1

The Analysis of the DA-40

Andrew George
11/17/2013
Aerospace 2200
Dr.Gregory













2

Table of Contents

Summary.3
Introduction4
Nomenclature.5
Drag
Polar7-8
Power
Required8-9
Power Available10
Climb Performance11-13
Range and
Endurance13-15
Glide
Performance.15-16
Turn Performance17
Take Off and Landing
Performance.18-21
Conclusion.22

List of
Figures..23-28
List of
Tables........28-29
Code..30-35
References.36


3



SUMMARY
The following report details and expounds on the DA-40 and how well it performs in
certain aircraft conditions. The first part of the analysis involved estimating the drag
polar, and building a graph based on that. Using values given, the lift to drag ratio was
found as 14.36. The power required section then involved finding how the power varies
with velocity and how efficiency is altered. It was found that the higher the altitude, the
higher the altitude was needed to keep steady level flight. The power available section
followed the same suit and the same conclusion was held that a higher altitude lead to a
higher velocity. When the climb performance section was reached, the rate of climb was
found, and the rate of climb vastly got lower as the altitude got higher. The rate of climb
was extrapolated to find the absolute and service ceilings, and the integral was used to
find the time to climb from 0 to 10000ft. Range and endurance had the Breguet
equations involved, and using a variety of parameters, predicted how far the aircraft
could go(range) and how long it can stay in the air(endurance). The following task
analyzed glide performance and how an aircraft performs in a glide. A hodograph was
made using a range of coefficient of lift and coefficient of drag values, and made a
vertical and horizontal component of the glide. The best time aloft and the range was
found through the minimum sink rate velocity found on the graph, and the lift to drag
ratio. The next task analyzed turn performance and used a V-N diagram. The V-N
diagram showed the relationship between velocity and the load factor, or how many gs
an aircraft could sustain. Finally the last section analyzed takeoff and landing, and what
parameters lead to it. The final results for takeoff and landing were that a higher altitude
airport required more runway, and aircraft with less weight required less runway.








4



INTRODUCTION:
This report took the basics of an aircraft and implored on it. It took the values given and
step by step created an overall performance characteristic of the DA-40. The
estimations used in the following report were acquired with the highest accuracy, and
were put in to allow the most accurate analysis of the DA-40



















5



NOMENCLATURE

0
: The coefficient of profile drag. It represents the drag due to the airplanes geometry
and includes skin friction and form drag.
: Wingspan. The wingspan of the aircraft, from one end to the other.
: Wing area. The planform wing area of the wing

: Wetted area. This area includes everything on the airplane that feels the airflow or
if dropped into water, would experience contact with the water.
: Equivalent parasite area. The area that is considered clean

: Cleanliness factor. An estimate on how clean the aircraft is

: Equivalent parasite area for the specific aircraft part.

: Oswald efficiency factor. A correction factor due to the wing not being elliptical.

: The change in coefficient of profile drag in respect to the coefficient of lift. Is

estimated based on historical data
: Aspect Ratio. The wing span squared divided by the wing area
: Taper ratio. The ratio of wing root to wing tip
: Factor derived from the taper ratio to estimate the Oswald Efficiency factor

: Coefficient of Lift. A numerical value that adjusts for the lift of an aircraft

: Coefficient of Drag. A numerical value that adjusts for the drag of an aircraft

: Power required. The power that is needed to fly at a given airspeed

: Power available. The amount of power available for the aircraft

: Lift to drag ratio. The ratio of lift to drag

: The maximum lift to drag ratio that corresponds to minimum thrust.

: The stall speed of the aircraft, the point where the airflow separates and lift can
no longer be produced.
6

: Density, the ratio of mass per unit volume

: The maximum coefficient of lift an aircraft can experience.

: The freestream velocity, or the velocity that is far up the upstream with no
deflections from the aircraft.
: The weight of the aircraft.
: Endurance. How long an aircraft can stay in flight
: Propellor efficiency. How efficient a propeller is
: Specific fuel consumption. The rate which fuel is burned
: Range. How far an aircraft can go

: Take off velocity, the velocity to take off

: Ground roll takeoff distance

: Average force of all acting forces

: Ground roll factor
: Turn rate, how much an aircraft turns











7



TASK 1: THE DRAG POLAR
The drag polar was found through two main ways of analysis. The first was the wetted
area method, and the second was the component buildup method. To expound both
ways found the coefficient of profile drag or

0
. This is the drag from the geometry of
the airplane and has no influences from lift. The first method uses an estimation of the
wing span, wing area, and the wetted area,

. The wing area is the area of the

wing, while the wetted area is the area that experiences airflow. Using estimations, the
wing span, wing area and wetted area were found to be 39.16
2
, 136.11
2
and
630
2
respectively. From there, the aircraft was then estimated a cleanliness factor.
This factor is based on past historical data. The cleanliness factor that was picked was
.0049, as the DA-40 had many similarities with the Beech V35. From there using the
formula: =

0
,
the coefficient of drag could be found. The

0
was found to be .022 from the equation

=
.0049630
2
136.11
2
= .022.
The component built up method was a method based on historical data. A drag
coefficient was associated with each part of the aircraft. The area for each part was also
estimated, and then using both values, the equivalent parasite area was found for that
part, or

. Summing all the equivalent parasite area values, and then adding a 25% for
landing gear and 10% for interference drag was found to be 4.8365. Using the area
and then using the equation

0
=

=
4.8365
136.11
2
= .035.
Adding the two values of these methods and then averaging them gave us our final
coefficient of drag of .029 or
.035+.021
2
= .02 = 9. The Oswald efficiency factor then
needed to be calculated. The Oswald efficiency factor is noted by the symbol , and the
equation is =
1

+1+
. was estimated from past historical data and was picked as
.01. The aspect ratio was defined as

. Putting the values into the equation it became

=
39.16
2

2
136.11
2
.
To find delta the tip-chord ratio needed to be found, and by using the geometry of the
aircraft, was estimated to be .7. Using the graph for tip chord ratio to delta, delta was
8

found to be .005. These values were put into the equation for and was found to be
.71. By using the values given, and finding the drag polar, the maximum lift to drag ratio
was found. It was found to be 14.3365, at a coefficient lift of .81. The following can be
seen in the upcoming graphs.


TASK 2: POWER REQUIRED
The velocity for the minimum power required for sea level was 59.111kts. For 5000ft it
was 64.5365kts. For 10000ft it was 69.7108kts. To find

, the lift equation must be

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
CD0
Coefficient of lift vs Coefficient of drag
Coefficient of lift
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

o
f

d
r
a
g
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
L/Dmax
Lift to drag ratio vs Coefficient of lift
Coefficient of lift
L
i
f
t

t
o

D
r
a
g

r
a
t
i
o
(
L
/
D
)
9

used. The lift equation, will have

, which is given to be 1.9. Using each specific

density and then using the weight of the aircraft as lift, due to steady level flight, the
velocity can be found. The

for sea level is

=

2

22645
.0023769

3
145.17
2
1.9
=89.92. For 5000ft its

22645
.0020482

3
145.17
2
1.9
=96.76. For 10000ft its

=

2

22645
.0017556

3
145.17
2
1.9
=104.52.
To find

, the point of minimum thrust had to be found. This point was found
through making a tangential line for each power required graph, and reading the results
off graphically. The

speeds were found to be 87 for sea level, 91 for

5000ft, and 96 for 10000ft.





40 60 80 100 120 140 160
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180


X: 150
Y: 129
velocity in knots
p
o
w
e
r

i
n

h
o
r
s
e
p
o
w
e
r
Velocity vs Power graph
Power required at sea level
Power required at 5000ft
Power required at 10000ft
10



TASK 3: POWER AVAILABLE
Minimum Speed Speed for /

Maximum Speed
Altitud
e

Sea
Level
43 44.43 44.43 87 50.08 117.7 138 132.1 132.1
5,000
feet
46 48.09 48.09 91 51.87 99.69 134 109.3 109.3
10,000
feet
52 50.41 50.41 96

54.43 81.16 127 87.41 87.41



40 60 80 100 120 140 160
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Velocity(kts)
T
H
P
(
h
p
)
Velocity vs Power graph


Sea level
5000ft
10000ft
11


TASK 4: CLIMB PERFORMANCE
A)

B)

40 60 80 100 120 140 160
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Rate of Climb VS Velocity
Velocity(knots)
R
a
t
e

o
f

C
l
i
m
b
(
f
t
/
m
i
n
)


RC at sea level
RC at 5000ft
RC at 10000ft
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
Rate of Climb(ft/min)
A
l
t
i
t
u
d
e
(
f
t
)
Extrapolated rate of climb graph vs altitude
12


Absolute Ceiling: 17400ft
Service Ceiling: 154200ft
C)

17.92 minutes from sea level to 10000ft


0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
x 10
-3
Altitude(ft)
R
a
t
e

o
f

c
l
i
m
b
-
1
(
f
t
/
m
i
n
)
Time to Climb graph
13

D)
Rate of
climb(ft/min)
Climb
angle(degrees)
Velocity(kts)
Best rate of climb
angle condition
505.5 .003 47.85
Best climb angle
condition
250.14 .0024 29.93


TASK 5: RANGE AND ENDURANCE
To analyze endurance and range the equations for them have to be first introduced. The
equation for range is
=

3
2

2 (
1
2

1
-
1
2

0
),
where the 1 in the W denotes final weight, and the 0 denotes starting weight. was
given as .78, and had to be found by converting the SFC to standard units. SFC was
given as . 49

, and converting it becomes

= .45

()()
1
550

1
3600
=2.47 10
7

1
.
To find the coefficient of lift and the ocefficient of drag, the velocity for minimum power
required needed to be known. The velocity for minimum power required allows for best
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
Climb Hodograph
Horizontal Velocity, V
H
(knots)
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y
,

V
V

(
k
n
o
t
s
)
14

endurance, and it was found previously from task 2 as 69.7108kts or 116.45

. Using
this in the lift equation the coefficient of lift could be found. It became

=

1
2

2
.
Lift is equal to weight, and the weight is max take off weight-fuel burned or 2645-
270=2375. The density is . 0017556

3
at 10,000ft and the wing area is
given as 145.7
2
. The equation then became

=
2375
1
2
.0017556

3
145.7
2
116.45

2
.=1.37.
The coefficient of drag could be found through the drag polar equation or

0
+

0
+

0

is given as .0300, oswald efficiency factor as .75, aspect ratio as

=
39.17
2

2
145.7
2
=10.53.

= .0300 +
1.37
2
10.53.75
=.1056.
The last things are the weight final and weight initial. The weight initial is max takeoff
weight at 2645lbs. With 90% fuel used, 270lbs of fuel was burned, so the final weight
becomes 2375lbs. Putting all these values into the final equation, it becomes =
.78
2.4710
7

1
1.37
3
2

..1056
2 .0017556

3
145.7
2
(2645
1
2

1
-
2375
1
2

0
)=10.27hours. The range equation follows the same procedure, and the range
is found out by =

1
. All the previous values are used except the coefficient lift
and coefficient of drag. For that the velocity for minimum thrust had to be used in the lift
equation to find coefficient of lift and drag. The velocity for minimum thrust at 10,000ft is
96 knots or 162.02

=
2375
1
2
.0017556

3
145.7
2
162.02

2
= .707. Plugging in the
same drag polar equation:

= .0300 +
.707
2
10.53.75
= .0501. The final range equation
15

becomes =
.78
2.4710
7

1
.77
.0544

2645
2375
=5225886ft or
491526
1
6076
= 860.08

TASK 6: GLIDE PERFORMANCE
A)



B) The best range for a glide is defined as

=h(

).

from task 1 is found out to be 14.36. The differential change in height is 4000ft.
Multiply the two values for it to be

=h(

)=4000 14.36 = 57360 9.44 s

100 150 200 250 300 350 400
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Glide Hodograph(sea level)
Vh(ft/s)
V
v
(
f
t
/
s
)
16


To maximize glide distance, the velocity for

needs to be found. This is found by

drawing a tangential line from the origin with

. Where the

meets the graph is

the velocity where

occurs and can be extrapolated from the graph. The velocity is

122.76 knots. For the maximum time aloft, the minimum

needs to be found as that

allows the lowest sink rate. Extrapolating from the graph again the minimum

is
63.63knots. If the maximum time aloft velocity is used, and a distance of 4000ft is
covered, it becomes
4000
107.4

=37.24seconds









100 150 200 250 300 350 400
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Glide Hodograph(5000ft)
Vh(ft/s)
V
v
(
f
t
/
s
)
17

TASK 7: TURN PERFORMANCE

The minimum turn radius is defined by the equation

=
2(

=
2(
2645
145.17
2
)
32.2

2
.0023769

3
1.9
=250.58
The maximum turn rate is defined by the equation:

=32.2

2

3.8.0023769

3
1.9
2
2645
145.17
2

= .69 /








0 50 100 150 200 250 300
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
Corner velocity
Velocity(freestream)
l
o
a
d

f
a
c
t
o
r
V-n diagram for DA-40
18

TASK 8: TAKEOFF AND LANDING PERFORMANCE
Since takeoff and landing performance no longer assumes steady level flight, new
2parameters must be put in. The equation for ground take off distance is

2
2

.
The derivation for takeoff velocity is

= 1.2

= 1.2

2/

.
To find the average force, all forces have to reach an equilibrium or

, which is simplified to

=
.707

1
2

2
.707

[
1
2

2
.707

].
The coefficient of lift and coefficient of drag have one more factor effecting them,
and thats the ground effect factor or . This factor is due to wind tip vortices are
interfered by the ground, and less drag occurs. The modified forms of coefficient of
lift and coefficient of drag are:

=
1
2
and

0
+

.,
and these are considered the optimum lift and drag coefficients for minimizing
ground roll The ground effect factor is defined as
=
(
16

)
2
1+(
16

)
2
,
where h is the height of the wing off the ground and b is the wingspan.
A) The first part of the analysis is finding out the ground effect factor. The height the
wing is above the ground can be estimated at 6ft, and the wing span is given as
39. 17
2
. The ground effect factor becomes
=
(
16

)
2
1+(
16

)
2
=
(
166
39.17
2
)
2
1+(
166
39.17
2
)
2
=.86.
B) The average velocity must be found. The take off velocity is shown as

=
1.2

= 1.2

2/

=1.2
2(
2645
145.7
2
)
.0023769

3
1.9
= 107.904ft/s.
19

Using the factor .707 to get the average velocity it becomes 76.288ft/s. To find
the coefficient of lift, a coefficient of rolling friction of .02 can be used. The
coefficient of lift becomes

=
1
2
=
1
2.86
10.53 .75 .02=.288.
The coefficient of drag is

0
+

.,=.0300 +
.86.288
2
10.53.75
=.03288.
The thrust can be found through the power curve with the given given velocity.
Through the equation

=T, and power being

= 180 .78(1
35

2
= 56.18
thrust in standard units is

30898
76.288

=T=405.02bs.
Now the average force can be calculated as

=
.707

1
2

2
.707

[
1
2

2
.707

]=405. 02
1
2

.0023769

3
76.288

2
145.17
2
.03288 .02 2645
1
2

.0023769

3
76.288

2
145.17
2
.288 = 345.05 .
Putting it into the final ground roll equation, its is

=
2645107.904

2
232.2

345.05
=1385
C) The same analysis applies, except with the density changing at 5000ft, some
values vary. The ground effect stays the same as
=
(
16

)
2
1+(
16

)
2
=
(
166
39.17
2
)
2
1+(
166
39.17
2
)
2
=.86.
The velocity take off becomes

= 1.2

= 1.2

2/

=1.2
2(
2645
145.7
2
)
.0020482

3
1.9
= 115.908ft/s,
and the average velocity is 115.908 .707 =
81.94

. The optimum coefficient of

lift and drag remain the same, while the average force varies with density.

=T,
and power being
= 150 .78(1
35

2
= 56.16.
20

The thrust changes with this new velocity and becomes
30893
81,94

=T=377.34lbs.
The average force becomes

=
.707

1
2

2
.707

[
1
2

2
.707

]=642.04
1
2

.0020842

3
81.94

2
145.17
2
.03288 .02 2645
1
2

.0020842

3
81.94

2
145.17
2
.288 =262.54lbs.
The final ground roll becomes

=
2645115.908

2
232.2

561.64
=1726ft
D) Now with the weight changing the velocity and the average force changes. The
ground effect stays the same, and the optimum coefficient of lift and drag stay
the same. With the modified weight the new velocity is

= 1.2

= 1.2

2/

=1.2
2(
2400
145.7
2
)
.0023769

3
1.9
= 102.49/
and the average velocity is
.707*102.49/=72.46ft/s.
Power is
= 180 .78(1
35

2
= 47.07
Thrust becomes
25893
72.46

=T=357.34lbs.
The average force is then

.707

1
2

2
.707

[
1
2

2
.707

]=357.34
1
2

.0023769

3
72.46

2
145.17
2
.03288 .02 2400
1
2

21

.0023769

3
72.46

2
145.17
2
.288=280.511lbs. Putting in the
final ground take off equation

=
2400102.49

2
232.2

280.511
=1395.5ft

) Much of the analysis for landing is the same as takeoff, with a few key
differences. First the equation for the ground roll is

=

2

2
.
The average force equation is

=
1
2

.707

[
1
2

.707

].
The same optimum of coefficient of lift and drag from the takeoff performance
can be used. The rolling friction while breaking can be estimated at .25. The
velocity while landing is

= 1.3

= 1.3

2/

=1.3
2(
2645
145.7
2
)
.0023769

3
1.9
=116.56ft/s,
and the average is .707*116.56kts=82.40ft/s. Putting the values into the
equation, its

=
1
2

.707

[
1
2

.707

]=
1
2
0023769

3

139.07

2
145.17
2
.03288 .25[2645
1
2
0023769

3

82.40
2
145.17
2
.288]=-304.651lbs.
Putting into the final equation

=
2645
232.2

2
304.651
116.56
2
=1831.62ft







22

Conclusion:
The DA-40 performed to expectations. Many of the DA-40 performance values matched
how an aircraft of its configuration would perform in real life. The multi-faceted analysis
allowed the student to take the DA-40 with very base information and expand on it and
make a full detailed report on its performance. These aspects included the drag polar,
power required, power available, climb performance, range and endurance, glide
performance, turn performance and take off and landing performance. The DA-40 was
tested on these very principles and showed and explained to the writer how an aircraft
functions and the complexities behind it. The writer learned how an aircraft performs in
real world conditions and how using analysis techniques can lead to results on aircraft
performance.

















23




LIST OF FIGURES:
Page 8:

Page 8:
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
CD0
Coefficient of lift vs Coefficient of drag
Coefficient of lift
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

o
f

d
r
a
g
24




Page 9:


Page 10:
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
CD0
Coefficient of lift vs Coefficient of drag
Coefficient of lift
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

o
f

d
r
a
g
40 60 80 100 120 140 160
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180


X: 150
Y: 129
velocity in knots
p
o
w
e
r

i
n

h
o
r
s
e
p
o
w
e
r
Velocity vs Power graph
Power required at sea level
Power required at 5000ft
Power required at 10000ft
25




Page 11:

Page 11:
40 60 80 100 120 140 160
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Velocity(kts)
T
H
P
(
h
p
)
Velocity vs Power graph


Sea level
5000ft
10000ft
40 60 80 100 120 140 160
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Rate of Climb VS Velocity
Velocity(knots)
R
a
t
e

o
f

C
l
i
m
b
(
f
t
/
m
i
n
)


RC at sea level
RC at 5000ft
RC at 10000ft
26





Page 12:

Page 13:
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
Rate of Climb(ft/min)
A
l
t
i
t
u
d
e
(
f
t
)
Extrapolated rate of climb graph vs altitude
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
x 10
-3
Altitude(ft)
R
a
t
e

o
f

c
l
i
m
b
-
1
(
f
t
/
m
i
n
)
Time to Climb graph
27





Page 15:

Page 16:
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
Climb Hodograph
Horizontal Velocity, V
H
(knots)
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y
,

V
V

(
k
n
o
t
s
)
100 150 200 250 300 350 400
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Glide Hodograph(sea level)
Vh(ft/s)
V
v
(
f
t
/
s
)
28





Page 17:

LIST OF FIGURES:
100 150 200 250 300 350 400
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Glide Hodograph(5000ft)
Vh(ft/s)
V
v
(
f
t
/
s
)
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
Corner velocity
Velocity(freestream)
l
o
a
d

f
a
c
t
o
r
V-n diagram for DA-40
29

Page 10:
Minimum Speed Speed for /

Maximum Speed
Altitud
e

Sea
Level
43 44.43 44.43 87 50.08 117.7 138 132.1 132.1
5,000
feet
46 48.09 48.09 91 51.87 99.69 134 109.3 109.3
10,000
feet
52 50.41 50.41 96

54.43 81.16 127 87.41 87.41


Page 13:
Rate of
climb(ft/min)
Climb
angle(degrees)
Velocity(kts)
Best rate of climb
angle condition
505.5 .003 47.85
Best climb angle
condition
250.14 .0024 29.93








30














CODE:
Task 1:
% Take home project
clc;
clear;
% Purpose: To find the relationship between coefficient of lift and drag
% Author: Andrew George
% Functions: No user defined functions
CD0=.0300;
e=.75;
S=145.7;
b=39.17;
AR=(b^2)/S;
CL=(-1:.1:1.9);
CD=CD0+((CL.^2)/(pi*e*AR));
plot([CL],[CD])
text(0,.0300,' \rightarrow CD0','FontSize',10)
title('Coefficient of lift vs Coefficient of drag')
xlabel('Coefficient of lift')
ylabel('Coefficient of drag')
31

LD=CL./CD;
plot([CL],[LD])
text(.8,14.34,' \rightarrow L/Dmax','FontSize',14)
maxLD=max(LD);
title('Lift to drag ratio vs Coefficient of lift')
xlabel('Coefficient of lift')
ylabel('Lift to Drag ratio(L/D)')

Task 2:
% Purpose: To find the relationship between power and speed
% Author: Andrew George
% Functions: No user defined functions
shpa1=180;
shpa2=150;
shpa3=120;
V=[40:1:150];
Vf=V.*(6076/3600);
n=.78.*(1-((35./V).^2));
P1=shpa1.*n;
P2=shpa2.*n;
P3=shpa3.*n;
S=145.7;
b=39.17;
AR=(b^2)/S;
CD0=.0300;
W=2645;
e=.75;
pi=3.14;
rho1=.0023769;
rho2=.0020482;
rho3=.0017556;
Pr1=((((.5*rho1*S*CD0).*Vf.^3)/550)+(((W^2)/(.5*rho1*S*3.14*AR*e)).*Vf.^-1)./550);
Pr2=((((.5*rho2*S*CD0).*Vf.^3)/550)+(((W^2)/(.5*rho2*S*3.14*AR*e)).*Vf.^-1)./550);
Pr3=((((.5*rho3*S*CD0).*Vf.^3)/550)+(((W^2)/(.5*rho3*S*3.14*AR*e)).*Vf.^-1)./550);
plot([V],[Pr1],[V],[Pr2],[V],[Pr3])
xlabel('velocity in kts')
ylabel('power in horsepower')
title('Velocity vs Power graph')
legend('Power required at sea level','Power required at 5000ft','Power required at
10000ft',0)
C1=(4*W^2)/(3*(rho1^2)*(S^2)*pi*AR*e*CD0);
C2=(4*W^2)/(3*(rho2^2)*(S^2)*pi*AR*e*CD0);
C3=(4*W^2)/(3*(rho3^2)*(S^2)*pi*AR*e*CD0);
VPrmin1=C1^(1/4);
VPrmin2=C2^(1/4);
VPrmin3=C3^(1/4);
32

Vparmin1=VPrmin1*(3600/6076);
Vparmin2=VPrmin2*(3600/6076);
Vparmin3=VPrmin3*(3600/6076);
display(Vparmin1)
display(Vparmin2)
display(Vparmin3)

Task 3:
shpa1=180;
shpa2=150;
shpa3=120;
V=[40:1:150];
Vf=V.*(6076/3600);
n=.78.*(1-((35./V).^2));
P1=shpa1.*n;
P2=shpa2.*n;
P3=shpa3.*n;
S=145.7;
b=39.17;
AR=(b^2)/S;
CD0=.0300;
W=2645;
e=.75;
pi=3.14;
rho1=.0023769;
rho2=.0020482;
rho3=.0017556;
Pr1=((((.5*rho1*S*CD0).*Vf.^3)/550)+(((W^2)/(.5*rho1*S*3.14*AR*e)).*Vf.^-1)./550);
Pr2=((((.5*rho2*S*CD0).*Vf.^3)/550)+(((W^2)/(.5*rho2*S*3.14*AR*e)).*Vf.^-1)./550);
Pr3=((((.5*rho3*S*CD0).*Vf.^3)/550)+(((W^2)/(.5*rho3*S*3.14*AR*e)).*Vf.^-1)./550);
plot([V],[P1],'r',[V],[P2],'b',[V],[P3],'c',[V],[Pr1],'r',[V],[Pr2],'b',[V],[Pr3],'c')
xlabel('Velocity(kts)')
ylabel('THP(hp)')
title('Velocity vs Power graph')
legend('Sea level','5000ft','10000ft',0)

Task 4:
shpa1=180;
shpa2=150;
shpa3=120;
V=[40:1:150];
Vf=V.*(6076/3600);
n=.78.*(1-((35./V).^2));
P1=shpa1.*n;
P2=shpa2.*n;
P3=shpa3.*n;
33

S=145.7;
b=39.17;
AR=(b^2)/S;
CD0=.0300;
W=2645;
e=.75;
pi=3.14;
rho1=.0023769;
rho2=.0020482;
rho3=.0017556;
Pr1=((((.5*rho1*S*CD0).*Vf.^3)/550)+(((W^2)/(.5*rho1*S*3.14*AR*e)).*Vf.^-1)./550);
Pr2=((((.5*rho2*S*CD0).*Vf.^3)/550)+(((W^2)/(.5*rho2*S*3.14*AR*e)).*Vf.^-1)./550);
Pr3=((((.5*rho3*S*CD0).*Vf.^3)/550)+(((W^2)/(.5*rho3*S*3.14*AR*e)).*Vf.^-1)./550);
RC1=33000*(P1-Pr1)/W;
RC2=33000*(P2-Pr2)/W;
RC3=33000*(P3-Pr3)/W;
%Velocity VS RC Graph
plot([V],[RC1],[V],[RC2],[V],[RC3])
title('Rate of Climb VS Velocity')
xlabel('Velocity(kts)')
ylabel('Rate of Climb(ft/min)')
legend('RC at sea level','RC at 5000ft','RC at 10000ft')
maxRC1=max(RC1)
maxRC2=max(RC2)
maxRC3=max(RC3)
display(maxRC1)
display(maxRC2)
display(maxRC3)
%Rate of Climb extrapolated
x=[853.2105,614.8650,364.0977];
y=[0,5000,10000];
new_x=linspace(0,1000);
coeffs1=polyfit(x,y,1);
new_y=polyval(coeffs1,new_x);
plot(x, y, 'rx');
plot(new_x, new_y, 'k');
xlabel('Rate of Climb(ft/min)')
ylabel('Altitude(ft)')
title('Extrapolated rate of climb graph vs altitude')
%Time to climb
plot(y,x)
Z=trapz(y,x);
display(Z)
xlabel('Altitude(ft)')
ylabel('Rate of climb(ft/min')
title('Time to Climb graph')
34

Vv =RC1*(60/6076.12); %knots
Vh =(V.^2-(Vv*6076.12/3600).^2).^(1/2)*(3600/6076.12); %knots
plot(Vh,Vv)
title('Climb Hodograph')
xlabel('Horizontal Velocity, Vh (knots)')
ylabel('Vertical Velocity, Vv (knots)')
grid on
display(Vh)
display(Vv)


Task 6:
Cl=[.1:.1:1.9];
Cd0=.0300;
pi=3.14;
AR=10.56;
e=.75;
W=2645;
S=145.17;
WS=W/S;
rho=.0023769;
Cd=Cd0+((Cl.^2)/(pi*AR*e));
R=Cl./Cd;
theta=atan(1./R);
display(Cl)
display(Cd)
display(theta)
c=cos(theta);
display(c)
Vstream=(((2.*c.*WS)./(rho.*Cl)).^.5);
display(Vstream)
Vh=Vstream.*cos(theta);
Vv=Vstream.*sin(theta);
plot(Vh,Vv)
axis ij
axis([80,400,0,125])
title('Glide Hodograph')
xlabel('Vh(ft/s)')
ylabel('Vv(ft/s)')
%5000ft
Cl=[.1:.1:1.9];
Cd0=.0300;
pi=3.14;
AR=10.56;
e=.75;
W=2645;
35

S=145.17;
WS=W/S;
rho=.0020842;
Cd=Cd0+((Cl.^2)/(pi*AR*e));
R=Cl./Cd;
theta=atan(1./R);
display(Cl)
display(Cd)
display(theta)
c=cos(theta);
display(c)
Vstream=(((2.*c.*WS)./(rho.*Cl)).^.5);
display(Vstream)
Vh=Vstream.*cos(theta);
Vv=Vstream.*sin(theta);
plot(Vh,Vv)
axis ij
axis([80,400,0,125])
title('Glide Hodograph(5000ft)')
xlabel('Vh(ft/s)')
ylabel('Vv(ft/s)')


Task 7:
Vex=178;
Vex1=178*(6076/3600);
V1=0:.1:Vex;
nmax=3.8;
nmin=-1.52;
W=2645;
S=145.17;
WS=W/S;
rho=.0023769;
Cl=1.9;
Cln=-1.9;
CV=(((2*nmax*WS)/(rho*Cl))^.5);
VC=(0:1:CV)*(6076/3600);
npositive=(.5.*rho.*VC.^2.*S.*Cl)./W;
nCV=(((2*-1*nmin*WS)/(rho*Cl))^.5);
NVC=(0:1:nCV)*(6076/3600);
nnegative=(.5.*rho.*NVC.^2.*S.*Cln)./W;
plot(VC,npositive,'r',NVC,nnegative,'b',[VC(end),500],[10.81,10.81],'r',[NVC(end),500],[-
4.272,-4.272],'b',[0,500],[0,0],'c',[295.4,295.4],[0,10.81])
axis([0 500 -6 12])
36

text(295.4,0,' \rightarrow Corner velocity','FontSize',12)
xlabel('Velocity(freestream)')
ylabel('load factor')
title('V-n diagram for DA-40')












REFERENCES:
Anderson, J ohn. Introduction to Flight. 7th ed. New York NY: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2007.
Print.