from figure 3.6 of Raymer Ref.2(4). This corresponds to the average value for Civil Turbo

prop aircrafts.

As prescribed by Raymer Ref.2(4) ,chapter 3

( L D )cruise = ( L

D )max

To account for allowances due to head wind during cruise and provision for diversion to

another airport, we proceed as follows.

Head wind is taken as 15 m/s. The time to cover the cruise safe range of 1333.33 km at cruise

velocity of 500km/hr is

Time = 1333.3

500

= 2.67 hrs

Therefore with a head wind of 15m/s or 54km/hr, the additional distance that has to

be accounted for

Additional distance = 54 x 2.67 = 144 km

The allowance for diversion to another airport is taken as 300 km. From the information

available the air distance between nearest airport is about 300 km. The corresponding map

is given in this report.

The total distance during cruise, R = 1333.3 + 144 + 300 = 1777.3 =1780(approx).

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 44: ADP PROJECT - final

Substituting the above values in the Breguet equation, we get

2.1.4 Loiter

Derivation for endurance:-

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 45: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 45

Therefore the

weight ratio for

Loiter phase of

flight is

calculated using

the following

expression

W 1 =3374 N/ m 2

S

from chapter 1.

W 3 = 3374 x 0.985 x 0.897 =2982 N/ m 2

S , η p = 0.7

We design for a loiter time of 30 min, so endurance E = 0.5 hrs

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 46: ADP PROJECT - final

W

Therefore we get

W 4 = 0.9878 W 3

2.1.5 Landing

Following the standards specified by Raymer Ref.2(4), chapter 3, we take this ratio as

W 5 = 0.995 W 4

Therefore ,

W 5 = 0.995 x 0.9878 x 0.897 x 0.985 x 0.97 = 0.8423 Wo

Allowing a reserve fuel of 6%, we obtain the fuel fraction as

Wf = ς = 1.06(1

- Wo

W 5 ) = 0.1671 Wo

2.2 Empty Weight Fraction To determine the empty weight ratio, we follow the method in Raymer Ref.2(4),

chapter 3, which gives a relation between We o

and W o

as follows.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 47: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 47

W

We = 0.92 Wo

− 0.05

o

(eq 1)

Hence,

W 0 = Wpayload = 6528

(eq 2) 1 − Wf Wo − We Wo 1 − 0.1671 − We Wo

From chapter 1 ,Wpayload =(102x64)=6528 kgf

We solve this equation by iteration

Table 2 : Iterative procedure for W o

Wo(guess) We Wo (from eq 1) W o (from eq 2)

22200 0.5577 23728.6

23728.6 0.5559 23566.7

23566.7 0.5562 23500

23500 0.5562 23500 Hence, the gross weight W o

Wo = 23500 Kg is obtained as

The critical weight ratios are:- We

= 0.5562 , Wg

Wf = 0.1671 , Wo

Wpay

Wo

= 0.2778 K

ARAN GROVER

Page 48: ADP PROJECT - final

Fig 2.1 This picture shows major airports in India.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 49: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 49

Fig 2.2 This picture shows Air network between major airports in India.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 50: ADP PROJECT - final

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 51: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 51

THP = TRe q *V

= 15553*138.9

= 2160.3Kw 1000 1000

η p = 0.8

BHP = THP

= 2160.3

= 2700Kw 0.8 0.8

BHP per engine

BHP = BHP =

2700 = 1350Kw =1822 hp per engine

2 2 The power required per engine is 1350kW

Engine selection

P req= BHP per engine=1350 kW

From Pratt and Whitney engine data base

Model Max SHP TO RPM Max continuous power

PW 120 1491 kW 1212 1268 kW

PW 121A 1640 kW 1212 1417 kW

PW 123D 1604 kW 1212 1454 kW ◄

PW 127F 2051 kW 1212 1864 kW

Considering the power requirement, PW123D engine is selected.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 52: ADP PROJECT - final

Propeller selection N = 1212 RPM information from website for PW123D engine

n= 1212/60 = 20.2 RPS

ρ =0.77 kg/m3 = 0.001508 slug/ft3

=455.6(0.001508/(1002100*20.22))1/5

=2.36 For a four bladed propeller with Cs =2.36

J for ηmax = 1.64

J=V/nd

Propeller dia D=V/n J = 455.6/20.2*1.64

= 13.75 ft = 4.2 m Referring to the similar airplanes data,

The propeller diameter is chosen as 3.9 m. K

ARAN GROVER

Page 53: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 53

Fig 3.1 Drag polar compared with Fokker-50

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 54: ADP PROJECT - final

4.0 WING DESIGN

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 55: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 55

4.1 Introduction

The weight and the wing loading of the airplane have been obtained in sections 2 and 3.

The details are as below

Weight = 23500 Kg = 230535 N

Wing loading = 3600 N/m2

Wing area is obtained as 64.04 m2

The wing design involves choosing the following parameters.

1. Airfoil selection

2. Aspect ratio

3. Sweep

4. Taper ratio

5. Twist

6. Incidence

7. Dihedral

8. Vertical location

4.2 Airfoil selection

The airfoil shape influences Many aerodynamic parameters. I has an influence

on stalling speed, fuel consumption during cruise, turning performance and weight of the

airplane.

After referring to the existing similar airplanes, NACA 653618 is chosen. For

NACA 653618

Details:

Design lift co-efficient 0.6

Thickness ratio 18 percent

4.3 Aspect ratio

The aspect ratio affects CL, Cdi and wing weight.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 56: ADP PROJECT - final

At present stage of design, we chose aspect ratio A = 12 based on the data

collection. (Table 1).

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 57: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 57

4.4 Sweep Referring to Raymer Ref.2,

Generally for low subsonic speed, sweep will be taken as zero. Based

on the data of similar airplanes, sweep = 0 deg.

4.5 Taper ratio

Based on the data collected, taper ratio selected as 0.4. 4.6 Twist

Based on the data of similar airplanes, twist = 0 deg.

4.7 Wing incidence

The wing incidence angle is the angle between wing reference chord and fuselage

reference line. Wing incidence angle is chosen to minimize drag at some operating

conditions, usually at cruise.

The wing incidence angle is the angle between wing reference chord and fuselage reference line. Wing incidence angle is chosen to minimize drag at some operating conditions, usually at cruise.

W

CLopt = S = qcr

3600 0.5 * 0.77 *138.92

= 0.48466

CLopt = 0.48466 = CLcruise

CLcruise = CLα (iw − α oL )

t/c = 18 From Raymer Ref.2 Λ = 0

β 2 = 0.8319

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 58: ADP PROJECT - final

Λ = 0

Clα Slope of the aerofoil NACA 653618

KARAN G

ROVER

toshiba
Stamp
Page 59: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 59

w

Clα =6.07 per radian

CLα= 5.62 per radian = 0.098 per deg

CLcruise = CLα (iw − α oL )

α oL = 4.1 for NACA 653618 aerofoil.

iw = 0.04125 rad

i = 2.360

Based on the data collected, the wing incidence angle is chosen as iw= 2o

4.8 Vertical location of wing.

The vertical location of wing for the designed airplane has been chosen to be a High

wing configuration which is typical of similar airplanes.

High Wing configuration:

Advantages:

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 60: ADP PROJECT - final

i) Allows placing fuselage closer to ground, thus allowing loading and unloading

without special ground handling equipment.

ii)Jet engines & propeller have sufficient ground clearance without excessive landing gear

length leading to lower landing gear weight.

iii) For low speed airplanes, weight saving can be effected by strut braced wing.

iv)For short take off and landing (STOL) airplanes with high wing configuration have

following specific advantages. (a) Large wing flaps can be used (b) Engines are away

from the ground and hence ingestion of debris rising from unprepared runways is avoided

(c) Prevents floating of wing due to ground effect which may occur for low wing

configuration.

4.9 Dihedral

Based on the data of similar airplanes, dihedral is chosen as 3 deg.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 61: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 61

Parameters

XAC-Y7

ATR-42

ATR-72

IPTN-N250-100

IL 114 SAAB 2000

An140

1

Aspect ratio

11.7

11.1

12

12.1

11

11

2

Wing Area (m2)

75.26

54.5

61

65

81.9

55.74

3

W (Kgf)

21800

18600

21500

24800

23500

22800

19150

4 W/S (Kg/m2) 289.7 341.3 352.5 381.5 286.9 409

5

Wing location

High Mounted

High Mounted

High Mounted

Low Wing

Low Wing

High

6

Aerofoil

NACA 43 Series

MS 0317

(MS0313)

7

t/c

18 % (At root)

17% (At root)

16%

8 Sweep 0 0

9

Taper Ratio

0.313

0.548

0.618

0.518

0.524

10 Twist (Degree) 3

11 Wing incident (i) Deg

3 (At root)

2 (At root)

2 (At root)

2

2 (At root)

12

Dihedral Angle

2.5 deg

2.5 deg

3

7

6

13

High Lift device

Fowler Flaps Single and

double slotted

Double slotted

flaps

Double slotted

flaps

Double slotted

fowler flaps

Double

Slotted Flaps

Single Slotted Flaps

Table: 4.1 Comparison of different parameters of similar aircrafts

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 62: ADP PROJECT - final

5.Fuselage And Tail Sizing Fuselage sizing

lf = aWoC

For a twin turbo prop (From Raymer Ref.2 book)

a= 0.169

C=0.51

We have Wo= 23500 Kg Therefore lf = (0.169)*(23500)0.51 =28.65 m

Therefore the length of the fuselage is 28.65 m.

Length of Nose

=0.03 therefore lnose= 0.86m

lcockpit = 2.5 m . It is standard for a 2 pilot cockpit.

Cabin Length:

Economic classs. No. of passengers = 48 (12 rows)

Business class. No. of passengers = 12 (3 rows)

Parameter Economy class Business class

Seat pitch (inches) 32 38

Seat width (inches) 22 28

Aisle width (inches) 22 56

Seat abreast 4 2

No. of aisle 1 1

Max height (m) 2.2 2.2

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 63: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 63

Class No. of seats No. of rows Seat pitch Cabin length (m)

Economy 52 13 32 10.56

Business 8 4 38 3.86

Cabin diameter

df(internal) = (22*4 +22*1)*2.54/100 = 2.8

m t = (110)(0.02) +1”

= 3.2 inch

= 0.0813 m

External diameter of the fuselage = 2.8+0.0813*2 = 2.96 m

Rear fuselage

= 0.25

= 0.25* 28.65 = 7.1625 m

Total fuselage length (m) Nose length = 0.86

Cockpit = 2.5

Passenger seating = 14.42

Rear fuselage = 7.162

Toilets, and other = 1.3

Total length = 28.5

Cargo door = 1.3

Tail sizing

1. Aspect ratio

Aspect ratio of horizontal wing Ah = 5.5

Aspect ratio of vertical tail Av = 1.5

2. Area ratio

Sh/S = 0.25 Sv/S= 0.21

Sh= 16 m2 Sv= 13.44 m2

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 64: ADP PROJECT - final

3. Span

bh= 9.4 m

bv= 4.5 m

Crh= 2.27 m

Cth=1.13m

Crv= 3.73 m

Ctv=2.24 m

4. Engine location

The type of Engine mounting and it’s location play a major role in deciding the overall

drag coefficient of the airplane. A conventional wing mounted engine is chosen as

it facilitates periodic maintenance in an industry where an

attached to the lower side of the wing using pylons to reduce drag. The other reason for

choosing a wing mounted engine is the fuel is stored in the wings itself, thereby

reducing the length of the fuel line. From the data collection of similar airplanes, the

engineFrom referring to the data of similar airplanes the engines are located at 33.4 % of

wing semi-span.

5. Landing gear

Hydraulically retractable tricycle type, nose unit retract forward, main units

inward into fuselage and large under fuselage fairing.

Minimum turning radius on ground is 17.08m

Wheel base 12 m

Track 4.10 m

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 65: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 65

Cargo Door Business class Economy class Passenger door

Fig 5.1 Cabin Layout

(The design of ATR-72 aircraft is considered for Cabin layout.)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 66: ADP PROJECT - final

6. Estimation of component weights and CG

location Aircraft weight is a common factor which links different design activities (aerodynamics,

structures, propulsion, layout, airworthiness,environmental, economic and operational

aspects).To this end, at each stage of the design, a check is made on the expected total mass

of the completed aircraft. A separate design organization(weights department)is employed

to assess and control weight. In the preliminary design stage, estimates have to made from

historical statistical data of all the component parts of the aircraft from similar airplanes. As

parts are manufactured and the aircraft prototype reaches completion it is possible to check

the accuracy of the estimates by weighing each component and where necessary instigate

weight reduction programmes.

6.1 Aircraft mass statement

The weight of the entire airplane can be sub-divided into empty weight and useful

load. The empty weight can be further subdivided into-

• Structures group

• Propulsion group

• Equipment group

DCPR(Defense Contractor Planning Report) weight is taken as the weight obtained

after deducting weights of wheels, brakes, tires, engines, starters, batteries, equipments,

avionics etc from the empty weight. DCPR weight is important for cost estimation, and can

be viewed as the weight of the parts of the airplane that the manufacturer makes as

opposed those of items bought and installed.

It has become normal practice in aircraft design to list the various components of

aircraft mass in a standard format.

The components are grouped in convenient subsections as shown below.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 67: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 67

6.1.1 Structures Group

1. Wing(including control surfaces)

2. Tail(horizontal and vertical including controls)

3. Body(or fuselage)

4. Nacelles

5. Landing gear (main and nose units)

6. Surface controls

6.1.2 Propulsion Group

1. Engine(s)(dry weight)

2. Accessory gearbox and drives

3. Induction system

4. Exhaust system

5. Oil system and cooler

6. Fuel system

7. Engine controls

8. Starting system

9. Thrust reversers

6.1.3 Fixed equipment group 1. Auxiliary power unit

2. Flight control systems (sometimes included in structural group)

3. Instruments and navigation equipment

4. Hydraulic systems

5. Electrical systems

6. Avionics systems

7. Furnishing

8. Air conditioning and anti-icing

9. Oxygen system

10. Miscellaneous (e.g. fire protection and safety systems)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 68: ADP PROJECT - final

6.2 weights of various components

After making the classification between various groups and listing the

components in each group, we next proceed to determine the weights of these

components. In the preliminary design stages it is not possible to know the size of

individual aircraft components in great detail but it is possible to use prediction

methods that progressively become more accurate as the aircraft geometry is

developed. Most aircraft design textbooks contain a set of equations empirically

derived based on existing aircraft. For the present design, we choose to follow

equations prescribed in Appendix 8.1 of [5]. Using these equations, the weights of

various individual components are calculated.

6.3 C.G Location and C.G Travel

6.3.1 Wing Location on Fuselage

The wing longitudinal location is decided based on the consideration the C.G of the

entire airplane with full payload and fuel is around the quarter chord of the m.a.c. We

tabulate the weights and the corresponding C.G locations of various components and then

apply moment equilibrium about the nose of the airplane in order to solve for Xl.e (the

distance of leading edge of root chord of the wing from the nose).In tabulating the results,

we assume that the C.G locations of wing, horizontal tail and vertical tail are at 40% of the

respective m.a.c. The fuselage C.G is taken to be at 40% of it’s length. The engine C.G

location was taken to be at 50% of it’s length. All other components were taken to have a

net C.G location at 40% of the fuselage length. The tabulated values are given below. The

nose wheel was placed referring to ATR-72 aircraft, main landing gear position was

determined based on load distribution.

• Using data for equivalent trapezoidal wing in section 4, the location of wing c.g. is at 5.34

m behind the leading edge of the root chord. The quarter chord of m.a.c is at

4.76 m behind the leading edge of root chord.

• Noting that the tail arm is 14.85 m and that the c.g of tail is 15 % behind the a.c., the

distance of horizontal tail c.g. from leading edge of root chord of wing is 20.05 m. In a

similar way, c.g. of vertical tail is at 19.56 m behind leading edge of the root chord of

wing

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 69: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 69

Components Wt (Kgf) CG (m) Wt*CG (Kgf*m) % Wt

Wing 2678.34 12.92 34613.15 11.40

Fuselage 3290.00 11.40 37506.00 14.00

HT 432.00 25.72 11112.92 1.84

VT 362.88 25.07 9097.90 1.54

Engine 1170.00 11.91 13930.68 4.98

Fixed Equipment 3995.00 11.40 45543.00 17.00

Nose Wheel 167.00 1.74 290.41 0.71

Main Landing Gear 949.93 13.74 13051.09 4.04

Pay Load 6528.00 12.36 80686.08 27.78

Fuel 3926.85 12.56 49319.70 16.71 295150.93

Table 6.1 Weights and CG location

By applying moment equilibrium about the nose of the airplane, we obtain

location of wing leading edge at the root to be 11.74 m from the nose of the airplane.

The C.G of the airplane lies at 12.56 m from the nose.

6.4 C.G Travel for Critical Cases

6.4.1 Full Payload and No Fuel

For the case of full payload and no fuel, the fuel contribution to the weight is

not present. However, since we have assumed that the c.g of the fuel to be at the

quarter chord of the m.a.c of the wing (where the c.g of the entire airplane has been

positioned) there will be no c.g shift in this case.

Hence, the C.G shift is 0%.

6.4.2 No Payload and No Fuel

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 70: ADP PROJECT - final

For this case, the fuel as well as the payload contribution are not present. Since the

c.g of payload is not at the c.g of the entire airplane, the c.g is bound to shift by a

certain amount in this case. Calculations showed that, the C.G shift is 4%.

6.4.3 No Payload and Full fuel

For this case, since there is no payload, the c.g is bound to shift. On performing

calculations, we obtain the new c.g location. The shift in CG is about 3.13 % 6.5 Summary

• Wing location(leading edge of root of trapezoidal wing) – 11.74 m

• c.g location with Full payload and full fuel - 12.56 m

• c.g travel for No Payload and No Fuel – 4.0%

• c.g travel for No Payload and full Fuel – 3.13%

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 71: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 71

7 Control Surfaces

7.1 Stability and Controllability The ability of a vehicle to maintain its equilibrium is termed stability and the influence which the pilot or control system can exert on the equilibrium is termed its controllability. The basic requirement for static longitudinal stability of any airplane is a negative slope of the curve of the pitching moment coefficient, Cmcg, versus lift coefficient, CL. Dynamic stability requires that the vehicle be not only statically stable, but also that the motions following a disturbance from equilibrium be such as to restore the equilibrium. Even though the vehicle might be statically stable, it is possible that the oscillations following a disturbance might increase in magnitude with each oscillation, thereby making it impossible to restore the equilibrium.

7.2 Static Longitudinal Stability and Control

7.2.1 Specifications

• The horizontal tail must be large enough to insure that the static longitudinal

stability criterion, dCmcg/dCL will be negative for all anticipated center of gravity

positions.

• An elevator should be provided so that the pilot will be able to trim the airplane(maintain

Cm = 0) at all anticipated values of CL.

• The tail should be large enough and its elevator powerful enough to enable the pilot rotate

the airplane during the take-off run to the required angle of attack. This condition is

termed as the Nose wheel Lift-off condition.

7.2.2 Aft Center of gravity limit

For the “stick free” case and for small angles of attack ,the following expression for the aft

center of gravity limit in terms of the tail-size parameter, V we have the following equation.

The value of xc.g from above equation is termed the “stick-free neutral point”, since it is the

c.g location at which the static stability is neutral.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 72: ADP PROJECT - final

7.2.3 Forward center of Gravity Limit

The forward c.g. limit is not generally dependent on maintaining stability. As the c.g

is moved forward ,the stability contribution xc.g −xa.c of the wing becomes more and

more negative ,thereby increasing the static stability. In order to keep the airplane in

equilibrium as the c.g is moved forward, the elevator must be capable of trimming out the

resulting negative pitching moment. The pitching moment will be the greatest when the

airplane is at CLmax when the airplane is landing and ground effects decrease the

downwash at the tail.

aw=5.62 /radian = 0.098 /degree

from the value obtained in section 4 on wing design.

From Raymer Ref.2 Fig 16.4, M=0.5

Cmα = -0.7 / radian

Therefore,

Referring to Nelson book

We get Cmα = -0.68 / radian for Navion

Cmα = -0.78 / radian for STOL

Therefore the Cmα = -0.7 / radian in appropriate.

Cmα (fuse) =0.223 for Navion.

For Jet planes

Therefore for turboprop aircraft can be considered.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 73: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 73

= 0.52 from Perkins and Hage

Horizontal Tail

Aspect Ratio : 5.5

Landing Mach number= 0.17 β2 =1 - M2 = 0.971, A=5.5

From Equation in section 4,

aw Land =4.354/ radian = 0.076 /deg

-0.125=0.06+0.06-(0.076/0.098) X V X 1 X (1-0.2979) X (1-(-0.0066/-0.0114)X0.52) V =

0.6438

V = therefore

The value is closer to the value from similar aircrafts.

We can take

Therefore Sht= 12.81 m2

Vertical Tail

Aspect ratio= 1.5

From Equation in section 4,

at Land =2.064 / radian = 0.036/deg

Cnβ desirable =0.08 / radian = 0.0014 /deg

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 74: ADP PROJECT - final

Cnβ (fuselage) = =0.0025

-0.0014=0+0.0025-0.036 V V

= 0.102

V = therefore

The value is closer to the value from similar aircrafts. We

can take

Therefore Svt= 13.4 m2

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 75: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 75

8. Performance Estimation

The details regarding overall dimensions, engine details, weights, geometric

parameters of wing, fuselage, horizontal tail, vertical tail, vertical tail and other

details like CLmax in various conditions and maximum load factor are given in section

8.2 - 8.10. The details of flight condition for estimation of drag polar are as follows

Altitude : 4500 m = 14760 ft

Mach number : 0.45 Kinematic Viscosity : 2.12355 ×10−5 m2/s Density : 0.777 kg/m3

Speed of Sound : 322.6 m/s

Flight Speed : 138.9 m/s

Weight of the Airplane : 23500 kgf

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 76: ADP PROJECT - final

Wing Loading Calculations

The power-to-weight ratio (P/W) and the wing loading (W/S) are the two most

important parameters affecting aircraft performance. Optimization of these

parameters forms a major part of the design activities conducted after initial weight

estimation. For example, if the wing loading used for the initial layout is low, then the area

would be large and there would be enough space for the landing gear and fuel tanks.

However it results in a heavier wing.

Wing loading and thrust-to-weight ratio are interconnected for a number of critical

performance items, such as take-off distance, maximum speed etc. These are often the

design drivers. A requirement for short takeoff can be met by using a large wing (low W/S)

with a relatively low P/W. On the other hand, the same takeoff distance could be met with

a high W/S along with a higher P/W.

In this section, we use different criteria and optimize the wing loading and thrust

loading. Wing loading affects stalling speed, climb rate, takeoff and landing distances,

minimum fuel required and turn performance.

Similarly, a higher thrust loading would result in more cost which is undesirable.

However it would also lead to enhanced climb performance. Hence a trade-off is needed

while choosing W/S and P/W. Optimization of W/S and P/W based on various

considerations is carried out in the following subsections.

1. Landing Distance Consideration

SLand = 1200 m

Initially landing distance was considered as 900m. But it is found that for all similar

aircrafts the landing distance is around 1200 m . so it is decided to consider

landing distance as 1200m

Va = SLand ( feet)

0.3

Va = (1200)(3.28)

0.3

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 77: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 77

2

V a = 114.54 K nots V a = 5 9 .0 4 m / s Stall Speed , Vs = Va/1.3 = 59.04/1.3

Vs = 45.4 m/s

Now (W/S)Land = 1 ρ σV 2C

2 0 s L max

1 (1.225) * (45.4)2 * 2.7 2

(W/S)Land = 3408.64 N/m2

WLand/WTO = 0.97

(W/S) TO = 3514.065 N/m2

With 10% Variation in Vs

2761.0 N/m2 < (W/S)Land < 4124.46 N/m2

2. Maximum Speed Consideration

Vmax = 1.1 Vcr Vcr = 500 Kmph

Vmax = 1.1*500

Vmax = 550 Km/h = 152.8 m/s

C D =

K =

C D 0

1

+ K C L

CD 0

π Ae = C fe

Swet

Sref

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 78: ADP PROJECT - final

2

2

A Swet

Sref

= 12 5.2

= 2.3

1

= 1 + 1 + 0.05

e ewing e fuge

1 = 1 + 1 + 0.05 e 0.84 0.1

e = 0 .7 4 6

K = 1 π *12 * 0.746

K = 0.03555

CD 0 = 1

4K (L D )

2 Max

CD 0 = 1

4 * 0.03555 (17)2

CD 0 = 0.02433

C D = C D 0 + K C L

CD = 0.02433 + 0.03555CL

This is the Drag polar for the aircraft under design

CD 0 = C fe * Swet

Sref

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 79: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 79

2 2

0.02433 = C fe * 5.2

C fe = 0.004679

F1 = 0.004679 *1.87 * (1 + 0.25 + 0.21)

F1 = 0.01277

F = CD 0 − F1 2 W

S

F2 = 0.02433 − 0.01277 3440

F = K

3 q2

F2 = 3.36046E − 6

F3 = 0.03555

( 1 * 0.77 *152.82 )

F3 = 4.39972 E − 10

F1 Popt =

F3

Popt = 0.01277

4.39972 E − 10

Popt = 5387.449 N / m2

tv max = 0.07282

Considering +5% of tvmax (0.076461)

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 80: ADP PROJECT - final

3573.65 N/m2 < W/S < 8121.815 N/m2

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 81: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 81

CL =

2W ρ SV 2

C = 2 * 5387.446

L 0.77 *152.82

CL = 0.59934

C D = 0.02433 + 0.03555*0.59934 2

CD = 0.03709986

T = WCD

CL

T = 23500 * 9.81* 0.03709986 0.59934

PRe q =

T = 14 270 .3 9 N TV

1000

PRe q = 14270.39 *152.8

1000

PRe q = 2180.515 Kw (Total power)

To convert it to sea level static thrust

PRe q = 2180.515

= 3634.19Kw 0.6 0.6

Power per engine is 3634.19 = 1817.1 kw

2

P = 3634.19 W 23500 *9.81

= 0.01576

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 82: ADP PROJECT - final

)

3. (R/C)Max Consideration

(CL

)min P =

3CD 0

K

(CL )min P =

3 * 0.02433 0.03555

(CL )

V

min P =

= 1.432886

2W S

min P ρ (CL

min P

Vmin P = 2 * 3440

1.225 *1.432886

Vmin P = 62.61m / s

q = 1 *1.225 * 62.612

2

q = 2401.01

F = K

3 q2

F = 0.03555

3 2401.012

F3 = 6.16668E − 9

F1 Popt =

F3

Popt = 0.01277

6.16668E − 9

Popt = 1439.03N / m2

Since the value is not appropriate, it is not considered

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 83: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 83

4. Based on the Range consideration (R) Vcr =500 Kmph = 138.9 m/s

q = 1 * 0.77 *138.92

2

q = 7427.886

F = K

3 q2

F = 0.03555

3 7427.8862

F3 = 6.4433E − 10

F1 Popt =

F3

Popt = 0.01277

6.4433E − 10

Popt = 4451.86N / m2

2997.12 N/m2 < W/S < 6612.69 N/m2

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 84: ADP PROJECT - final

Summary of above considerations.

Popt (N/m2) Wing loading N/m2) power loading

S land consideration 3514 2761- 4125

Vmax consideration 5387.4 3573.6- 8121.8 0.01576

Range consideration 4452 2998- 6613

R/C consideration

Take off consideration 0.08112

The wing loading is chosen as 3600 N/m2

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 85: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 85

ENGINE CHARACTERISTICS Fig. 9.1 to 9.6 shows the engine characteristics at different altitude during different flight conditions.

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 86: ADP PROJECT - final

Fig 9.1

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 87: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 87

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 88: ADP PROJECT - final

Fig 9.3

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 89: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 89

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 90: ADP PROJECT - final

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 91: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 91

Fig 9.6

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 92: ADP PROJECT - final

9 features of the designed aircraft

9.1 Three View Drawing The 3-view drawing of the airplane designed is given in figure

9.2 Overall Dimensions

Length : 34.32

Wing Span : 27.72 m

Wheel base : 12.0 m

Wheel track : 4.1 m

9.3 Engine details

Pratt and Whitney PW 123D Engine

Maximum SHP TO 1604 kW

Maximum continuous power 1454 kW

8.4 Weights

Gross Weight : 23500 kgf

Empty Weight : 13045 kgf

Fuel Weight : 3927 kgf

Payload : 6528 kgf

9.5 Wing Geometry

Planform Shape : Tapered wing with no sweep

Span : 27.72 m Area : 64.04 m2

Airfoil : NACA - 653618, t/c = 18%, Clopt = 0.6

Root Chord : 3.3 m

Tip Chord : 1.32 m

Mean Aerodynamic Chord : 2.451 m

Quarter chord Sweep : 0 deg

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 93: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 93

Dihedral : 3 deg

Twist : 0 deg Incidence : 2 deg

Taper Ratio : 0. 4 (Equivalent Trapezoidal wing)

Aspect Ratio : 12

9.6 Fuselage Geometry

Length : 28.5 m

Maximum Diameter : 2.96 m

9.7 Horizontal Tail Geometry Span : 9.4 m

Area : 12.81 m2

Mean Aerodynamic Chord : 1.74 m

Root Chord : 1.81 m

Tip chord : 0.91 m

Taper Ratio : 0.5

Aspect Ratio : 5.5

9.8 Vertical Tail Geometry

Span : 4.5 m

Area : 13.44 m2

Root Chord : 4.26 m

Tip chord : 1.7 m

Mean Aerodynamic Chord : 2.15 m

Quarter Chord Sweep : 0 deg

Taper Ratio : 0.4

Aspect Ratio : 1.5

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 94: ADP PROJECT - final

9.9 Other details

CLmax without flap : 1.5

CLmax with landing flaps : 2.7

9.10 Crew and Payload

Flight crew : 2 (pilot and co-pilot)

Cabin crew : 2

Passenger seating : 52 economy and 08 business class

9.11 Performance The detailed performance estimation is given in section 9. The highlights are as

follows.

• The performance is worked for a gross weight of 23500 kgf and wing

loading of 3600 N/m2 except for landing where the landing weight is taken

as 85% of take-off weight.

• Maximum Mach No. at 10000 ft Mmax = 0.45

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 95: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 95

Fig 8.1 Three view drawing of Aircraft under design

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 96: ADP PROJECT - final

BIBLIOGRAPHY References:

1) Dr. E G Tulapurkara, A. Venkattraman, V. Ganesh, “ An Example of Airplane

Preliminary Design Procedure- Jet Transport, AE TR 2007-4, April 2007

2) Raymer .D.P. Aircraft design a conceptual approach.

AIAA’ educational series, 2006

3) Tulapurkara.E.G Lecture Notes on Aircraft Design, Department

of Aerospace Engineering I.I.T Madras, 2008

4) Roskam J. Methods of estimating drag polars of subsonic airplanes

Roskam Aviation & Engineering Corporation, Ottawa, Kansas,1983

5) Jenkinson L.R., Simpkin P. and Rhodes D.

Civil Jet Aircraft Design, Arnold, 1999

6) Wood K.D. Aerospace vehicle design, Volume 1, Johnson

publishing company, Boulder, Colorado, 1966

7) Perkins C.D. & Hage A.E. Airplane performance stability & control,

McGraw Hill, 1963

8) Abbot I.H. and Doenhoff A.E. Theory of wing sections,

Dover publications, 1959

9) Roskam J. Aircraft design,

Roskam Aviation & Engineering Corporation, Ottawa, Kansas, 1990

10) Kroo, Ilan & Shevel, Richard - Aircraft Design, Synthesis and Analysis

11) Lloyd R. Jenkinson, James F. Marchman III

Aircraft Design Projects For Engineering Students

12) BRUHN- Airplane Design

KARAN G

ROVER

Page 97: ADP PROJECT - final

Page | 97

INTERNET REFERENCES 1. www.wikipedia.org

2. www.cessena.com

3. www.diamondaircraft.com

4. www.airliners.net

5. www.boeing.com

6. www.google.com

7. www.scribd.org

KARAN G

ROVER