Aircraft Design Project 1

AIM OF THE PROJECT
The aim of this design project is to design a 300 seater passenger

aircraft by comparing the data and specifications of present aircrafts in
this category and to calculate the performance characteristics. Also
necessary graphs need to be plotted and diagrams have to be included
wherever needed.
The following design requirements and research studies are set for the
project:
Design an aircraft that will transport 300 passengers and their
baggage over a design range of 13800 km at a cruise speed of
about 0.85 Mach number.
To provide the passengers with high levels of safety and comfort.
To use advanced and state of the art technologies in order to reduce
the operating costs.
To offer a unique and competitive service to existing scheduled
operations.
To assess the development potential in the primary role of the
aircraft.
To produce a commercial analysis of the aircraft project.
ABSTRACT
Aircraft design is an evolutionary process rather than a revolutionary process
Airplane design is an art and a science. In that respect it is difficult to

learn by reading a book. Airplane design the intellectual engineering
process of creating on paper a flying machine to meet certain
specification and requirements established by potential users or to
pioneer innovative, new ideas and technology, like the aircraft to be
designed here.
Sir George cayley who was pioneer and his revolutionary work has
helped in reaching great heights in aero science. Today our dream for
designing a 300 seater passenger aircraft has come into reality.
The purpose of the project is to design a passenger aircraft comprised of
300 passengers with 5 crew members. Turbofan engines are provided for
the required amount of speed, range, and fuel consumption. There remain
a lot of technical challenges and problems to be met and solved before
sustained, practical passenger aircraft becomes reality. In this project we
use various design parameters. This result of various design process gave
clear view of long range wide body passenger aircrafts. The performance
calculation is done with the normal payload. Two turbofan engines are
used for producing the required thrust.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION OF AIRCRAFT DESIGN
1.1INTRODUCTION
For any airplane to fly, it must be able to lift the weight of the
airplane, its fuel, the passengers, and the cargo. The wings generate most
of the lift to hold the plane in the air. To generate lift, the airplane must
be pushed through the air. The engines, which are usually located
beneath the wings, provide the thrust to push the airplane forward
through the air.
The fuselage is the body of the airplane that holds all the pieces of the
aircraft together and many of the other large components are attached to
it. The fuselage is generally streamlined as much as possible to reduce
drag. Designs for fuselages vary widely. The fuselage houses the cockpit
where the pilot and flight crew sit and it provides areas for passengers
and cargo.
The wing provides the principal lifting force of an airplane. Lift is
obtained from the dynamic action of the wing with respect to the air. The
cross-sectional shape of the wing as viewed from the side is known as the
airfoil section. The planform shape of the wing (the shape of the wing as
viewed from above) and placement of the wing on the fuselage
(including the angle of incidence), as well as the airfoil section shape,
depend upon the airplane mission and the best compromise necessary in
the overall airplane design.
The control surfaces include all those moving surfaces of an airplane
used for attitude, lift, and drag control. They include the tail assembly,
the structures at the rear of the airplane that serve to control and
maneuver the aircraft and structures forming part of the tail and attached
to the wing.
1.2ACTUAL PROCESS OF DESIGN
Selection of aircraft type and shape
3
Determination of geometric parameters

Selection of power plant
Structural design and analysis of various components
Determination of aircraft flight and operational characteristics.
1.3STAGES OF AIRCRAFT DESIGN
Project Feasibility Study
Preliminary Design
Design Project
1.3.1PROJECT FEASIBILITY STUDY
Comprehensive market survey
Studies on operating conditions for the airplane to be designed
Studies
on
relevant
design
requirements
(specified
by
Airworthiness Authorities)
Evaluation of similar existing designs
Studies on possibilities of introducing new concepts
Collection of data on relevant power plants
Laying down preliminary specifications
1.3.2PRELIMINARY DESIGN
It consists of the initial stages of design, resulting in the
presentation of a BROCHURE containing preliminary drawings and
clearly stating the operational capabilities of the airplane being
designed. This Brochure has to be APPROVED by the manufacturer
and/or the customer.
The steps involved:
Layout of the main components
Arrangement of airplane equipment and control systems
Selection of power plant
Aerodynamic and stability calculations
Preliminary structural design of MAJOR components
Weight estimation and c.g. travel
Preliminary and Structural Testing
4
Drafting the preliminary 3-view Drawings
1.3.3DESIGN PROJECT
Internal discussions
Discussions with prospective customers
Discussions with Certification Authorities
Consultations with suppliers of power plant and major accessories
Deciding upon a BROAD OUTLINE to start the ACTUAL
DESIGN, which will consist of Construction of Mock-up
Structural layout of all the individual units, and their stress analysis
Drafting of detailed design drawings
Structural and functional testing
Nomenclature of parts
Supplying key and assembly diagrams
Final power plant calculations
Final weight estimation and c.g. limits
Final performance calculation
1.4THE DESIGN WHEEL
SIZING AND
TRADE
STUDIES
DESIGN
ANALYSIS
REQUIREMENTS
DESIGN
CONCEPT
Fig 1.1The Design Wheel
SEVEN INTELLECTUAL POINTS FOR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
Fig 1.2 Seven Intellectual Points for Conceptual Design

6
1.5DESIGN SEQUENCE
1. Define the mission
2. Compare the past design
3. Parametric selection
a. Geometry
b. Shape
4. Weight Estimation
5. Aerodynamics
a. Wing
b. Speed
c. Altitude
d. Drag
6. Propulsive device
a. Engine selection
b. Location
7. Performance
a. Fuel weight
b. Take-off distance
c. Landing distance
d. Climb
e. Descent
f. Loiter
g. Cruise
8. Configuration
a. Conceptional
b. Preliminary
c. Detailed design
9. Stability and control
a. Tail
b. Flaps
c. Control surfaces
7
10. Structure
a. Primary
b.Secondary
c. Tertiary
11. Construction
a. Truss
b. Semi-monocoque
c. Monocoque
12. Manufacturing Models
a. Mock up model
b. Training model
c. Scale in/out
d. Fake model
e. Test model
f. Prototype model
g. Flying model
13. Life cycle cost Minimize the owning cost
14. Iteration Refine the weight and design
15. Simulation Flight envelope
16. Testing
17. Modification and refinement
18. Design report
a. Executive summary
b. Management summary
c. Design details
d. Manufacturing plan
CHAPTER-2
COMPARATIVE DATASHEET
Table 2.1
Comparative Datasheet
Aircrafts
Parameter
Units
Name
707-320B
757-200
767-200
777-200
787-9
Total Seating
202
234
290
301
280
Aircraft
Capacity
Length
46.61 Dimensions
47.32
48.5
63.7
62.8
Height
12.93
13.56
16.8
18.5
16.9
Fuselage Dia
3.76
4.1
5.03
6.2
5.9
Wing Span
44.42
38.05
47.6
60.9
60.1
Chord
6.25
4.76
5.95
7.02
6.4
7.1
7.98
7.99
8.67
9.4
181.25
283.3
427.8
325.3
25
31.5
31.64
32.2
Aspect Ratio
Wing Area
Wing Sweep
m2
273.7
Degree
35
Performance
Cruise Altitude
10,058
10,668
10,668
10,668
12,192
Ceiling
11,887
12,802
11,887
13,137
13,106
Range
Km
10,650
7,600
7,300
9,695
15,000
Cruise Speed
Mach
0.86
0.8
0.8
0.84
0.85
Max Speed
Mach
0.97
0.84
0.84
0.87
0.9
320.4
193
222
330
320
No of Engines
Max thrust
kN
Design Weights
capability
MTO Weight
Kg
Empty Weight
Kg
2
151320
115680
142880
247200
248000
66400
57180
81230
134800
115000
Wing Loading
Kg/m
552.87
638.23
504.34
577.84
762.37
Max Fuel
Litre
90,160
43,490
90,770
117,000
127,000
Capacity
Table 2.2
Comparative datasheet 2
Aircrafts
Parameter
Units
Name
A380-800
B-747-200
Total Seating
64
412
Aircraft
70.6
Dimensions
Capacity
B-787-8
B-787-10
10
B-747-300
310
313
270
68.3
67.9
60.7
Length
72.
Height
7
24.45
19.3
16.9
17.1
17.2
Fuselage Dia
5.6
5.64
5.64
5.64
5.96
Wing Span
4
79.75
59.6
60.1
63.45
64.8
Chord
5.8
5.64
6.5
6.8
9.3
9.3
9.25
7.
7.7
Wing Area
m2
7
84
219
325
439.4
443
Wing Sweep
Degree
37.5
32.2
31.1
31.9
Aspect Ratio
33.5 Performance
Cruise Altitude m
13,136
13,100
13,100
10,972
12,192
Ceiling
12,000
12,497
12,000
12,527
13,137
Range
Km
15700
12690
14,500
16,060
15,000
Cruise Speed
Mach
0.85
0.84
0.85
0.83
0.85
Max Speed
Mach
0.89
0.89
0.90
0.86
0.9
No of Engines
Max thrust
kN
244
28
249
374
2
369
Design Weights
capability
MTO Weight
Kg
575000
377842
228000
372000
268000
Empty Weight
Kg
276000
174000
118000
170900
115700
Wing Loading
Kg/m2
660.38
748.86
644.36
846.61
604.96
Max Fuel
Litre
323,546
200
126.210
2,14,810
1,29,000
Capacity
10
Table 3
Comparative Datasheet 3
Aircrafts
Parameter
Units
Name
Total Seating
11
12
13
14
Lockheed
Ilyushin
Tupolev
Douglas
Tupolev
Tu-204-100
210
DC-8-63CF
259
Tu-114
220
L-1011-200 IL-96-300
26
300
3
Capacity
15
Aircraft Dimensions
Lengt
54.15
55.3
46.1
57.1
54.1
h
Height
16.87
17.5
13.9
13.11
15.44
Fuselage
6.0
6.08
4.1
3.73
4.2
Diameter
Wing
Span
47.35
60.11
41.8
45.24
51.1
Chord
6.7
5.82
4.40
6.01
6.08
8
6.9
10.32
9.48
7.52
8.39
8
321.1
350
184.2
271.9
311.1
35
30
30
32
35
Aspect Ratio
Wing Area
Wing Sweep
Degree
Performance
Cruise Altitude m
10,257
10,668
12,100
10,668
8,991
Ceiling
10,668
13,106
12,588
12,497
11,887
Range
Km
7,420
10,400
5,650
3,445
6,200
Cruise Speed
Mach
0.8
0.78
0.78
0.80
0.74
Max Speed
Mach
0.95
0.84
0.85
0.8
0.82
kN
222.4
157
158.3
84.5
60
No of Engines
Max thrust
capability
Design Weights
Kg
211000
250000
103000
161000
175000
Empty Weight Kg
105100
120400
60000
66360
93000
MTO Weight
Wing Loading Kg/m2
657.11
714.28
559.17
592.12
562.52
Max Fuel
99,935
152,620
41,000
66,243
71,615
Litre
Capacity
11
Table 4
Aircrafts
Parameter
Name
Units
-
16
17
Ilyushin
B-767-400-ER
IL-86
Total Seating
304
320
18
19
20
Ilyushin
Ilyushin
Ilyushin
IL-96M
IL-96T
IL-96-400
340
313
386
60.21
64.7
63.9
63.9
Aircraft Dimensions
Length
61.4
Height
16.62
15.8
15.7
15.7
15.7
Fuselage Dia
5.64
6.08
6.08
6.08
6.08
Wing Span
48.06
60.11
60.11
60.11
Chord
5.8
5.64
6.5
6.8
Aspect Ratio
7.7
Wing Area
Wing Sweep
m2
290
28
Degree
51.9
300
35
350
35
350
35
350
35
Performance
Cruise Altitude m
11,000
11,000
11,000
11,000
11,000
Ceiling
13,100
13,100
13,100
13,100
13,100
Range
Km
10,418
3,400
12,800
5,000
10,000
Cruise Speed
Mach
0.8
0.88
0.78
0.78
0.78
Max Speed
Mach
0.86
0.84
0.84
0.84
0.84
No of Engines
Max thrust
kN
282
128
167
167
171
Design Weights
Kg
204000
Empty Weight Kg
104000
MTO Weight
215000
270000
270000
265000
117.5
132.4
116.4
122.3
Wing Loading
Kg/m2
660.38
748.86
644.36
846.61
604.96
Max Fuel
Litre
91,400
75,470
152,260
152,260
152,260
Capacity
12
Table 5
Aircrafts
Parameter
Units
21
Name
(no unit)
Total Seating
(no unit)
Capacity
A300-B4
22
23
24
25
A310-200
A330-300
A340-500
A350-800
240
295
313
270
46.6
63.6
67.9
60.7
266
Aircraft Dimensions
53.62
Length
Height
16.62
15.8
16.85
17.1
17.2
Fuselage Dia
5.64
5.64
5.64
5.64
5.96
Wing Span
44.85
43.9
60.3
63.45
64.8
Chord
5.8
5.64
6.5
6.8
(no unit)
7.7
7.78
9.3
9.3
9.25
m2
260
219
361.6
439.4
443
degree
28
28
30
31.1
31.9
Aspect Ratio
Wing Area
Wing Sweep
Performance
Cruise Altitude
10,668
9,998
10,972
10,972
12,192
Ceiling
12,000
12,497
12,527
12,527
13,137
Range
Km
7,540
9,600
10,500
16,060
15,000
Cruise Speed
Mach
0.78
0.8
0.82
0.83
0.85
Max Speed
Mach
0.86
0.84
0.86
0.86
0.9
(no unit)
kN
311.4
262.5
320
249
374
No of Engines
Max thrust
Design Weights
capability
MTO Weight
Kg
171700
Empty Weight
Kg
90900
83100
Wing Loading
Kg/m2
660.38
748.86
Litre
68,150
75,470
Max Fuel
164000
Capacity
13
233000
124500
372000
268000
170900
115700
644.36
846.61
604.96
97,170
2,14,810
1,29,000
CHAPTER 3
LIST OF GRAPHS
3.1.1CRUISE SPEED VS CARGO CAPACITY

600
Cargo capacity (m3)
500
400
300
200
100
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
0.97
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph1
Cargo capacity = 146 m3
Overall Length (m)
3.1.2CRUISE SPEED VS OVERALL LENGTH

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 2
Overall Length = 55.5 m
14
0.97
3.1.3CRUISE SPEED VS WING SPAN

90
Wing span (m)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.77
0.81
0.85
0.89
0.93
0.97
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 3
Wing span = 54 m
3.1.4CRUISE SPEED VS WING AREA

900
800
700
Wing area (m2)
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 4
Wing Area = 350 m2
15
0.92
0.97
3.1.5CRUISE SPEED VS OVERALL HEIGHT

30
Overall height (m)
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
0.97
0.92
0.97
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 5
Overall Height = 18 m
3.1.6CRUISE SPEED VS CABIN WIDTH

7
6
Cabin width (m)
5
4
3
2
1
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 6
Cabin Width = 5.6 m
16
3.1.7CRUISE SPEED VS OPERATING WEIGHT
Operating weight (kg)
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
0.97
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 7
Operating Weight = 120,000 kg
Fuselage width (m)
3.1.8CRUISE SPEED VS FUSELAGE WIDTH

7
6.5
6
5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
0.72
0.77
0.82
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 8
Fuselage Width = 6 m
17
0.87
0.92
Fuselage Height
(m)
3.1.9CRUISE SPEED VS FUSELAGE HEIGHT

7
6.5
6
5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
0.97
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 9
Fuselage Height = 5.8 m
3.1.10CRUISE SPEED VS FUSELAGE DIAMETER

7
6.5
6
5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 10
Fuselage Diameter = 6 m
18
0.97
3.1.11CRUISE SPEED VS MAXIMUM TAKEOFF WEIGHT

Maximum Takeoff
Weight (kg)
700000
600000
500000
400000
300000
200000
100000
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
0.97
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 11
Maximum Takeoff Weight =230,000 kg
3.1.12CRUISE SPEED VS TAKEOFF FIELD LENGTH
Takeoff Field Length

(m)
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 12
Takeoff Field Length=2430 m
19
0.97
3.1.13CRUISE SPEED VS MAX SPEED

1
Max speed (mach)
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
0.97
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 13
Max speed = 0.871
3.1.14CRUISE SPEED VS RANGE

40000
35000
Range (km)
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 14
Range = 13,800 km
20
0.92
0.97
3.1.15CRUISE SPEED VS FUEL CAPACITY

350000
Fuel Capacity
(liters)
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
0.97
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 15
Fuel Capacity = 136,000 litres
3.1.16CRUISE SPEED VS CEILING

15000
14500
14000
Ceiling (m)
13500
13000
12500
12000
11500
11000
10500
10000
0.77
0.82
0.87
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 16
Ceiling = 12750 m
21
0.92
0.97
3.1.17CRUISE SPEED VS WING SWEEP ANGLE

35
33
(Degree)
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
0.97
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 17
Wing Sweep Angle = 30.6
3.1.18CRUISE SPEED VS ASPECT RATIO

11
Aspect Ratio (no unit)
Wing Sweep Angle
34
10
9
8
7
6
5
0.77
0.82
0.87
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 18
Aspect Ratio = 8
22
0.92
0.97
3.1.19CRUISE SPEED VS PAYLOAD

100000
90000
Payload (kg)
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
0.97
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 19
Payload = 46,000 kg
3.1.20CRUISE SPEED VS THRUST

600
Thrust (KN)
500
400
300
200
100
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 20
Thrust = 185 KN
23
0.92
0.97
3.1.21CRUISE SPEED VS MAXIMUM LANDING WEIGHT

Max. Landing Weight (kg)
450000
400000
350000
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
0.77
0.82
0.87
0.92
0.97
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 21
Max. Landing Weight = 185,000 kg
Max. Zero Fuel Weight (kg)
3.1.22CRUISE SPEED VS MAXIMUM ZERO FUEL WEIGHT

450000
400000
350000
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
0.75
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
Cruise Speed (Mach)

Graph 22
Max. Zero Fuel Weight = 170,000 kg
24
3.2 MEAN DESIGN PARAMETERS

S.No
Design Parameter
Value
Unit
1.
Cruising Speed
Mach 0.85
(no unit)
2.
Length
55.5
3.
Wing Span
54
4.
Wing Area
350
m2
5.
Height
18
6.
Cabin Width
5.6
7.
Seating Capacity
300 (Passengers)
(no unit)
8.
Cargo Capacity
146
m3
9.
Fuselage Width
10.
Fuselage Height
5.8
11.
Fuselage Diameter
12.
Takeoff Field Length
2430
13.
Maximum Speed
Mach 0.871
(no unit)
14.
Range
13800
Km
15.
Maximum Fuel Capacity
136,000
Litre
16.
Service Ceiling
12,750
17.
Wing Sweep Angle
30.6
(degree)
18.
Aspect Ratio
(no unit)
19.
Thrust
185
kN
20.
Empty Weight (Operating)
120,000
Kg
21.
Maximum Takeoff Weight
230,000
Kg
22.
Maximum Payload
46,000
Kg
23.
Maximum Zero Fuel
170,000
Kg
24.
MaximumWeight
Landing Weight
Engine
185,000
Kg
(no unit)
25.
25
CHAPTER-4
FLIGHT MISSION PATH
Fig4.1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Engine Starts Warm-Up

Taxi
Take-off
Climb
Cruise
Loiter
Descent
Landing
The above plan one of the most basic and would generally correspond
to a Commercial aircrafts. It consists of flight phases made up of engine
start up and take-off, climb and accelerate to cruise altitude and speed,
cruise out to destination, and landing.
4.1 ENGINE START-UP AND TAKE-OFF
The Engine start-up and Take-off is the first phase in any flight plan. It
consists of starting the engines, taxiing to the take-off position, take-off,
and climb out. A good empirical estimate for the weight of fuel used in
this phase is from 2.5 to 3 % of the total take-off weight.
26
4.2 ACCELERATION TO CRUISE VELOCITY AND ALTITUDE

After the take-off the aircraft will generally climb to cruise altitude and
accelerate to cruise speed. The estimate for the weight fraction for this
phase of the flight is also found from the empirical data.
4.3 CRUISE OUT TO DESTINATION
For a cruising aircraft the fuel weight fraction can be determined quite
well from an analytical formulation called the Brequet range equation.
4.4 ACCELERATION TO HIGH SPEED (INTERCEPT)
The flight phase involves accelerating from the cruise Mach no to a
maximum flight Mach no as part of a high speed intercept.
4.5 RETURN CRUISE
Return cruise refers to a flight plan in which the aircraft return to its
point of origin to land for a flight plans in which the landing destination is
different from where it took-off, return cruise can be viewed as the second
half of the cruise phase. In either case return cruise treated exactly like
cruise out with two possible exceptions: Loss of fuel weight, Increase in
altitude due to decrease in weight.
4.6 LOITER
The loiter consist of cruising for specified amount of time over a small
region. Loiter is usually built into the flight plan to allow for delays prior
landing. For this phase the fuel weight fraction is derived an analytical
expression called the Endurance equation.
4.7 LANDING
The final phase of the flight plan is landing. As an estimate of the fuel
weight fraction used at landing, we use the same empirical formula that
was used for start- up and take-off.
27
CHAPTER 5
WEIGHT ESTIMATION
5.1 FIRST WEIGHT ESTIMATION

The design take off gross weight Wo is the weight of the airplane
at the instant it begins its mission. It includes the weight of all the fuel
on board at the beginning of the flight.
Wo = Wcrew + Wpayload + Wfuel + Wempty
5.2 CREW WEIGHT
The two pilots and three cabin attendants at 175 lbs each and 30 lbs
baggage each
Therefore,
No.of Crew = 5
Wcrew = (5*175 lbs) + (5*30 lbs)
=1025 lbs.
Wcrew = 1025 lbs.
5.3 PAYLOAD WEIGHT
The 150 passengers at 175 lbs each and 30 lbs of baggage each.
Therefore,
No.of passengers = 300
Wpayload = (300*175 lbs) + (300*30 lbs)
=52,830 lbs
Wpayload = 52,830 lbs
28
5.4 FUEL WEIGHT

Mission Profile
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Engine Starts Warm-Up

Taxi
Take-off
Climb
Cruise
Loiter
Descent
Landing
Phase 1:
The Engine starts warm-up Weight Ratio is W1 /W2
Phase 2:
The Taxi Weight Ratio is W2 / W1
Phase 3:
The Take-off Weight Ratio is W3 / W2
Phase 4:
The Climb Weight Ratio is W4 / W3
Phase 7:
The Descent Weight Ratio is W7 / W6
Phase 8:
The Landing Weight Ratio is W8 / W7
29
The phase 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 are refer Table 6

Table 5.1
S
No
Aircraft
W1 / W0
Transport
0.990
W2 / W1 W3 / W2 W4 / W3 W7 / W6
0.990
0.995
0.980
0.990
jet
Phase 5:
The Cruise Weight Ratio is W5 / W4
By using formula,
Rcr = (V / Cj)cr x ( L /D )cr x In ( W4 / W5 )

Rcr = 7,452 Nautical miles
Vcr = 849.7 kmph
Table 5.2
Cruise
Loiter
L/D
14
17
Cj
0.75
0.5
Rcr = (V / Cj)cr * ( L /D )cr * In ( W4 / W5 )

7452 = (849700 / 0.75) * (14) * In (W4 / W5)
In (W4 / W5) = 4.69 * 10-4
(W4 / W5) = 1.000469
( W5 / W4 ) = 1.0001
30
W8 / W7
0.992
Phase 6:
The Loiter Weight Ratio is W6 / W5
Eltr = (1 / Cj)ltr x ( L /D )ltr x In ( W5 / W6 )
Eltr = 25 min = 0.417 hrs.
Eltr = (1 / Cj)ltr x( L /D )ltr x In ( W5 / W6 )
0.417 = (1/ 0.5) x (17) x In (W5 / W6)
In (W5 / W6) = 0.0122
(W5 / W6) = 1.00122
( W6 / W5 ) = 1.000
The total weight ratio is,
( W8 / W0 ) = ( W1 / W0 ) ( W2 / W1 ) (W3 / W2 ) ( W4 / W3 )
( W5 / W4 )( W6 / W5 ) ( W7 / W6 ) ( W8 / W7 )
(W8 / W0) = 0.990 x 0.990 x 0.995 x 0.9980 x 0.9995 x 0.9878
x0.990 x0.992
( W8 / W0 ) = 0.9558
Wfuel = (1 Mff ) WTo

5.5 EMPTY WEIGHT
The formula is,
WE = Antilog10 ( (log10 WTo A) / B)
Table 5.3
Aircraft
Transport Jet
0.0833
1.0383
31
By refer the graph,
Graph 23
WTo = 5.07 x 105 lbs,
WE = 270000 lbs
ITERATION
We put approximate Value
WTo = 508,560 lbs
WE = Antilog10 (5.454849)
WE = 270000 lbs
Therefore,
32
The Take-off Weight is

WTo = 527698 lbs
Wfuel = (1 Mff ) WTo
Wfuel = 0.0564 (558,560)
Wfuel =51421.164 lbs
The total weight estimation is,
Wo = Wcrew + Wpayload + Wfuel + Wempty
Wo= 1,025 + 52,830 + 270,000 + 23,324.25

Wo = 347179 lbs
33
CHAPTER 6
POWERPLANT SELECTION
6.1 INTRODUCTION
From the first weight estimate, we can have a rough idea of the
weight of the power-plant that is to be used.
The total weight of the power-plant (0.055W) requires being
approximately 15,443.5 kg.
Choice of engine is a Turbofan for obvious reasons such as
higher operating fuel economy & efficiency for high payloads.
Engines can be used in combination of 2 x 7721.8 kg engines. Or
3 x 5147.85 kg engines Or 4 x 3860.6 kg engines providing enough
thrust for Take-off.
Most of the aircraft in the 250-350 passenger category were found
to have 2 engines and 4 engines. Hence the preference is towards
having three engines (Trijet).
A list of engines with weight and thrust matching our requirements are
chosen and are tabulated below.
Table 6.1
Engine
Rolls
Pratt &
CFM
General
Pratt &
name
Royce
whitney
CF
Electric
Whitney
Trent
PW400
M56
CF6-50
JT9D
4270
3990
4104
772B
Dry weight 478
4030
8
Max thrust
320
310
151
240
250
Bypass
6.4
4.4
4.8
ratio
34
The preferable choice of engine, from those listed above would be

the pratt & whitney pw JT9D engine which meets our demand of
weight and powers. Airbus A330 and Boeing 777 aircrafts uses these
engines which are similar in payload capabilities such as the one
under design.
6.2 DETAILS ABOUT THE SELECTED ENGINE
6.2.1PRATT & WHITNEY PW JT9D
Since its launch with Cathay Pacific in 1995, PW JT9D has built up
the greatest service experience on the A330. As the only engine
specifically designed for the BOEING 777 it delivers the greatest
performance over the widest range of operational and environmental
conditions.
Fig 6.1 JT9D Turbofan engine

6.3 DESCRIPTION
High bypass turbo-fan engine
Bypass ratio is 5.0 : 1
6.3.1COMPRESSOR
35
Single Stage low pressure fan

3 Stage low pressure axial flow compressor
11 Stage high pressure axial flow compressor
6.3.2 COMBUSTION CHAMBER
Annular combuster
6.3.3 PRESSURE RATIO (OVERALL)
Nominal at sea-level ISA condition 23.4 : 1
6.3.4 TURBINE
4 Stage low pressure turbine
2 Stage high pressure turbine
6.3.5 DIMENSIONS
Overall length 3260mm
Maximum Radius 1670mm
6.3.6 DRY WEIGHT
The dry power plant weight less intake, cowl doors & cowl door
support structure is 3905kg (8608lbs).
6.3.7 ENGINE RATINGS
The ISA Sea-level static thrust ratings are
Take-off thrust
- 222.41 KN
Thrust to weight ratio
- 5.8
Fuel type
- Jet A-1
Oil system
- pressure spray with scavenge
36
CHAPTER-7
AIROFOIL SELECTION
7.1 AIROFOIL
The airfoil is the main aspect and is the heart of the airplane. The
airfoils affects the cruise speed landing distance and take off, stall speed
and handling qualities and aerodynamic efficiency during the all phases
of flight.
Aerofoil Selection is based on the factors of Geometry & definitions,
design/selection, families/types, design lift coefficient, thickness/chord
ratio, lift curve slope, characteristic curves.
An airfoils shape is defined by several parameters, which are shown in
the following figure:
Fig 7.1 Airfoil section

7.2 DEFINITIONS
7.2.1 CHORD LINE
Straight line drawn from the leading edge to the trailing edge
7.2.2 CHORD LENGTH (C)
Length of the chord line
37
7.2.3 MEAN CAMBER LINE

Curved line from the leading edge to the trailing edge, which is
equidistant between the upper and lower surfaces of the airfoil.
7.2.4 MAXIMUM CAMBER
Maximum distance between the chord line and the mean camber line
7.2.5 MAXIMUM THICKNESS
Maximum distance between the upper and lower surfaces of the airfoil
normal to the chord line
7.2.6 SPAN
Width of the airfoil
7.2.7 ANGLE OF ATTACK
Angle between the chord line and the stream wise flow direction
7.2.8 ZERO LIFT ANGLE OF ATTACK
Angle of Attack that no lift is produced. For our symmetric wedge this
would be an angle of attack of zero.
7.2.9 STALL ANGLE OF ATTACK
Angle of attack at which there is maximum lift (or lift coefficient).
Fig 7.2 Flow around the airfoil

7.2.10 SYMMETRIC OR UNCAMBERED AIRFOIL
Upper and lower surfaces are mirror images, which leads to the mean
camber line to be coincident with the chord line. A symmetric airfoil will
also have a just camber of zero.
7.2.11 CAMBERED AIRFOIL
An asymmetric airfoil for which the mean camber line will be above the
chord line.
38
Fig 7.3 Difference between uncambered and cambered airfoil

7.2.12 PITCHING MOMENT
Torque or moment created on the wing due to net lift and drag forces.
Tends to rotate the leading edge either up or down.
7.2.13 PITCHING MOMENT COEFFICIENT
Cm = (M) / (0.5 V2 S c)
Where,
M- Pitching moment (will depend on the moment reference center)
c- Chord length
7.2.14 CENTER OF PRESSURE
The moment reference center for which the moment is zero.Depends on
the angle of attack.
7.2.15 AERODYNAMIC CENTER
The moment reference center for which the moment does not vary with
angle of attack
7.3 NACA CLASSIFICATION
Airfoils have been classified by the National Advisory Committee for
Aeronautics (NACA), the forerunner of NASA, and have been cataloged
using a four digit code. Hence a specific airfoil can be identified by
NACA WXYZ
Where, W: maximum camber as % of the chord length
X: Location of the maximum camber form the leading edge along
the
chord line in tenths of chord length

Y&Z: Maximum thickness in % of the chord length
39
7.3.1 NACA AIRFOIL CHARTS

Every NACA airfoil has two charts to present the lift, drag, and moment
coefficient data for the airfoil. The first chart will have curves of lift
coefficient versus angle of attack at various Reynolds numbers and
curves of moment coefficient at the quarter chord point versus angle of
attack at various Reynolds numbers. See the chart below. In addition to
the lift and moment coefficients, the stall angle of attack and zero lift
angle of attack can be determined.
The second chart will have curves of drag coefficient versus lift
coefficient at various Reynolds numbers and curves of moment
coefficient at the aerodynamic center versus lift coefficient at various
Reynolds numbers. In addition to smooth airfoils, it is common for data
for an airfoil whose leading edge has a sandpaper surface texture to be
included. The second chart also has an insert picture of the air foil
geometry and the aerodynamic center for the airfoil at different Reynolds
numbers is provided in tabular form.
7.3.2 COMPRESSIBILITY EFFECTS
For Mach number less than 0.3, we may assume that our flow is
incompressible and the standard airfoil charts work very well. For Mach
numbers greater than 0.3, we must correct the lift coefficient using the
Prandtl-Glauert correction which gives
CL = CL chart / SQRT (1-M2)
This is valid for Mach numbers up to 0.7.
7.3.3 AIRFOIL CATEGORIES
The following are airfoil categories:
NACA 4 Digit
1st digit: maximum camber (as % of chord).
2nd digit (x10): location of maximum camber (as % of
chord from leading edge (LE)).
3rd & 4th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord).

40
NACA 5 Digit
1st digit (x0.15): design lift coefficient.
2nd & 3rd digits (x0.5): location of maximum camber (as % of
chord from LE).
4th & 5th digits: maximum section thickness (as % of chord).
NACA 6 Digit
1st digit: identifies series type.
2nd digit (x10): location of minimum pressure (as % of chord from

leading edge (le)).
3rd digit: indicates acceptable range of cl above/below design
value for satisfactory low drag performance.
4th digit (x0.1): design cl.
5th & 6th digits: maximum section thickness (%c)
7.4 SELECTED AEROFOIL

Airfoil: NACA 23012
Fig8.4 Airfoil NACA 23012

CL
= 0.3 at angle of attack 0
CL max
= 1.6
41
CHAPTER-8
WING SELECTION AND WING LOADING
8.1 INTRODUCTION
After the final weight estimation of the aircraft, the primary
component of the aircraft to be designed is the wing. The wing weight
and its lifting capabilities are in general, a function of the thickness of the
airfoil section that is used in the wing structure. The first step towards
designing the wing is the thickness estimation. The thickness of the wing,
in turn depends on the critical mach number of the airfoil or rather, the
drag divergence Mach number corresponding to the wing section.
The wing may be considered as the most important component of an
aircraft, since a fixed-wing aircraft is not able to fly without it. Since the
wing geometry and its features are influencing all other aircraft
components, we begin the detail design process by wing design. The
primary function of the wing is to generate sufficient lift force or simply
lift (L).
However, the wing has two other productions, namely drag force or
drag (D) and nose-down pitching moment (M). While a wing designer is
looking to maximize the lift, the other two (drag and pitching moment)
must be minimized. In fact, a wing is considered as a lifting surface that
lift is produced due to the pressure difference between lower and upper
surfaces. Aerodynamics textbooks are a good source to consult for
information about mathematical techniques for calculating the pressure
distribution over the wing and for determining the flow variables.
During the wing design process, eighteen parameters must be
determined. They are as follows:
1. Wing reference (or planform) area (SW or Sref or S)
2. Number of the wings
3. Vertical position relative to the fuselage (high, mid, or low wing)
4. Horizontal position relative to the fuselage
42
5. Cross section (or airfoil)

6. Aspect ratio (AR)
7. Taper ratio ()
8. Tip chord (Ct)
9. Root chord (Cr)
10. Mean Aerodynamic Chord (MAC or C)
11. Span (b)
12. Twist angle (or washout) (t)
13. Sweep angle ()
14. Dihedral angle ()
15. Incidence (iw) (or setting angle, set)
16. High lifting devices such as flap
17. Aileron
18. Other wing accessories
8.2 NUMBER OF WINGS
One of the decisions a designer must make is to select the number of
wings. The options are:
1. Monoplane (i.e. one wing)
2. Two wings (i.e. biplane)
3. Three wings
Fig 8.1Configuration of wing
43
8.3 WING VERTICAL LOCATION

One of the wing parameters that could be determined at the early
stages of wing design process is the wing vertical location relative to the
fuselage centerline. This wing parameter will directly influence the
design of other aircraft components including aircraft tail design, landing
gear design, and center of gravity. In principle, there are four options for
the vertical location of the wing. They are:
Fig 8.2 Position of wing

8.4 SELECTED WING IS LOW WING
8.4.1LOW WING
In this section, advantages and disadvantages of a low wing
configuration (Figure 9.2-c) will be presented. Since the reasons for
several items are similar with the reasons for a high wing configuration,
the reasons are not repeated here. In the majority of cases, the
specifications of low wing are compared with a high wing configuration.
8.4.1.1 ADVANTAGES
1. The aircraft take off performance is better; compared with a high
wing configuration; due to the ground effect.
2. The pilot has a better higher-than-horizon view, since he/she is
above the wing.
3. The retraction system inside the wing is an option along with inside
the fuselage.
44
4. Landing gear is shorter if connected to the wing. This makes the

landing gear lighter and requires less space inside the wing for
retraction system. This will further make the wing structure lighter.
5. In a light GA aircraft, the pilot can walk on the wing in order to get
into the cockpit.
6. The aircraft is lighter compared with a high wing structure.
7. Aircraft frontal area is less.
8. The application of wing strut is usually no longer an option for the
wing structure.
9. Item 8 implies that the aircraft structure is lighter since no strut is
utilized.
10.Due to item 8, the aircraft drag is lower.
11.The wing has less induced drag.
12.It is more attractive to the eyes of a regular viewer.
13.The aircraft has higher lateral control compared with a high wing
configuration, since the aircraft has less lateral static stability, due to
the fuselage contribution to the wing dihedral effect.
14.The wing has less downwash on the tail, so the tail is more effective.
15.The tail is lighter; compared with a high wing configuration.
16.The wing drag is producing a nose-down pitching moment, so a low
wing is longitudinally stabilizing. This is due to the lower position
of the wing drag line relative to the aircraft center of gravity.
8.4.1.2 DISADVANTAGES
1. The wing generates less lift; compared with a high wing
configuration; since the wing has two separate sections.
2. With the same token to item 1, the aircraft will have higher stall
speed; compared with a high wing configuration; due to a lower
CLmax.
3. Due to item 2, the take-off run is longer.
4. The aircraft has lower airworthiness due to a higher stall speed.
5. Due to item 1, wing is producing less induced drag.
45
6. The wing has less contribution to the aircraft dihedral effect, thus
the aircraft is laterally dynamically less stable.
7. Due to item 6, the aircraft is laterally more controllable, and thus
more maneuverable.
8. The aircraft has a lower landing performance, since it needs more
landing run.
9. The pilot has a lower lower-than-horizon view. The wing below
the pilot will obscure part of the sky for a fighter pilot.
8.5 WING LOADING
In aerodynamics, wing loading is the loaded weight of the aircraft
divided by the area of the wing. The faster an aircraft flies, the more lift
is produced by each unit area of wing, so a smaller wing can carry the
same weight in level flight, operating at a higher wing loading.
L = W = (1/2) V2 S CL
Vstall = SQRT ((2xW) / ( S CL))
(W/S) = V2stall CL / 2
= (289.228x0.25)2x (1.225) x (0.3)/2
(W/S) = 961.17 N/m2
8.6 WING GEOMETRY DESIGN

The geometry of the wing is a function of four parameters, namely the
Wing loading (W/S), Aspect Ratio (b2/S), Taper ratio () and the
Sweepback angle at quarter chord.
The Take-off Weight that was estimated in the previous analysis is
used to find the Wing area S (from W/S).The value of S also enables us
to calculate the Wingspan b (using the Aspect ratio). The root chord can
now be found using the equation.
The root chord is given by,
Croot = (2 x S) / b (1+)
The tip chord is given by,
Ctip = x Croot
The mean chord is given by,
46
Cmean = (2/3) Croot x (1++2) / (1+)

8.6.1 Croot CALCULATION
Croot = (2 x S) / b x (1+)
= (2 x 350) / (54 x 1.25)
Croot = 10.37m
8.6.2 Ctip CALCULATION
Ctip = x Croot
Ctip = 2.59m
8.6.3 Cmean CALCULATION
Cmean = (2/3) Croot x (1++2) / (1+)
= (2/3) x10.37 x (1.05)
Cmean = 7.259m
8.7 LIFT ESTIMATION
8.7.1 LIFT
Component of aerodynamic force generated on aircraft perpendicular
to flight direction.
Fig 8.3 Forces acting in aircraft

8.7.2 LIFT COEFFICIENT (CL)
Amount of lift generated depends on:
Planform area (S),
47
Air density (),

Flight speed (V),
Lift coefficient (CL)
Lift is given by,
Lift = (1/2)V2SCL
CL is a measure of lifting effectiveness and mainly depends upon:
Section shape,
Planform geometry,
Angle of attack (),
Compressibility effects,
Viscous effects (Reynolds number).
8.7.3 GENERATION OF LIFT
Aerodynamic force arises from two natural sources:
o Variable pressure distribution.
o Shear stress distribution.

Shear stress primarily contributes to overall drag force on aircraft.
Lift mainly due to pressure distribution, especially on main lifting
surfaces, i.e. wing.
Require (relatively) low pressure on upper surface and higher
pressure on lower surface.
Any shape can be made to produce lift if either cambered or
inclined to flow direction.
Classical aerofoil section is optimum for high subsonic lift/drag ratio.
48
Fig 8.4 Pressure distribution on airfoil

8.7.4 PRESSURE VARIATIONS WITH ANGLE OF ATTACK
Negative (nose-down) pitching moment at zero-lift (negative ).
Positive lift at = 0.
Highest pressure at LE stagnation point, lowest pressure at crest on
upper surface.
Peak suction pressure on upper surface strengthens and moves
forwards with increasing .
Most lift from near LE on upper surface due to suction.
Fig8.5 Airfoils at different angle of attack
49
8.7.5 LIFT CURVES
Fig8.6 Lift curve

8.7.6 LIFT CALCULATION:
General Lift equation is given by,
Lift = (1/2) V2SCL
8.7.6.1 LIFT AT CRUISE
= 0.27641 kg/m3 (at the cruising altitude of 12750m)
V = 289.228 m/s
S = 350m2
CL (cruise) = 0.6 (from the wing and airfoil estimation)
Substituting all these values in the general lift equation,
L (cruise) = 1/20.27859 (289.228)2 350 0.6
Lift at cruise = 2427.860 kN
8.7.6.2 LIFT AT TAKEOFF
= 1.225 kg/m3 (at sea-level)
V = 0.7 x Vlo
50
= 0.7 x 1.2 x Vstall

= 60.738 m/s
S = 350m2
CL(take-off) = 1.2251(flaps kept at the take-off position of 20)
L(take-off) = 1/2 1.225 (60.738)2 350 1.2251
Lift at take-off = 968.873 kN
8.7.6.3 LIFT AT LANDING
V = 0.7 x Vlo
= 65.799 m/s
S = 350m2
CL(Landing) = 1.6 (flaps kept at the take-off position of 40)
L(Landing) = 1/2 1.225 (65.799)2 350 1.6
Lift at Landing = 1485.0214 kN
51
CHAPTER-9
DRAG ESTIMATION
9.1 DRAG
Drag is the resolved component of the complete aerodynamic force
which is parallel to the flight direction (or relative oncoming
airflow).
It always acts to oppose the direction of motion.
It is the undesirable component of the aerodynamic force while lift
is the desirable component.
9.2 DRAG COEFFICIENT (CD)
Amount of drag generated depends on:
Planform area (S), air density (), flight speed (V), drag coefficient
(CD)
CD is a measure of aerodynamic efficiency and mainly depends
upon:
Section shape, planform geometry, angle of attack (),
compressibility effects (Mach number), viscous effects (Reynolds
number).
9.3 DRAG COMPONENTS
9.3.1 SKIN FRICTION
Due to shear stresses produced in boundary layer.
Significantly more for turbulent than laminar types of boundary
layers.
Fig9.1 Skin friction drag

52
9.3.2 FORM (PRESSURE) DRAG

Due to static pressure distribution around body - component
resolved in direction of motion.
Sometimes considered separately as fore body and rear (base) drag
components.
Fig9.2 Form drag

9.3.3 WAVE DRAG
Due to the presence of shock waves at transonic and supersonic
speeds.
Result of both direct shock losses and the influence of shock waves
on the boundary layer.
Fig9.3 Shock formation over wedge
53
9.4 TYPICAL STREAMLINING EFFECT
Fig9.4 Flow around different shapes

9.5 LIFT INDUCED (OR) TRAILING VORTEX DRAG
Fig9.5 Downwash region in wings

9.6 CALCULATION
Generally for jet aircrafts, it is given that
CD,0 = 0.0030
e = 0.8
54
The general drag equation is given by,

= ( ) 2 (,0 + ( / 2))
For calculating , we use the formula,
= (16 h/b)2 / (1 + (16 h/b)2 )

Where,
h= 2m
b= 65m
= 0.2599
9.6.1 DRAG AT CRUISE
= 0.27641 kg/m3 (at the cruising altitude of 12750m)
V = 289.228 m/s
S = 350m2
CL(cruise) = 0.523 (from the wing and airfoil estimation)
Substituting all these values in the general drag equation,
D(cruise) = 1/2x0.27641 x (289.228)2 x 350 x 5.65333 x 10-3
Drag at cruise = 30.992 kN
9.6.2 DRAG AT TAKEOFF
V = 0.7 x Vlo
= 60.738 m/s
S = 350m2
CL(take-off) = 0.6257(flaps kept at the take-off position of 20)
D(take-off) = 1/2x 1.225 x (60.738)2 x 350 x (6.7583 x 10-3 )
Drag at take-off = 17.7235 kN
9.6.3 DRAG AT LANDING
V = 0.7 x Vlo
= 65.799 m/s
55
S = 350 m2
CL(Landing) = 0.65 (flaps kept at the take-off position of 40)
D(Landing) = 1/2x 1.225 x (65.799)2 x 350 x (7.54656 x10-3 )
Drag at Landing = 33.513 kN
56
CHAPTER-10
PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS
10.1 TAKE-OFF PERFORMANCE

Distance from rest to clearance of obstacle in flight path and
usually considered in two parts:
o Ground roll - rest to lift-off (SLO)
o Airborne distance - lift-off to specified height (35 ft FAR, 50
ft others).
The aircraft will accelerate up to lift-off speed (Vlo = about 1.2 x
Vstall) when it will then be rotated.
A first-order approximation for ground roll take-off distance may be
made from:
SLO = (1.44 x W2) / ( g S CLmax T)
Slo may be reduced by increasing T, S or Cl,max (high lift devices
relate to latter two).
An improved approximation for ground roll take-off distance may
be made by including drag, rolling resistance and ground effect
terms.
The bracketed term will vary with speed but an approximation may
be made by using an instantaneous value for when V = 0.7 x Vlo.
In the above equation:
Where,
accounts for drag reduction when in ground effect

57
is calculated by using the following formula,
Where,
h = height above ground,
b = wing span.
r = 0.02 for smooth paved surface, 0.1 for grass.
10.1.1 CALCULATION
= (3.8777635 x 1012) / (1392870392)

SLO = 1685.159 m
Take-off runway Distance = 1685.159 m
10.2 CLIMBING
Consider aircraft in a steady unaccelerated climb with vertical climb
speed of Vc.
Fig10.1 Aircraft during climb
58
Force balance gives:
= (53427635 x 103) / (167278.608 x 9.81)

R/Cmax = 19.989 m/s
10.3 MANOEUVRES / TURNING FLIGHT
An aircraft is capable of performing many different types of turns and
maneuvers.
Three of the more common turns will be considered here in simplistic
terms:
Constant altitude banked turn.
Vertical pull-up maneuver.
Vertical pull-down maneuver.
In the case of a commercial transport aircraft, it is capable of
performing only a constant altitude banked turn and not any vertical pullup or pull-down maneuver.
10.3.1 CONSTANT ALTITUDE BANKED TURN
In steady condition:
-T=D
So for given speed and turn radius there is only one correct bank angle
for a co-ordinate (no sideslip) turn.
Maneuverability equations simplified through use of normal load factor
(n) = L/W.
59
In the turn, n = L/W = sec > 1 and is therefore determined by bank

angle.
Turn radius (R) and turn rate () are good indicators of aircraft
maneuverability.
10.3.2 CALCULATION
W = L cos
Let = 30
n = (L/W)
= 1.572
R = 7030.37 m
= (V/R)
= 0.0411 rad/sec
10.4 GLIDING
Similar to the steady unaccelerated case but with T = 0.
Fig10.2 Aircraft at gliding

= 4.085
60
10.5 LANDING PERFORMANCE:

Landing performance consists of three phases:
Airborne approach at constant glide angle (around 3o) and
constant speed.
Flare - transitional maneuvers with airspeed reduced from
about 1.3 Vstall down to touch-down speed.
Ground roll - from touch-down to rest.
Ground roll landing distance (s3 or sl) estimated from:
Where,
Vav may be taken as 0.7 x touch-down speed (Vt or V2)
Vt is assumed as 1.3 x Vstall.
r is higher than for take-off since brakes are applied - use r = 0.4
for paved surface.
If thrust reversers (Tr) are applied, use:
10.5.1 CALCULATION
= (4074.34 + 0.4 (167278.608 x 9.81 373084)

= 11193.283 m
Landing Runway Distance = 1193.283 m
61
CHAPTER 11
CALCULATION OF CENTER OF GRAVITY
11.1 INTRODUCTION
The precise location of the aircraft cg is essential in the positioning of
the landing gear, as well as for other MDO applications, e.g., flight
mechanics, stability and control, and Performance. Primarily, the aircraft
cg location is needed to position the landing gear such that ground
stability, maneuverability, and clearance requirements are met. Given the
fact that none of the existing conceptual design-level cg estimation
procedures has the degree of responsiveness and accuracy required for
MDO applications, a new approach is formulated to provide a reliable
range of cg locations that is better suited for MDO applications.
11.2 CURRENT CAPABILITIES
Although not expected to determine the location of the aircraft cg,
current aircraft sizing programs, as typified by Jayaram et al. and
McCullers, do provide some rudimentary estimates. These codes use
estimated component weights obtained from statistical weight equations,
and either user-specified or default component cg locations to arrive at
the overall aircraft cg location. The lack of responsiveness and accuracy
has rendered current approaches inadequate for MDO application.
Fig 11.1 Cg Range

The lack of responsiveness is attributed to the fact that each aircraft
component is assigned a specific location within the airframe. Typically,
62
these approaches do not estimate the operational range of cg locations.

The cg location is a complicated function of the configuration, loading,
and fuel state, with an allowable range limited by a number of
operational factors. Although a range of cg locations can be established
by varying the configuration, equipment arrangement, and payload and
fuel states individually, the process is difficult. The accuracy limitations
arise because the codes assume that the user has the experience and
knowledge required to make adjustments to the component weight and cg
estimates. Unfortunately, this approach is not suitable for use in
automated procedures required in MDO.
Evidently, what is needed is a new approach which is capable of
establishing a maximum permissible cg range for a given configuration.
This available cg range can then be compared with the desired
operational cg range obtained from performance, control, and operational
requirements. If the desired cg range is within the available cg range, the
concept is viable and can be balanced. If not, the configuration must be
changed, either by the designer or an MDO procedure if an automated
process is being used.
11.3 ALTERNATE METHOD
Component location flexibility at the conceptual design phase is
actively exploited as a means to improve the responsiveness and accuracy
of current cg estimation procedures. In the proposed procedure, aircraft
components are assigned a range of cg locations based on the geometry,
as well as physical and functional considerations, associated with each
component. By arranging the cg of the components at their fore- and aftmost limits, the maximum permissible cg range of a particular layout can
be established. This cg range can then be used by an MDO procedure to
determine the forward and aft aircraft cg limits required to meet
performance and stability and control considerations. Adjusted for
uncertainty, this maximum permissible cg range can be used as a
constraint for the operational cg range during the optimization.
63
11.4 ESTABLISHMENT OF COMPONENT CG RANGE

The assignment of component cg range is based on the geometry,
planform, and the type of components involved. In the case of the
primary components, e.g., fuselage, wing, and empennage, the location of
these items remains relatively unchanged once the concept is frozen.
Consequently, the cg range is expected to be centered near the volumetric
center of the component and is unlikely to shift too much. For ease of
identification, the primary components will be referred to as the
constrained items.
As for secondary components, e.g., equipment and operational items,
the location of each component varies from one aircraft concept to
another, depending on the philosophy and preference of the airframe
manufacturer. Note that as long as the stowage and functionality
constraints are not violated, these components can be assigned to any
available space throughout the aircraft due to their compactness.
Consequently, the corresponding cg range is defined by the forward and
aft boundaries of the stowage space within which the item is located.
Accordingly, these components are termed the unconstrained items.
Although the payload and passenger amenity, i.e., furnishings and
services, are confined within the cargo holds and cabin, operational
experience has shown that the cg location of these items varies according
to the loading condition and cabin layout as specified by the airlines,
respectively. Similarly, the cg location of the fuel varies as a function of
time as the fuel is being consumed during the duration of the mission.
Given the added freedom in terms of the loading pattern, these
components are also classified as unconstrained items.
11.5 GENERIC COMPONENT LAYOUT
The ranges are based on the layout of existing commercial transports
and can be modified to accommodate any unique layout of the aircraft
concept under consideration. The locations of the front and rear spar for
the wing and empennage are dictated by space required for housing the
control surfaces and the associated actuation systems, where values of 15
64
and 65 percent chord, respectively, are typically used. As in the

conventional cantilever wing and empennage construction, the majority
of the structure, i.e., bulkheads, ribs, and fuel tanks, are located between
the front and rear spars. Thus, it can be expected that the cg of the wing is
most likely to be located between the two, along the respective mean
aerodynamic chords (mac). In addition, given the physical arrangement
of the fuel tanks, the cg of the fuel and the fuel system can be expected to
be located near the same vicinity.
The cg of the fuselage depends on the structural arrangement of the
pressure bulkheads, Frames, and the aft-body taper ratio. Other factors
include local structural reinforcement around the landing gear wheel
wells, cargo holds, and the layout of the cabin, e.g., a forward upper-deck
as found on the Boeing Model 777 or a double-decker as found on the
proposed ultra-high-capacity transports. Taking these factors into
consideration, the proposed procedure assumes that the cg of the fuselage
is most likely to be located between 40 and 50 percent of the fuselage
length.
11.6 WEIGHT AND BALANCE
When the weight of the aircraft is at or below the allowable limit(s) for
its configuration (parked, ground movement, takeoff, landing, etc.) and
its center of gravity is within the allowable range, and both will remain so
for the duration of the flight, the aircraft is said to be within weight and
balance. Different maximum weights may be defined for different
situations For example, large aircraft may have maximum landing
weights that are lower than maximum takeoff weights (because some
weight is expected to be lost as fuel is burned during the flight). The
center of gravity may change over the duration of the flight as the
aircraft's weight changes due to fuel burn or by passengers moving
forward or aft in the cabin.
11.7 ARM
The arm is the horizontal distance from the reference datum to the
center of gravity (CG) of an item. The algebraic sign is plus (+) if
65
measured aft of the datum or to the right side of the center line when
considering a lateral calculation. The algebraic sign is minus (-) if
measured forward of the datum or the left side of the center line when
considering a lateral calculation.
11.8 MOMENT
The moment is the moment of force, or torque that results from an
objects weight acting through an arc that is centered on the zero point of
the reference datum distance. Moment is also referred to as the tendency
of an object to rotate or pivot about a point (the zero point of the datum,
in this case). The further an object is from this point, the greater the force
it exerts. Moment is calculated by multiplying the weight of an object by
its arm.
11.9 MEAN AERODYNAMIC CHORD (MAC)
A specific chord line of a tapered wing. At the mean aerodynamic
chord, the center of pressure has the same aerodynamic force, position,
and area as it does on the rest of the wing. The MAC represents the width
of an equivalent rectangular wing in given conditions. On some aircraft,
the center of gravity is expressed as a percentage of the length of the
MAC. In order to make such a calculation, the position of the leading
edge of the MAC must be known ahead of time. This position is defined
as a distance from the reference datum and is found in the aircraft's flight
manual and also on the aircraft's type certificate data sheet. If a general
MAC is not given but a LeMAC (leading edge mean aerodynamic chord)
and a TeMAC (trailing edge mean aerodynamic chord) are given (both of
which would be referenced as an arm measured out from the datum line)
then your MAC can be found by finding the difference between your
LeMAC and your TeMAC.
66
11.10 CALCULATION
5.89m
20 m
11.99m
Wcrew
8.72m
Wpassengers
Wengine
Wbaggage
Fig11.2
CG WITHOUT WING
(W crew x 5.89) + (W engine x 25) + (W passengers x 36) + (W baggage x 46)
X=
W crew + W engine + W passengers + W baggage
Where,
Wcrew
= 464.94 kg
Wengine
= 7810 kg (for two engine)
Wpassengers = 23814 kg
Wbaggage
X=
= 680.4 kg
(464.94 x
5.41) + (12320 x 30) + (19845 x 36) + (3402 x 46)

464.94 + 12320 + 19845 + 3402
Xwithout wing = 34.67 m

CG WITHOUT WING
Wtotal = Wcrew + Wengine + Wpassengers + Wbaggage
Wtotal = 32768.34 kg
CG WITH WING
X total =
(W total x 34.67) + (W wing x (34.67 + X wing ))

W total + W wing
67
CG for wing
(Ctip + Croot + Cmean ) x S
X wing =
3xS
(S = 350 m2)
X wing =
(2.59 + 7.259 + 10.37) x (350)

3 x 350
Xwing = 6.739 m
Wwing = 2.5 x S
Wwing = 875 kg
X total =
(32769 .34 x 34.67) + (875 x (34.67 + 6.739))

32769 .34 + 875
Xtotal = 34.845 m
68
CHAPTER-12
VIEWS OF DESIGNED AIRCRAFT
12.1. TOP VIEW
65 m
Fig12.1Top view
69
12.2. FRONT VIEW
17 m
Fig12.2 Front view
70
12.3. SIDE VIEW
54 m
Fig 12.3 side view
71
CONCLUSION
Design is a fine blend of science, presence of mind and the application of
each one of them at the appropriate time. Design of anything needs experience
and an optimistic progress towards the ideal system. The scientific society
always look for the best product design .This involves a strong fundamental in
science and mathematics and their skill full application which is a tough job
endowed upon the designer . We had put enough hard work to the best of our
knowledge for this design project. A design never gets completed in a flutter
sense but it is one further step towards the ideal system. But during the design of
this passenger aircraft we learnt about aeronautics and its implications when
applied to an aircraft.Thus a conceptual design of a 250 seater passenger aircraft
has been successfully done. The Aircraft is a twin engine configuration. It uses
two RR Trent 768 engines which fulfills the power requirement. The wing is
B737 A/il airfoil.
72
REFERENCES
1.Blanchard B. S., and Fabrycky W. J., Systems Engineering and Analysis,
Fourth edition, 2006, Prentice Hall
2. Niu Michael C. Y., Composite Airframe Structures, Fifth Edition, 2005,
Conmilit Press
3. Groover M. P., Fundamentals of Modern Manufacturing: Materials,
Processes, and Systems, 4th edition, Wiley, 2010
4. www.faa.gov
5. Eschenauer H., Koski J., Osyczka A., Multicriteria Design Optimization:
Procedures and Applications, Springer, 1990
6. Padula S.L., Alexandrov N.M., and L.L. Green, MDO Test Suite at NASA
Langley Research Center, 6th AIAA/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on
Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, Bellevue, WA, 1996
7. Kroo I., S. Altus, R. Braun, P. Gage, and I. Sobieski, Multidisciplinary
Optimization Methods for Aircraft Preliminary Design, AIAA 94-4325
8. Rao C., H. Tsai and T. Ray, Aircraft Configuration Design Using a
Multidisciplinary Optimization Approach, AIAA-2004-536, 42nd
AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, Jan. 5-8,
2004
9. Roskam J., Lessons Learned in Aircraft Design, 2007, DAR Corporation
10. Roskam J., Roskams Airplane War stories, 2006, DAR Corporation
11. Young J. A., Anderson R. D., and Yurkovich R. N., A Description of The
F/A-18E/F Design and Design Process, AIAA-98-4701
12. Alexandrov N. M. and R. M. Lewis, Analytical and Computational
Properties of Distributed Approaches to MDO, AIAA 2000-4718, 8th
AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis
& Optimization, 6-8 September 2000, Long Beach, CA
13. Umakant J., Sudhakar K., Mujumdar P.M., and Panneerselvam S.,
Configuration Design of a Generic Air-Breathing Aerospace Vehicle
Considering Fidelity Uncertainty, AIAA 2004-4543, 10th AIAA/ISSMO
73
Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference, 30 August - 1

September 2004, Albany, New
14. Tanrikulu O. and Ercan V., Optimal external configuration design of
unguided missiles, AIAA-1997-3725, AIAA Atmospheric Flight
Mechanics Conference, New Orleans, LA, Aug. 11-13, 1997
15. YorkBlouin V. Y., Miao Y., Zhou X., Fadel G. M., An Assessment of
Configuration
Design
Methodologies,
AIAA
2004-4430,
10th
AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference,

30 August - 1 September 2004, Albany, New York
16. Onwubiko C., Introduction to Engineering Design Optimization, 2000,
Prentice Hall
17. Chong E. K. P., Zack S. H., An Introduction to Optimization, third
edition, Wiley, 2008
18. Jackson P., Janes All the Worlds Aircraft, Janes information group,
Various years
19. Peter.Sydenham, Systems Approach to Engineering, Artech house, Inc,
London, 2004.
20. Aslaksen, Erik and Rod Belcher, Systems Engineering, Prentice Hall,
1992.
21. Daniel P. Raymer, Aircraft Design: A conceptual Approach, AIAA
Education Series, 1999.
22. Allan G. Seabridge and Ian Moir, Design and Development of Aircraft
Systems: An Introduction, AIAA Education Series, 2004.
23. Andrew P. Sage, James E., Jr. Armstrong, Introduction to Systems
Engineering, Wiley Series in Systems Engineering and Management,
2000
74

Aircraft Design Project 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aircraft Design Project 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AIM OF THE PROJECT

The aim of this design project is to design a 300 seater passenger

Airplane design is an art and a science. In that respect it is difficult to

Determination of geometric parameters

Drafting the preliminary 3-view Drawings

Fig 1.1The Design Wheel

SEVEN INTELLECTUAL POINTS FOR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

Fig 1.2 Seven Intellectual Points for Conceptual Design

Wing Loading Kg/m2

3.1.1CRUISE SPEED VS CARGO CAPACITY

Cargo capacity (m3)

Cruise Speed (Mach)

Overall Length (m)

3.1.2CRUISE SPEED VS OVERALL LENGTH

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.3CRUISE SPEED VS WING SPAN

Wing span (m)

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.4CRUISE SPEED VS WING AREA

Wing area (m2)

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.5CRUISE SPEED VS OVERALL HEIGHT

Overall height (m)

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.6CRUISE SPEED VS CABIN WIDTH

Cabin width (m)

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.7CRUISE SPEED VS OPERATING WEIGHT

Operating weight (kg)

Cruise Speed (Mach)

Fuselage width (m)

3.1.8CRUISE SPEED VS FUSELAGE WIDTH

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.9CRUISE SPEED VS FUSELAGE HEIGHT

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.10CRUISE SPEED VS FUSELAGE DIAMETER

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.11CRUISE SPEED VS MAXIMUM TAKEOFF WEIGHT

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.12CRUISE SPEED VS TAKEOFF FIELD LENGTH

Takeoff Field Length

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.13CRUISE SPEED VS MAX SPEED

Max speed (mach)

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.14CRUISE SPEED VS RANGE

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.15CRUISE SPEED VS FUEL CAPACITY

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.16CRUISE SPEED VS CEILING

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.17CRUISE SPEED VS WING SWEEP ANGLE

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.18CRUISE SPEED VS ASPECT RATIO

Aspect Ratio (no unit)

Wing Sweep Angle

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.19CRUISE SPEED VS PAYLOAD

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.20CRUISE SPEED VS THRUST

Cruise Speed (Mach)

3.1.21CRUISE SPEED VS MAXIMUM LANDING WEIGHT

Cruise Speed (Mach)

Max. Zero Fuel Weight (kg)