You are on page 1of 66

FINAL REPORT

Module Code
Module Name
Course
Department

ACD 510
Aircraft Conceptual Design
M.Sc in Aircraft Design
Automotive and Aeronautical Engg.

Name of the Student

ACD FT-11

Batch

Full-Time / Part-Time 2011.

Module Leader

Dr. H K Narahari

M.S.Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies


Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programmes(PEMP)
#470-P Peenya Industrial Area, 4th Phase, Peenya, Bengaluru-560 058
Tel; 080 4906 5555, website: www.msrsas.org

POSTGRADUATE ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME (PEMP)

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Declaration Sheet
Student Name

ACD FT-11

Reg. No
Course

MSc [Egg] Aircraft Design

Batch

FT 11

Module Code

ACD 510

Module Title
Module Date

Aircraft Conceptual Design


to
06.08.2012

Module Leader

Dr. H K Narahari

Batch Full-Time 2011.

1.09.2012

Extension requests:
Extensions can only be granted by the Head of the Department in consultation with the module leader.
Extensions granted by any other person will not be accepted and hence the assignment will incur a penalty.
Extensions MUST be requested by using the Extension Request Form, which is available with the ARO.
A copy of the extension approval must be attached to the assignment submitted.

Penalty for late submission


Unless you have submitted proof of mitigating circumstances or have been granted an extension, the
penalties for a late submission of an assignment shall be as follows:
Up to one week late:
Penalty of 5 marks
One-Two weeks late:
Penalty of 10 marks
More than Two weeks late:
Fail - 0% recorded (F)
All late assignments: must be submitted to Academic Records Office (ARO). It is your responsibility to
ensure that the receipt of a late assignment is recorded in the ARO. If an extension was agreed, the
authorization should be submitted to ARO during the submission of assignment.
To ensure assignment reports are written concisely, the length should be restricted to a limit
indicated in the assignment problem statement. Assignment reports greater than this length may
incur a penalty of one grade (5 marks). Each delegate is required to retain a copy of the
assignment report.

Declaration
The assignment submitted herewith is a result of my own investigations and that I have conformed to the
guidelines against plagiarism as laid out in the PEMP Student Handbook. All sections of the text and
results, which have been obtained from other sources, are fully referenced. I understand that cheating and
plagiarism constitute a breach of University regulations and will be dealt with accordingly.

Signature of the student

Date

Submission date stamp


(by ARO)

Signature of the Module Leader and date

Signature of Head of the Department and date

ii
Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Abstract
____________________________________________________________________________
Aircraft design mainly depends on the existing historical data. Drastic changes in design cannot
be made hence it is usually the up gradation or the enhancement of the existing design. This
report is such an effort to Design of a Passenger Aircraft with a Range of 3000 nautical miles
with a passenger Capacity of 80. This report is made by a group of five members working on
different areas of design.
The first Chapter deals with the initial weight estimation which is usually the first step in the
design process of any aircraft. This is only a rough estimate rather than detailed weight
estimation because the weights must be varied in order to meet various customer requirements
in the later part of the design phase. This is because the design is a compromise of several
parameters.
Chapter 2 deals with the design of wing and high lifting devices. Various parameters like Wing
area, aspect ratio, airfoil, geometry, sweep angle, taper ratio is actually assumed based on the
historical data available. This is a good starting point because a lot of time is saved and most
importantly near close or meaningful results can be obtained in first set of assumption itself.
CFD analysis is carried out with the final geometry to validate the results obtained. Similar
procedure is carried out with flaps deflected at a particular angle calculated using Javafoil in
order to obtain max Cl needed as per the requirement.
Chapter 3 deals with the fuselage design which includes the entire layout and seating
arrangement which usually depends on the number of passengers. Several considerations are
carried out in design process to meet all FAA regulation like vision of the pilot and space
between the seats and also the dimension of the seats.
Chapter 4 deals with the selection of a propulsion system and the integration of the same. This
process depends upon the gross weight and the thrust requirements.
Chapter 5 deals with the design of horizontal and vertical tail and various performance
parameters are calculated to check it meets with the customer requirement.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

iii

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Contents
____________________________________________________________________________

Declaration Sheet ......................................................................................................................... ii


Abstract ....................................................................................................................................... iii
Contents ........................................................................................................................................iv
List of Figures ..............................................................................................................................vi
List of Nomenclature ....................................................................................................................ix
CHAPTER 1 .............................................................................................................................. 10
1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 10
1.2 Initial Weight Estimate ...................................................................................................... 10
1.2.1 Payload Weight .......................................................................................................... 11
1.2.2 Crew Weight............................................................................................................... 11
1.2.3 Empty weight Fraction ............................................................................................... 11
1.2.4 Fuel weight Fraction ................................................................................................... 12
2.1 Wing Design ...................................................................................................................... 16
2.1.1 Wing loading .............................................................................................................. 17
2.1.2 Aspect Ratio ............................................................................................................... 17
2.1.3 Wing Sweep and Taper .............................................................................................. 18
2.1.4 Wing Geometry and Planform ................................................................................... 19
2.1.5 Number of wings ........................................................................................................ 20
2.1.6 Wing vertical location on the fuselage [1] ................................................................. 20
2.1.7 Steps for selection of the Airfoil for the wing [4] ...................................................... 23
2.1.8 Wing Twist ................................................................................................................. 27
2.2 Wing high lift devices ....................................................................................................... 30
2.2.1 Calculation of Takeoff and landing distance .............................................................. 31
2.2.2 Javafoil ....................................................................................................................... 32
2.2.3 Finite 3D Wing ........................................................................................................... 34
3.1Fuselage layout [6] ............................................................................................................. 36
3.2 Fuselage nose section ........................................................................................................ 38
3.3 Fuselage Mid-section ........................................................................................................ 39
3.4 Fuselage tail section .......................................................................................................... 39
3.5 Galley and Toilet configuration ........................................................................................ 40
3.6 Passenger loading and emergency exits ............................................................................ 40
iv
Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

3.7 Structural consideration ..................................................................................................... 42


3.8 Weight estimation for fuselage.......................................................................................... 43
3.9 Landing gear layout: .......................................................................................................... 45
4.1Propulsion System .............................................................................................................. 47
4.2Engine Selection ................................................................................................................. 47
4.3 Why to go for CFM56-5B3 Engine ................................................................................... 49
4.4 Engine integration ............................................................................................................. 51
5.1 Empennage ........................................................................................................................ 52
5.2 Empennage types ............................................................................................................... 52
5.3 Empennage design ............................................................................................................. 53
5.4 Tail geometry .................................................................................................................... 53
5.5 Tail sizing .......................................................................................................................... 55
5.6 Tail layout.......................................................................................................................... 56
6.1 Empty weight build up and C.G location .......................................................................... 59
6.2 Performance....................................................................................................................... 61
7.1 Assembly ........................................................................................................................... 64
8.1 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 65
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 66

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

List of Figures
____________________________________________________________________________
Figure1. 1 Empty weight fraction Vs Wo[1] ............................................................................... 11
Figure1. 2 Mission Profile ........................................................................................................... 12
Figure1. 3 Aircraft type based on Range[2] ................................................................................ 13
Figure1. 4 Selection of SFC[1].................................................................................................... 13
Figure1. 5 Selection of L/D Ratio[1]........................................................................................... 13
Figure1. 6 Selection of L/D based on type of Aircraft[2] ........................................................... 14
Figure1. 7 No. of Passenger Vs MTOM[3] ................................................................................. 15
Figure1. 8 Range Vs MTOM/Passenger[3] ................................................................................. 16

Figure2. 1 Selection of Wing Loading[2][3] ............................................................................... 17


Figure2. 2 Selection of Aspect Ratio[2] ...................................................................................... 18
Figure2. 3 Mach no Vs Leading edge sweep angle[1] ................................................................ 19
Figure2. 4 Maximum and ideal lift co-efficient plot [5] ............................................................. 25
Figure2. 5 Cl Vs Cd plot for 631-412 [5] .................................................................................... 26
Figure2. 6 Airfoil created using ICEM CFD ............................................................................... 28
Figure2. 7 CATIA model of the wing (isometric view) .............................................................. 28
Figure2. 8 Top view of the wing ................................................................................................. 29
Figure2. 9 Domain around the wing ............................................................................................ 29
Figure2. 10 3-D domains around the wing .................................................................................. 29
Figure2. 11 Unstructured mesh for the wing ............................................................................... 30
Figure2. 12 Creation of Airfoil geometry ................................................................................... 32
Figure2. 13 Flap deflection ......................................................................................................... 33
Figure2. 14 Computation of Cl.................................................................................................... 33
Figure2. 15 Generation of curves using ICEM CFD from point data ......................................... 34
Figure2. 16 CATIA model of 3D wing ....................................................................................... 34
Figure2. 17 Domain sketch ......................................................................................................... 35
Figure2. 18 Domain surface ........................................................................................................ 35
Figure2. 19 Mesh generated in ICEM CFD ................................................................................ 35

Figure3. 1 Seat pitch and height. [3] ........................................................................................... 36


Figure3. 2 Fuselage Interior detail (mm)..................................................................................... 37
Figure3. 3 Fuselage Plan view (mm)........................................................................................... 37
Figure3. 4 Fuselage side view (mm). .......................................................................................... 38
Aircraft Conceptual Design

vi

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure3. 5 Nose section layout. [6] ............................................................................................. 38


Figure3. 6 Pilot Vision designed in Catia (mm). ......................................................................... 38
Figure3. 7 Pilot seat dimensions as per FAR. [3] ........................................................................ 39
Figure3. 8 Galley and toilet layout. [6] ....................................................................................... 40
Figure3. 9 CATIA model for fuselage view-1 ............................................................................ 41
Figure3. 10 CATIA model fuselage view-2 ................................................................................ 41
Figure3. 11 Mesh geometry of fuselage and domain. ................................................................. 42
Figure3. 12 Mesh geometry of fuselage. ..................................................................................... 42
Figure3. 13 Stringers layout. [1] ................................................................................................. 43
Figure3. 14 Mass fractions for rapid mass estimation. [3] .......................................................... 44
Figure3. 15 Landing gear forward retract. [8] ............................................................................ 45
Figure3. 16 Nose landing gear load calculation. [8] ................................................................... 46
Figure3. 17 Tires used in typical aircraft. ................................................................................... 46

Figure 4. 1 Effect of flight speed on engine efficiency. [6] ........................................................ 48


Figure 4. 2 Effect of Mach number and specific thrust on thrust lapse rate. [6] ......................... 48
Figure 4. 3 Inlet locations-podded engines. [1] ........................................................................... 51
Figure 4. 4 Location of the nacelle compared to the wing .......................................................... 51

Figure 5. 1 Tail variations [1]...................................................................................................... 52


Figure 5. 2 Tail aspect ratio and taper ratio for various types of aircraft [1] .............................. 54
Figure 5. 3 Tail volume coefficient [1] ....................................................................................... 55
Figure 5. 4 NACA 0012 airfoil coordinates with deflected control surface ............................... 57
Figure 5. 5 Velocity distribution and Cl values with deflected control surface .......................... 58
Figure 5. 6 NACA 0012 airfoil with deflected control surface in CATIA ................................. 58
Figure 5. 7 CATIA model-Horizontal tail ................................................................................... 59
Figure 5. 8 CATIA model-Vertical tail ....................................................................................... 59

Figure 6. 1 Approximate empty weight build up and c.g. location [1] ....................................... 60

Figure 7. 1 Front View ................................................................................................................ 64


Figure 7. 2 Top view ................................................................................................................... 64
Figure 7. 3 Side view ................................................................................................................... 64
Figure 7. 4 Isometric view ........................................................................................................... 65
Aircraft Conceptual Design

vii

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

List of Tables
____________________________________________________________________________
Table1. 1Iterations ....................................................................................................................... 16
Table1. 2 2D Cl increment for leading edge flaps[2] .................................................................. 31
Table2. 1 Different set of airfoils selected from the graph [5] .................................................... 25
Table2. 2 Geometric twist for different aircrafts ......................................................................... 27

Table3. 1 Typical seat width and pitch for different class of travel. [6] ..................................... 36
Table3. 2 Typical guidelines for fuselage front and aft closure ratio. [3] ................................... 37
Table3. 3 Emergence exits requirements. [6] .............................................................................. 40
Table3. 4 Dimensions for types of exits. [6] ............................................................................... 41
Table3. 5 Mass amended for different configuration. [6] ........................................................... 43

Table 4. 1 Specifications and applications of CFM56-5 series engines. [10] ............................. 50

Table 5. 1 Design data of wing and fuselage .............................................................................. 54


Table 5. 2 Geometrical data supposed for tail design ................................................................. 54
Table 5. 3 Tail Design configuration........................................................................................... 57

Table 6. 1 Empty weight build up and c.g. location .................................................................... 61


Table 6. 2 Derived data from design ........................................................................................... 62
Table 6. 3 Designed aircraft characteristics ................................................................................ 63

Aircraft Conceptual Design

viii

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

List of Nomenclature
____________________________________________________________________________

Acronym

Expansion

Cl

Coefficient of lift

Cd

Coefficient of Drag

TWR

Thrust to Weight Ratio

WL

Wing Loading

LDR

Lift to Drag Ratio

Ct

Specific Fuel Consumption

AR

Aspect ratio

Wf

Fuel Weight

MTOM

Maximum Takeoff weight

Cdo

Zero lift Drag co efficient

DSL

Density at Sea Level

Aircraft Conceptual Design

ix

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

CHAPTER 1
Design of a Passenger Aircraft with a Range of 3000 nautical miles with a passenger
Capacity of 80

1.1 Introduction
This report deals with the conceptual design of an aircraft. Any type of aircraft has the same
parts like fuselage, wing, engine etc but analyzing it a bit deeper it is evident that they are only
same by parts not on the geometry or the size. Fighter planes are smaller but much faster when
compared to that of the commercial transport plane. The root cause for such a big difference in the
design of aircraft is mainly due to the change in the functionality that has to be met. So in order to
start the conceptual design, proper understanding of the purpose of the aircraft to be designed is
required. Design in any field is a compromise of various factors, especially in the field of aircraft
where changing one influencing parameter affects many other influencing parameters. Since there
is a correlation between various influencing parameters the final modified design cannot be
achieved by changing only one influencing parameter. It is usually a combination of various
parameters to meet the final customer requirements and moreover other performance parameter as
per FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) regulation has to be satisfied for the aircraft to be
certified.
An aircraft with a range of 3000 (nautical miles) and a passenger capacity of 80 comes under
the small Jet transport category. Looking into the available statistical data of similar type of aircraft
is regarded as the good starting point for a new design. The design process begins with the rough
estimate of the maximum take off mass. In this process several decisions has to be made on initial
assumptions to be used for calculations. Since most of the processes in aircraft design are iterative
in nature it is important to start with a meaningful assumption. By doing so reasonable results can
be achieved in a shorter span. This is done with the help of available statistical data.

1.2 Initial Weight Estimate


First step is to come up with a rough estimate of the total takeoff weight which is denoted by
Wo. It is the sum of crew weight, payload weight, fuel weight and empty weight.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

1.2.1 Payload Weight


Here the payload weight can be estimated with the number of passenger and the amount of baggage
that they are permitted to carry.

W payload = N * (Average weight of a passenger + Permitted baggage per individual)

Where N is the number of passengers and the initial assumption for average weight of an
individual passenger is taken as 80 kg (173.36 pounds) and the permitted baggage as 40 kg (88.14
pounds). So

W payload = 80 * (80+40) = 9600 kg (21165 pounds)

1.2.2 Crew Weight


Crew consists of a pilot, a co pilot, a flight engineer and for a passenger capacity of 80 we need two
air hostesses which all together make a crew as five members and assuming the crew members are
allowed to carry a baggage of 40 kg. Then

W crew = 5 * (120) = 600 kg (1323 pounds)

1.2.3 Empty weight Fraction


Empty weight is denoted as We, rather than calculating the empty weight as such, empty weight
fraction is calculated. Empty weight fraction is the ratio between the empty weight and the total
takeoff weight. This can be calculated from the statistical data available.
Empty weight fraction = (We/ Wo) and is given by We/ Wo = A* WoC * Kvs

Figure1. 1 Empty weight fraction Vs Wo[1]

Aircraft Conceptual Design

11

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Since the aircraft to be designed comes under Jet transport appropriate values for A and C are
selected. Therefore
(We/Wo) = 1.02 Wo-0.06 *1.04
(We/Wo) = 1.0608 Wo-0.06

1.2.4 Fuel weight Fraction


Fuel weight as such cannot be estimated from statistical data because amount of fuel to be carried
varies according to the mission profile. The mission profile is usually given as the customer
requirement. Statistical data are available to find out the fuel fraction at various stages of the
mission profile hence the total fuel fraction can be estimated.

Figure1. 2 Mission Profile

Where
 1-2 Warm up and Takeoff
 2-3 Climb
 3-4 Cruise
 4-5 Loiter and descent
 5-6 Landing phase
Let W1, W2, W3, W4, W5 and W6 be the weights after respective phases of the mission profile.

1.2.4.1 Calculation
 Amount of fuel utilized for warm up and takeoff phase is estimated as 0.97
(W1/W0) = 0.97
 Amount of fuel utilized for climb phase with respect to the amount of fuel left over after the
takeoff phase is estimated as 0.985

Aircraft Conceptual Design

12

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

(W2/W1) = 0.985
 Fuel utilized for Cruise depends upon the range to be achieved and can be calculated using
Range equation

Therefore Wi-1 / Wi in our case it is given by (W3/W2) is given by

Where R is the Range, C is the specific Fuel Consumption, V is the velocity, L/D is the lift to
drag ratio

Figure1. 3 Aircraft type based on Range[2]

 Range for this mission is 3000 nautical miles (18228341.6 ft)


 Specific fuel consumption for a high bypass turbo fan engine for cruise was found to be 0.5
1/hr (0.0001389 1/s)

Figure1. 4 Selection of SFC[1]

 The cruise velocity was assumed to be 0.85 M (845.58 ft/sec).


 In a similar fashion the L/D ratio for jet engine at cruise is given by L/D = 0.866 (L/D) max.
The selection of L/D and specific fuel consumption comes from the statistical data
available. (L/D) max was assumed to be 16. So L/D for cruise = 0.866*16 = 13.9

Figure1. 5 Selection of L/D Ratio[1]

Aircraft Conceptual Design

13

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure1. 6 Selection of L/D based on type of Aircraft[2]

 Substituting all the values we get


(W3/W2) = e-0.2154 = 0.8062
 In case the intended airport is closed due to some unavoidable reason like worst climatic
condition, the aircraft has to loiter for extra duration or can have an increased range to reach
the nearest airport. According to FAA regulation an additional fuel for loitering atleast for
30 min has to be provided. In this case the additional time for endurance is taken as 45 min
which includes both loiter and descent. Fuel ratio calculation for endurance is as follows.
 It can be obtained from endurance formula.

Therefore Wi-1 / Wi in our case it is given by (W4/W3) is given by

Where
 E is the endurance in seconds. In this case it is 45 min (2700 sec)
 But again the selection of specific fuel consumption and L/D ratio is based on statistical data
but it varies because it is a loitering phase. Specific fuel consumption for jet engines during
loiter phase is estimated as 0.4 1/ hr (0.0001111 1/s)
 L/D for jet engines for loitering phase is the L/D max hence the value is 16 from statistical
data which says L/D selection can lie between (15 - 18.2).
 Substituting all the values we get
(W4/W3) = e-0.01874 = 0.9814

Aircraft Conceptual Design

14

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

 Fuel fraction used for landing is estimated as 0.995


(W5/W4) = 0.995
Therefore W5/W0 = (W1/WO) * (W2/W1) * (W3/W2) * (W4/W3) * (W5/W4)
= 0.97 * 0.985 * 0.8062 * 0.9814 * 0.995

W5/W0 = 0.7521
But the Total fuel fraction (Wf / Wo) is given by the formula
(Wf / Wo) = 1.06 * (1- W5/W0)
(Wf / Wo) = 1.06 * (1- 0.7521) = 0.2626
We know that

Simplifying the equation, we get

0 =

(  +   )

1 ( / ) ( / )

 =

22486.35
1 0.2626 1.0608  .


 =

22486.35
0.7374 1.0608  .

It is an iterative process so the initial guess should be reasonable so that a lot of time can be saved.

Figure1. 7 No. of Passenger Vs MTOM[3]

Aircraft Conceptual Design

15

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

From the Figure 1.3 a initial estimate of 40000 kg approximately 80000 pounds is taken
Table1. 1Iterations
No of

Initial Guess of

Obtained Value

80000

113148.2

107000

108075

Iteration

Wo

Wo

113150

108000

107922.4

107933

107932.6

3
5
6

107900

107162.1

107937

So the initial estimate of Maximum takeoff mass is 48957 kg (107933 pounds). The calculated
value can be cross checked with the range VS MTOM / passenger

Figure1. 8 Range Vs MTOM/Passenger[3]

So for a range of 3000 nm and a passenger capacity of 80 we have MTOM as 80*600 we get 48000
kg which is comparable to the estimated value.

2.1 Wing Design


The different parameters that needs to be found during the wing design is
 Wing area
 Aspect ratio
 Taper ratio
 Root chord
 Tip chord
 Mean aerodynamic chord
 Span
 Number of wings
 Wing position on the fuselage

Aircraft Conceptual Design

16

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

 Airfoil cross section


 Twist angle
 Sweep angle
 Dihedral angle
 Wing incidence angle for Cruise
The step followed in the selection of wing area is discussed here in a sequential manner

2.1.1 Wing loading


Once the weight estimation is done, the next step is the proper selection of wing loading. The
selection of wing loading depends upon the mission requirement of an aircraft. Wing loading is the
ratio of total takeoff weight to that of the wing area. It is denoted by W/S and its units are Kg/m2 or
lbs/ft2. It is found that for a short/ medium range aircraft the wing loading is about 110 lbs/ft2
(537.06 kg/m2).
W/S = 537.06 Kg/m2 (110 lbs/ft2)

Figure2. 1 Selection of Wing Loading[2][3]

2.1.2 Aspect Ratio


Aspect ratio is defined as the ratio between the wing span to the wing mean aerodynamic. The
selection of aspect ratio in conceptual design phase is mainly on the historical data but what leads to

Aircraft Conceptual Design

17

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

the selection of particular aspect ratio is based on its effects on the various flight features such as
aircraft performance, stability, control, cost, and manufacturability.
The effects of aspect ratio are
 As the aspect ratio increases, the aerodynamic features of the three-dimensional wing such
as CL, 0, CLmax, CDmin will get closer to the two-dimensional airfoil properties. This is
because of reduction of the influence of wing tip vortex, so it is desired have high AR.
 As the AR increases, the maximum lift co-efficient for a particular angle of attack increases,
because the wing effective angle of attack increases, so it is desired to have a high aspect
ratio wing.
 As the aspect ratio increases the weight of the wing increases, this needs more stiffer wing,
hence more stress on the root to hold the wing, hence it is desired to have a short wing to
reduce the weight of the wing.
From statistical data it is found that the aircraft that comes under the jet transport category has an
optimum Aspect ratio which lies between (7 - 9.5) hence a approximated value of aspect ratio 9 is
assumed. It is denoted by A.R and is a dimensionless quantity.
Aspect ratio = b2/S = 9

Figure2. 2 Selection of Aspect Ratio[2]

2.1.3 Wing Sweep and Taper


The next step in the design process is to come up with the wing geometry which includes the Root
chord and tip chord dimension, taper ratio, Sweep angle. The sweep back angle is provided to
reduce the effective Mach number at the leading edge. By doing so the loss of lift associated with
supersonic flow can be reduced. The sweep angle usually depends on the cruise Mach number.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

18

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure2. 3 Mach no Vs Leading edge sweep angle[1]

From Figure 1.6 for a design cruise Mach no of 0.85 the leading edge sweep angle is chosen as 30
degrees. Taper ratio is defined as the ratio of the tip chord to that of the root chord. Tapered wing is
used in order to reduce the lift induced drag. A commercial transport aircraft with swept back wings
has a taper ratio that lie between 0.2 - 0.3. The maximum permitted taper ratio (0.3) is taken in this
design. So
 Sweep Angle = 30 degrees
 Taper Ratio = 0.3

2.1.4 Wing Geometry and Planform


Wing geometry includes calculation of Wing span, tip chord length, root chord length, Mean
aerodynamic chord length and span wise location of mean aerodynamic chord. All these parameters
can be calculated by the previously assumed parameters. The assumptions were Wing area = 90 m2,
Aspect ratio = 9, Wing sweep = 30 degrees, Taper ratio = 0.3.

 Wing span b = E. F H = 9 90 = 28.46 I


 Aspect Ratio =

J K

LM (NOP)

JJQ.R

LM(NO.S)

Root chord length Cr = 4.864 m


 For calculating Tip chord length, We have Taper Ratio = 0.3
T = 0.3 =

UV
UV
=
U
4.864

Aircraft Conceptual Design

19

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Tip chord length = 1.459 m


 Mean Aerodynamic chord length

 Span wise location of mean aerodynamic chord

2.1.5 Number of wings


In the olden days because of manufacturing limitations, more number of wings was used to
generate the required lift, now with modern manufacturing technologies and with the development
of new materials such as Aluminum and its alloys and composite have enabled the manufacturing
of single with long span wing.
With the modern technologies and the materials, now a days only single wing is used.

2.1.6 Wing vertical location on the fuselage [1]


The parameter that could be found during the initial stage of the design is the vertical location of
the wing with respect to fuselage centerline. This parameter will directly affect the other parameters
such as the tail location, landing gear design etc
Generally there are four types of configurations available, they are
 High wing
 Mid wing
 Low wing
 Parasol wing
As seen from the figure that, the most of the cargo aircrafts have a high wing, where as fighter
aircrafts will have the mid wing and the long rage passenger aircrafts will have the low wing. The
advantages and disadvantages of the different configuration are

Aircraft Conceptual Design

20

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

High wing
The high wing has some advantages as well as some disadvantages for a particular mission, they are
Advantages
 It eases the loading and unloading of cargo in to and out of the aircraft, and the trucks to
unload and load can move easily around the aircraft.
 The clearance from the ground for this configuration is more compared to low wing, which
facilitates the installation of engine on the wing.
 It facilitates the aircraft to take-off and land from the sea in case of amphibian aircrafts, thus
preventing the spilling of water in to the engine during take-off, which may shut down the
engine.
 The wing will produce more lift compared to low wing and mid-wing, because part of the
fuselage near the connection between two parts of the wing also contributes for the lift
produced by the wing.
 Since the CL produced by the wing the wing is high the aircraft can fly at a lower stall speed
compared to high and the low-wing.
Disadvantages
 The aircraft in this configuration will have more frontal area, which increases the drag of the
aircraft.
 The ground effect will be lower compared to low wing, this will influence on landing and
take-off distances.
 Landing gear is longer if connected to the wing. This makes the landing gear heavier and
requires more space inside the wing for retraction system. This will further make the wing
structure heavier.
 The wing will produce more induced drag (Di), due to higher lift coefficient.
 A high will be structurally 20% more heavier than the low wing.
Low Wing
In this section, advantages and disadvantages of a low wing configuration are discussed
Advantages
 The aircraft take off performance will be better compared with a high wing configuration
due to ground effect.
 The pilot will have a better view above the horizon, since the wing the wing is below the
pilot

Aircraft Conceptual Design

21

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

 There will be option for the landing gear retracting system in the wing as well as fuselage.
 Landing gear will be shorter; this makes the landing gear system lighter and requires less
space inside the wing for retracting system.
 The aircraft is lighter compared to the high wing structure, aircraft frontal area in this case
is less. Since the frontal area is less, it has less induced drag.
Disadvantages
 The wing generates less lift, compared with a high wing configuration since the wing has
two separate sections because of this the wing has less induced drag.
 Because of the first reason the aircraft will have higher stall speed compared with a high
wing configuration due to a lower CLmax because of that the take-off run is longer.
 The dihedral effect by the wing is less compared to the high wing, thus the aircraft is
laterally dynamically less stable.
 The wing below the pilot will obstruct the view of the pilot below the horizon.
Mid Wing
In general, the features of the mid-wing configuration stand between features of high-wing
configuration and features of low-wing configuration. Some of the new features of a mid-wing
configuration are as follows:
 The aircraft structure is heavier, due to the necessity of reinforcing wing root at the
intersection with the fuselage.
 The mid wing is more expensive compared with high and low-wing configurations.
 The mid wing is more attractive compared with two other configurations.
 The mid wing is aerodynamically streamliner compared with two other configurations.
 The strut is usually not used to reinforce the wing structure.
 The pilot can get into the cockpit using the wing as a step in a small GA aircraft.
 The mid-wing has less interference drag than low-wing and high-wing.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

22

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

2.1.7 Steps for selection of the Airfoil for the wing [4]
The design of airfoil is time consuming as well more cost is involved, for a conceptual design it is
better to select the best available airfoil from the data base. The steps involved in selection of the
airfoil are as follows.
The cruise altitude considered is 12 km at which the air speed is given by, temperature at 12 km is
216
= WXFY
= 1.4 287 216
= 293.9 I/[

The cruise number given for the design is 0.85 mach at an altitude of 12 km, therefore the cruise
velocity is given by
\=

] = 0.85 293.9
Vcruise = 249.8 m/s

First step is to determine the average weight in the cruising flight


1
^_` = (a + b )
2
N

^_` = J (48957 + 36100)

^_` = 42529 cd
Where Wi is the initial aircraft weight at the beginning of cruise and Wf is the final aircraft weight
at the end of cruise.
Calculation of aircraft ideal lift co-efficient (CLc).
In the cruising flight the aircraft weight is equal to the lift force.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

23

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

CLc =

CLc =

2 ^_`
V J S

JRJgJhh.QN

.SNhRJRh.Qi h

CLc =

2 42529 9.81
= 0.465
0.3194 249.8J 90

Where V is the aircraft cruise speed, is the air density at cruising altitude, and S is the wing
planform area.
Calculate the wing cruise lift co-efficient (CLcw).
We consider that the wing the only component responsible for the generation of lift, but other
aircraft components such as tail, fuselage etcwill contribute to the total lift negatively or
positively. Thus the relation between aircraft cruise lift coefficient and wing cruise lift coefficient is
a function of aircraft configuration. The contribution of fuselage, tail and other components will
determine the wing contribution to the aircraft lift co-efficient. In the preliminary design phase
where the other components are been decided, then the following relation is used to calculate the
Wing cruise lift co-efficient.
m

no
Cjkl = .hg

Cjkl =

0.465
= 0.489
0.95

Later in the design process when the other components are decided, this should be validated by
CFD simulations.
Calculation of wing airfoil ideal lift coefficient (Cli).
The wing is a 3-dimensional body whereas the airfoil is 2-D section, therefore the airfoil ideal lift
coefficient is different from the 3-D wing because the wing has a finite span and different chord
lengths and sweep angle results in this variation from the airfoil lift co-efficient, this variation can
be approximated using the relation.
Cpq =

Cjkl
0.9

Cpq =

.RQh
.h

= 0.54

Aircraft Conceptual Design

24

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

As per the statistical data the thickness to chord ratio generally used is 10-12%, but the cruise Cl
0.54 is not achieved in any of the airfoil with this thickness range with in the drag bucket. So the
wing area is modified to decrease the Cl cruise.
So the calculation are redone to adjust the Cl by considering wing area as 120 m2, then the values
lift co-efficient values are

rst = u. vw

rstx = u. vy
rz{ = u. |1
Later in the design process when the other components are decided, this should be validated by
CFD simulations
Table2. 1 Different set of airfoils selected from the graph [5]

No

NACA

Cdmin

Cmo

s
(deg)

o
(deg)

Stall
quality

1
2
3
4
5

631-412
641-412
651-412
652-415
642-415

0.006
0.004
0.004
0.0035
0.0045

-0.08
-0.040
-0.060
-0.028
-0.028

14
12
12
14
16

-1.5
-1.2
-1.5
-1.2
-1.3

moderate
Moderate
Sharp
Sharp
Moderate

Figure2. 4 Maximum and ideal lift co-efficient plot [5]

Aircraft Conceptual Design

25

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

From the ideal lift co-efficient and the maximum lift co-efficient values required, the airfoil
with corresponding values of lift co-efficient are selected from the figure, where the figure
represents the collection of airfoils with different lift co-efficient values. If there is no airfoil of
particular values then the airfoil that is nearest to the design point is selected.
If the wing is designed for a high subsonic passenger aircraft, select the thinnest airfoil (the
lowest (t/c max). The reason is to reduce the critical Mach number (Mcr) and drag-divergent9 Mach
number (Mdd). This allow the aircraft fly closer to Mach one before the drag rise is encountered. In
general, a thinner airfoil will have a higher Mcr than a thicker airfoil.

Figure2. 5 Cl Vs Cd plot for 631-412 [5]

We can notice that the 631-412 is the airfoil which has the maximum Cl which is equal to the
calculated value and the cruise Cl of 0.41 according to the calculation, and the stall is moderate,
which is acceptable so 631-412 airfoil is chosen for the design.
Since the cruise Cl obtained is 0.41 to achieve that the angle of attack of 1.50 is required so the
wing is set at 1.50 angle for cruise. The result is validated using CFD

Aircraft Conceptual Design

26

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

2.1.8 Wing Twist


Twist is the difference in angle of attack between wing tip and the root, if the wing tip has lower
angle of attack than the root, the wing is said to have negative incidence and if the wing root is at
lower angle of attack then the tip, the wing is said to have positive incidence. In most of the cases
negative incidence is employed, the main reason for it is to have stall at the root first than at the tip,
because in case of stall if the root stalls first, then the pilot can still have a control on the ailerons to
control the aircraft, since the tip is at negative incidence, it will lower the overall lift produced by
the wing. There are two types of twists employed, they are

Aerodynamic twist

Geometric twist

If the different airfoil cross-section used in the root and tip, which will have different zero lift angle
of attack then, it s called as aerodynamic twist. If the tip and root have the same airfoil cross section
and if the incidence is not same then, it is referred to as Geometric twist.
In most of the cases aerodynamic twist is employed because it is easy to manufacture, where as
geometric twist is difficult to manufacture. The negative incidence of -1 to -4 is used in most of the
aircraft, because if the negative incidence is more then it decreases the overall lift produced by the
wing and the twist is also used to obtain the elliptical lift distribution on the wing.
In case of conceptual design phase, the twist is decided based on the historical data available and in
the later stage it can refined based on numerical calculations.
Table2. 2 Geometric twist for different aircrafts

No

Aircraft

MTOW
(lb)

Wing incidence at
root (iw) (deg)

Wing angle at
tip (deg)

Twist
(deg)

1
2
3

Fokker 50
Cessna 310
Cessna
Citation I
Beech King
Air
Beech T-1A
JawHawk
Beech T-34C
Cessna
StationAir 6
Gulfstream IV
NorthropGrumman E2C Hawkeye
Piper

20,800
4,600
11,850

+3.5
+2.5
+2.5

+1.5
-0.5
-0.5

-2
-3
-3

11,800

+4.8

-4.8

16,100

+3

-3.3

-6.3

4,300
3,600

+4
+1.5

+1
-1.5

-3
-3

73,000
55,000

+3.5
+4

-2
+1

-5.5
-3

11,200

+1.5

-1

-2.5

4
5
6
7
8
9

10

Aircraft Conceptual Design

27

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Cheyenne
Beech Super
King
Beech starship
Cessna 208
Beech 1900D
Beechjet
400A
AVRO RJ100
Lockheed C130 Hercules
Pilatus PC-9
Piper PA-28161 Warrior

12,500

+ 3o 48'

-1o 7'

4.55'

14,900

+3

-5

-3.5

8000
16,950
16,100

+2o 37'
+3o 29'
+3

-3o 6'
-1o 4'
-3o 30'

-5o 31'
-4o 25'
-6o 30'

101,500
155,000

+3o 6'
+3

0
0

-3o 6'
-3

4,960
2,440

+1
+2

-1
-1

-2
-3

As seen from the table 2.2 for the design weight of 48900, the similar class of aircraft is NorthropGrumman E-2C Hawkeye, for which the twist angle of -30 is used, since the design weight is close
to it, for the initial design phase the twist angle of -30 is being used.

Figure2. 6 Airfoil created using ICEM CFD

Figure2. 7 CATIA model of the wing (isometric view)

Aircraft Conceptual Design

28

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure2. 8 Top view of the wing

Figure2. 9 Domain around the wing

Figure2. 10 3-D domains around the wing

Aircraft Conceptual Design

29

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure2. 11 Unstructured mesh for the wing

2.2 Wing high lift devices


The airfoil selected may give a design Cl required for cruise. But the same amount of lift may not
be sufficient during the takeoff and landing condition. Hence it is necessary to design high lifting
devices such as flaps and leading edge slats. The lift force is denoted by L and is given by
1
} = ~ ] J U H
2
The need for high lift devices can be explained through the formula itself. The first thing to be
noticed is that the cruise velocity and the takeoff or landing velocity is not same. The takeoff
velocity is less when compared to that of the cruise velocity. So in order to achieve the desired lift
during takeoff and landing two approaches can be formulated, one is by increasing the Cl and the
other way by increasing the surface area. Cl can be increased by increasing the camber of the
airfoil by deflecting the trailing edge flaps or the leading edge slats. There are several types of high
lift devices are available like plain flap, slotted flap, double and triple slotted flap, fowler flaps,
leading edge Krueger flap, slotted leading edge flap (slats) can be used. By using a plain flap, only
the camber of the airfoil can be changed but by using fowler flaps both the effective wing area and
also the camber can be varied. This is achieved by the extension or protrusion of the trailing edge
through some distance and is then deflected. Higher deflection can be achieved in case of fowler
flaps when compared to that of the split flaps because split flaps are prone to flow separation at

Aircraft Conceptual Design

30

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

higher deflection of the trailing edge but whereas in case of fowler flaps the flow separation does
not occur even at a higher angle of deflection because the effective chord length is also increased.
. Delta Clmax values for different type of leading edge flaps are
Table1. 2 2D Cl increment for leading edge flaps[2]

S.No

Type

Cl max

Fixed Slot

0.2

Leading Edge Flap

0.3

Kruger Flap

0.3

Slats

0.4

The design cruise Cl is 0.44 and if the leading edge slats are used the Cl max value will be 0.8
which will also be not sufficient for takeoff and landing purpose. It is roughly estimated that the Cl
max

required for takeoff and landing should be somewhere around 1.6 to 2.2 for long/ medium

range aircraft. Hence the desired Cl cannot be achieved just by using only one high lift device but
is usually a combination of both the leading edge slats and the trailing edge flaps. It is roughly
estimated that the leading edge flap deflection is usually 30 to 40 degrees. Since it is only a
conceptual design phase the normal split flap is only considered for initial computation rather than a
slotted flap. The most common flap chord length is 0.25 C from the trailing edge where C is the
airfoil chord.

2.2.1 Calculation of Takeoff and landing distance


Landing and takeoff run is usually specified in terms of ground roll. A initial rough approximate of
takeoff distance is given by the formula [2]

Sg =

N.JN(/)
` L

Considering the design cruise Cl of 0.44 (i.e.) without using high lift devices.
Sg

N.JNNN
SJ.J .SQJL

Sg = 12,726 ft (3,878 m)

So it is clearly evident that the takeoff distance is too large approximately 4 km. The airports cannot
afford to such a big runway. Moreover the takeoff and landing distance comes under customer
specifications and in most cases short take off and landing distance is preferred. The aircraft may
not be certified by FAA if the design does not meet the FAA regulations for takeoff and landing. As

Aircraft Conceptual Design

31

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

previously stated the Cl max required to meet takeoff and landing should be somewhere around 1.6
to 2.2 for long/ medium range aircraft. So assuming the required Cl max of 2.1, the landing distance
obtained will be 2666.42 fts (812.72 m) which is acceptable. So the takeoff distance with the
implementation of high lift devices is

Sg = 812.72 m

The rough estimate for landing distance for initial calculation is given by the formula [2]

SL = 118 (LP) + 400


Where LP is the landing parameter and is given by

LP =

N
L

Substituting the known values in the formula the landing distance is calculated as
 SL = 29,900 ft (9113.52 m) for Cl of 0.44 without using high lift devices.
 SL =6530 ft (2005.58 m) for Cl of 0.44 with the implementation of high lift devices.
These calculations clearly reveal the importance of lifting devices.

2.2.2 Javafoil

Figure2. 12 Creation of Airfoil geometry

Aircraft Conceptual Design

32

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Javafoil is an applet which is available in public domain that can be used to come up with new
airfoil geometry as per the customer requirement. This applet is widely utilised not only to create
the required airfoil co-ordinates but it also provides options to vary the flap deflection angle and
also the location of percentage of flap with respect to the airfoil chord.

Figure2. 13 Flap deflection

The smooth option can be used to smoothen the curve when the flap is deflected.

Figure2. 14 Computation of Cl

It is found that the created airfoil generates a Cl of 0.464 at zero degree angle of attack which is
bit higher than the design Cl of 0.44 but taking the 3 D effects into consideration the wing is
attached to the fuselage at an minimum angle not more than 2 degrees because the CL for wing

Aircraft Conceptual Design

33

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

will be less than 2D airfoil. It is also found that the desired flap deflection angle of 25.5 degrees is
required to achieve the Cl max value of (2.1). This is just an approximation of flap deflection
angle because the results may not be the same in case of a 3D wing hence a bit more deflection of
flap angle of 5 degree may be required to attain the Cl max

2.2.3 Finite 3D Wing


In order to study the variation between the 2D airfoil and a 3D wing, the obtained airfoil co
ordinates from Javafoil applet is converted into point data and is imported in ICEM CFD to
generate the airfoil curve and is then converted into IGES format and is taken to CATIA to create a
3 D wing geometry with all those taper ratio and sweep angle considered. Then the wing geometry
along with the domain is converted into IGES format and is imported to ICEM CFD. Meshing is
carried out in ICEM CFD and the mesh is read in Fluent. The resulting Cl value will be less when
compared to that of the Javafoil case because of the 3D effects.

Figure2. 15 Generation of curves using ICEM CFD from point data

Figure2. 16 CATIA model of 3D wing

Aircraft Conceptual Design

34

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure2. 17 Domain sketch

Figure2. 18 Domain surface

Figure2. 19 Mesh generated in ICEM CFD

Aircraft Conceptual Design

35

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

3.1Fuselage layout [6]


Structural requirements for pressurization mainly dictate the shape of the fuselage cross section.
Internal pressure loads are better handled by circular cross section by Hoop tension. This makes the
structure stronger and also lighter in comparison to other cross sectional shape. Non circular cross
section is more prone to bending stress for a shell structure. For a fuselage to maximize internal
volume usually interconnecting two or more circular section are considered.
Laying out the fuselage structure mainly depends on the payload specification. The number of
passenger dictates the width and length of the fuselage. The seat arrangement and number of aisle
helps in deciding the fuselage interior structures. The seat configuration considered in this design is
4 abreast single aisle and number of seats along the fuselage helps in fixing the length of the
fuselage. The length to diameter ratio for a given fuselage also needs to be considered at the time of
design since this helps in reducing drag. Low ratio increases the drag penalty where as high ratio
makes the fuselage long and thin which will adversely affect the structural stability of the airplane.
FAR rules have specified the minimum dimensions for different class of passenger seats and are
given in table 1.3.
Table3. 1 Typical seat width and pitch for different class of travel. [6]

Class

Seat width (mm)

Seat pitch (mm)

Charter

400-420

700-775

Economy

475-525

775-850

Business

575-625

900-950

First class

625-700

950-1050+

The seat width considered for the design is 500mm the seat pitch is 800mm and the aisle width as
500mm. the length of the fuselage for passenger seating is 800x20=16000mm. Fuselage consists of
a nose section, midsection barrel with constant cross section and aft-end closure.

Figure3. 1 Seat pitch and height. [3]

Aircraft Conceptual Design

36

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure3. 2 Fuselage Interior detail (mm).


Table3. 2 Typical guidelines for fuselage front and aft closure ratio. [3]

Seating abreast

Front fuselage

Aft fuselage

Aft closure angle

closure ratio. Fcf

closure ratio, Fca

(deg)

1.7-2

2.6-3.5

5-10

4-6

1.5-1.75

2.5-3.75

8-14

1.5

2.5-3.75

10-15

Figure3. 3 Fuselage Plan view (mm).

Aircraft Conceptual Design

37

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure3. 4 Fuselage side view (mm).

Figure3. 5 Nose section layout. [6]

3.2 Fuselage nose section


The fuselage nose section is from the tip of the nose end to the constant cross section of the mid
fuselage. This section holds the cockpit, flight deck, forward looking radar, nose undercarriage and
the windscreen. The fuselage length to diameter ratio considered is 1.5 as shown in figure 3.3. The
shape of the nose cone is designed such as to reduce drag.

Figure3. 6 Pilot Vision designed in Catia (mm).

Aircraft Conceptual Design

38

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure3. 7 Pilot seat dimensions as per FAR. [3]

The pilot seat is standardized to have stress free condition for the pilot during takeoff and landing
with ample space to reduce fatigue to the pilot. The wind screen is designed to allow adequate
vision to the pilot for flight maneuver.

3.3 Fuselage Mid-section


This section holds the passenger seating, the length for this section depends on the number of
passenger to be accommodate. The seating are 4 abreast and 20 along with single aisle
configuration with a galley and toilet at both ends. Foldable seats one each at each end of the midsection for the crew is provided. The mid-section is 20148mm long as shown in figure3.3

3.4 Fuselage tail section


The tail section is shaped to provide smooth surface to reduce the drag. The tail section also
supports the tail surfaces and in some configuration the engine installation. The lower side of the
profile is tapered to 9deg to provide clearance for the aircraft during takeoff. The tail section length
to diameter ratio considered is 3. The overall fineness ratio of the fuselage is around ~10.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

39

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

3.5 Galley and Toilet configuration

Figure3. 8 Galley and toilet layout. [6]

As per the FAR rules there should be one galley for 10-60 passengers and one toilet for 15-40
passenger. Since the design is for 80 passengers there are two galley and toilets provided at each
end of the midsection of the fuselage. The sizes considered for the galley is 762 mm x 914 mm and
for the toilet is 914mm x 914mm.

3.6 Passenger loading and emergency exits


FAR rules state that during emergency the plane needs to be evacuated within 90 second. This leads
to FAR guidelines for the number of emergency exits that is needed for different number of
passenger.
Table3. 3 Emergence exits requirements. [6]

Seats

Emergency exit type

Less than

Type I

Type II

Type III

Type IV

10

20

40

80

110

140

180

Aircraft Conceptual Design

40

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP


Table3. 4 Dimensions for types of exits. [6]

Type

Dimension (mm)

Type I

610 x 1219

Type II

508 x 1118

Type III

508 x 914

Type IV

483 x 660

Type A (passenger or service loading door)

1067 x 1829

In consideration to the FAR rules two doors are provided at each end of the fuselage with Type-A
and two emergency exits one with Type I and one with Type III provided at each end of the
fuselage.

Figure3. 9 CATIA model for fuselage view-1

Figure3. 10 CATIA model fuselage view-2

Aircraft Conceptual Design

41

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure3. 11 Mesh geometry of fuselage and domain.

Figure3. 12 Mesh geometry of fuselage.

3.7 Structural consideration


The fuselage structure should be able to take the bending moment, shear force, torsional loads and
the compressive loads due to self-weight, weight of wings and the weight of engine along with the
thrust force generated by the engine. The structure of the fuselage is constructed with a large
number of stringers distributed along the circumference of the fuselage which helps in resisting
bending of the fuselage. Bulkhead is provided at the ends of midsection of fuselage with frames
along the length of fuselage.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

42

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure3. 13 Stringers layout. [1]

3.8 Weight estimation for fuselage


Even though the weight of fuselage depends on the fuselage size, layout, and location of engine and
under carriage, initial guess can be assumed from historical data of similar aircraft which is
considered at 7-12% of the maximum takeoff weight. For a better estimation one can use Howe
formula [2] recommended for civil aircraft (50-300
(50 300 seats) to arrive at initial estimation of the
fuselage mass. All the equations are for all metal (aluminum) construction only and necessary
nec
correction factors need to be factored in for different material or advanced lighter material.
\  0.039} 2 ].g N.g

Where LF= fuselage overall length.


DF= fuselage diameter.

VD=aircraft maximum speed.


Table3. 5 Mass amended for different configuration. [6]

Configuration

Mass to be amended
amen

For pressurized cabin

Increase by 8%.

For fuselage mounted engines

Increase by 4%.

For fuselage mounted main undercarriage

Increase by 7%.

For large cargo door (etc.) discontinuity

Increase by 10%.

If free from structural discontinuity

Reduce by 4%.
4

For the design considered the flight Mach # 0.85, hence the flight speed is at 340.3 x 0.85 = 289
m/s. the fuselage overall length is 35898 mm, fuselage diameter is 3500 mm.
The fuselage body mass can be estimated by the Howes formula as

\_ = 0.03935.898 2 3.500 289^0.5 ^1.


0
.5
=10889 kg.

Rapid mass estimation method can also be used to arrive at initial estimate for fuselage weight.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

43

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure3. 14 Mass fractions for rapid mass estimation. [3]

Roskams [7] suggest few different ways of estimating the fuselage weight,
The general dynamic method,

a_a = 10.43(a )N.RJ

.JQS
.hg
.N

100
\Y1000 }

Where Kinlet =1.25 for inlets in or on the fuselage, otherwise 1.0


qD=dive dynamic pressure in psf
L=fuselage length
D=fuselage depth
The Torenbeek method,

Aircraft Conceptual Design

44

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

a_a

] }
= 0.021b ( + )

.g

N.J

Hb_`M_^M^

Here Kf=1.8 for a pressurized fuselage.


=1.07 for main undercarriage attached to the fuselage
= 1.1 for a cargo aircraft with rear door.
VD=design dive speed in knots equivalent air speed (KEAS)
LH_tail=tail arm of the H-tail
Sfus_gross_area= fuselage shell gross area.
In light of the fuselage construction it is very difficult to predict the weight since the weight
depends on the layout, type of material used and advancement of material technology for better
strength to weight ratio, which the initial estimate needs to be cross checked with detail calculation
and arrive at reasonably accurate estimation. Empirical formulas are available to get an accurate
estimate but are very time consuming since every structural component needs to be accounted for.

3.9 Landing gear layout:


The landing gear used is a tri cycle type. The layout of the landing gear is usually done at the end
after all the weight estimation is made for different section of the aircraft so that the CG is known
for the landing gear location. The landing gear location also depends on the tail-down angle
requirements suited for takeoff and landing attitudes, tipover and general airframe configurations.
The weight estimation also gives an idea whether to use two large wheels or 4 small wheels per
strut. For rough estimation 92% of gross weight is distributed on the main gear at aft CG condition
and 8% of the loads distributed on the nose landing gear at aft CG. The nose landing gear is placed
as far forward as possible to minimize the load on nose landing gear. The gear is designed to retract
forward to have a free fall capability. [8]

Figure3. 15 Landing gear forward retract. [8]

Aircraft Conceptual Design

45

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure3. 16 Nose landing gear load calculation. [8]

The nose gear load is calculated as, [8]


Max static main gear load (per strut) = W (F-M)/2F
Max static nose gear load

= W (F-L)/F

Min static nose gear load

= W (F-N)/F

Where W is the gross weight,


For tire selection the nose gear dynamic load is necessary which is calculated as,
Max braking nose gear load = max static load + 10J. W/32.2F

Figure3. 17 Tires used in typical aircraft.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

46

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

From figure 3.17 the landing gear configuration used is a tri cycle type with two wheel per struts
with tire size 40 x 14 with 155 psi T type.

4.1Propulsion System
The turbofan is a type of air breathing jet engine that is widely used for aircraft propulsion. A
ducted fan which uses the mechanical energy from the gas turbine to accelerate air rearwards. The
ratio of the mass-flow of air bypassing the engine core compared to the mass-flow of air passing
through the core is referred to as the bypass ratio. Current high bypass ratio turbofan engines are
thermodynamically much more efficient than the early turbojet and low bypass types. This has been
largely brought about by the introduction of advanced technologies which have enabled turbine
blades to withstand high centrifugal loads whilst operating in gas temperatures considerably higher
than the melting point of the unprotected blade material. Most commercial aviation jet engines in
use today are of the high-bypass type, and most modern military fighter engines are low-bypass.
In passenger aircraft, efficiency is the main factor rather than performance, large aircraft the fuel
price accounts for some 30% of the aircraft direct operating costs. [3] By increasing the fuel
efficiency the amount of fuel carried will be lesser there by reducing the total weight. A more fuel
efficient engine will require less fuel to fly a given range and hence will lead to a lower take-off
weight.
We are designing 80 seater passenger aircraft having maximum takeoff mass is 48957 kg and range
of 3000 nm keeping this in mind we have to select the appropriate engine which suits the
requirements, the engine should weigh less weight so that maximum takeoff mass will not alter so
much and the engine should have better efficiency as the engine efficiency is one of the key factor
in passenger aircraft as efficiency decreases operating cost increases in order to decrease the
operating cost we need to choose the engine which is having better efficiency.

4.2Engine Selection
The weight estimation can be made by using the statically data of similar plane and plotting the
results of MTOW with number of passenger. Similar plots can also be made with range against
MTOW per passenger and using this number one can arrive at estimating the maximum take-off
weight (MTOW). Figure 1.1 and table 1.1 shows this relation and is used to arrive at first estimate
for the given design.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

47

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure 4. 1 Effect of flight speed on engine efficiency. [6]

Above shows the difference between turboprop, turbofan and propfan engines, we can see from the
graph that Turboprop engines are having higher efficiency than Propfan and Turbofan engines but
Turboprop engine efficiency is high at lesser mach number (mach 0.5-0.6), but we need the cruise
speed of 0.85, for this cruise speed Turbofan engines are having higher efficiency than Propfan and
Turboprop, so it will be efficient if we install Turbofan engine to our design.

Figure 4. 2 Effect of Mach number and specific thrust on thrust lapse rate. [6]

Our aircraft design has total mass of 48957 kg and we know that thrust to weight ratio of passenger
aircraft is in between 0.3 to 0.4.

Y[V
Y[V
=
= 0.3
dV
48957 9.81

Aircraft Conceptual Design

48

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Required thrust = 144080 N = 144.08kN

So we need to choose the engine which gives minimum thrust of 144.08kN. By considering
all above conditions one can go for Pratt & Whitney PW6000 series or CFM International
CFM56-5 series engine.

CFM International CFM56-5 series engine which gives the thrust of more than 100kN, in
our design the CFM56-5B3 engine can be used which gives thrust of 150kN, has bypass ratio of 5.4
and overall pressure ratio of 35.5, CFM56-5B3 is a dual rotor, axial flow turbofan engine, the
integrated fan and booster (low pressure turbine) is driven by a 4 stage low pressure turbine. A
single stage high pressure turbine drives the 9 stage high pressure compressor, the two rotors are
mechanically independent of each other. Air entering the engine is divided into a primary (inner)
airstream and a secondary (outer) airstream. After the primary airstream has been compressed by
the LPC and HPC, combustion of the fuel in the annular combustion chamber increases the HPC
discharge air velocity to drive the high and low pressure turbines. An accessory drive system off the
N2 rotor drives engine and airplane accessory components. [9]

4.3 Why to go for CFM56-5B3 Engine

CFM56-5B3 engines gives more thrust than the PW6000 series.

CFM56-5B3 engines has higher bypass ratio than PW6000 series engines thus there is
increase in the efficiency.

In CFM56-5B3 engines there is option of a double-annular combustor that reduces


emissions (particularly NOx).

A new fan in a longer fan case, and a new low-pressure compressor with a fourth stage.

It has higher efficiency than PW6000 series.

The CFM56-5B Tech Insertion configuration provides operators with up to 1 percent


improvement in fuel consumption over the life of the product compared to the base CFM565B engine.

Low carbon emission than PW6000 series engines.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

49

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Table 4. 1 Specifications and applications of CFM56-5 series engines. [10]

Engine Model
Takeoff
Conditions
(sea level)
Max. takeoff
(kN)

5B1

146.81

120.11

97.87

104.54

120.11

96.09

103.65

Airflow (N/sec)

4194.65 4252.47 4350.85

3990

3638.6

3754.3

3990

3607.5

3741

5.7

5.9

5.7

5.9

Bypass ratio

5B2

133.46

5B3

137.91

5.5

5.5

5B4

5.4

5B5

5B6

5B7

5B8

5B9

In-Flight Performance (10.668 km - Mach 0.80 ISA)

Max climb
thrust (kN)
Overall
pressure ratio

28.56

28.56

28.56

25.05

25.05

25.05

28.56

25.05

25.05

35.4

35.4

35.5

32.6

32.6

32.6

35.5

32.6

32.6

25.98

25.98

25.98

22.33

22.33

22.33

25.98

22.33

22.33

2.6

2.6

2.6

2.6

2.6

2.6

2.6

2.6

2.6

1.734

1.734

1.734

1.734

1.734

1.734

1.734

1.734

1.734

At max. climb

Max. cruise
thrust (kN)
Engine
Characteristics
Length (m)
Fan diameter
(m)
Basic dry
weight (kN)
Applications:

23.36
23.36
23.36
23.36
23.36
23.36
23.36
23.36
23.36
A321
A321
A321
A320
A319
A319
A319
A319
A319
A319CJ

Specific Fuel Consumption of the engine is 1.00034*10-4 N/N-S. [11]


Lapse rate = 5.650 C/km

Aircraft Conceptual Design

50

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

4.4 Engine integration


The engine integration has a significant impact on the aircraft, affecting safety, structural weight,
flutter, drag, control, maximum lift, propulsive efficiency, maintainability, and aircraft growth
potential. Engines can be mounted on different wing positions,

Figure 4. 3 Inlet locations-podded engines. [1]

Engine location is influenced by many considerations including the interference between the
nacelle and the wing which increases drag. Consequently, nacelles must be sufficiently forward and
low to avoid drag increases. However, to minimize the weight of the landing gear and engine pylon,
a general rule is drawn, the nacelles are usually located as close to the wing lower surface as
possible, without causing undue heating of the wing by the engine exhaust.

Figure 4. 4 Location of the nacelle compared to the wing

From the literature survey, the engine can be placed below the wing as shown in the figure.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

51

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

From the data of thrust to weight ratio, the minimum required thrust is found to be 144.08kN for
our design and CFM56-5B3 engine is selected for the aircraft and clarification for choosing this
engine is discussed.

5.1 Empennage
The function of an empennage is to stabilize the aircraft and provide control moments
needed for maneuver and trim. The empennage consists of a horizontal and a vertical tail. Together
they stabilize an aircrafts pitch and yaw moments. Trim for a horizontal tail refers to the balancing
of moment created by the wing. For a vertical tail, trim force generated by it is largely unexploited,
since most aircrafts are axis symmetrical. But in the case of an engine failure the vertical tail must
provide for enough trim to sustain the aircraft stable. Though it is possible to build a tailless
aircraft, it often comes with greater compromises in weight, wing area, airfoil selection and narrow
centre of gravity range. The other major function of the tail is to provide control. The tail must be
sized so as to provide adequate control at all critical conditions. For a horizontal tail, this includes
control during takeoff and landing, low speed flight and transonic maneuvering. For a vertical tail,
engine out flight, spin recovery and maximum roll rate are vital control conditions.

5.2 Empennage types


Different types of tail variations are available for various aircrafts depending on their functionality.
Some variations in tail design are as shown in figure 5.1.

Figure 5. 1 Tail variations [1]

Each type of tail has its uniqueness owing to its functionality. Some of the designs are explained as
follows.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

52

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Conventional tail
About 70% of the aircrafts use a conventional tail. This is due to the fact that a conventional
tail will be able to produce the necessary stability and control at the lightest weight.
T tail
This design is very popular due to its high aerodynamic efficiency. Since the horizontal tail
is above, it avoids wing wake and propwash and also reduces fatigue in both structure and pilot. A
smaller area of the vertical and horizontal tails would suffice compared to a conventional tail to
produce the necessary moments. But it comes with a high weight penalty though.
Cruciform tail
The cruciform tail is a compromise between conventional tail and the T tail. It can function
even at high angles of attack like the T tail but with comparatively lesser weight penalty. However
no reduction in tail area can be made as in the case of a T tail.
H tail
In this design the vertical tail is positioned as such so as to have undisturbed flow of air at
high angles of attack. Also, in the case of twin engines the H tail is positioned as such to be in line
of propwash so as to have better control in the case of engine out.
V tail
The V tail is intended to reduce wetted area. With a V tail the horizontal and vertical tail
forces are the result of horizontal and vertical projection of forces exerted on the V surface. The
resulting wetted area of a V tail would be lesser than that of separate horizontal and vertical tails. V
tails offer reduced interference drag, but with some penalty in control surface actuation complexity
as the rudder and elevator controls must be blended to provide the proper movement of V tail
ruddervators. This also results in adverse roll-yaw coupling.
Hence for the purpose of commercial transport aircraft a conventional tail would be appropriate.

5.3 Empennage design


The tail design is quite similar to the design of a wing. However a smaller area of tail is
enough to compensate for the moments about the aircraft aerodynamic centre due to the distance
between tail and wing.

5.4 Tail geometry


The surface area required by the tail is directly proportional to the area of the wing. Hence
area of the tail cannot be determined without the area of the wing. However other geometric
parameters like aspect ratio and taper ratio are similar over a wide range of aircraft types. These are

Aircraft Conceptual Design

53

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

obtained through statistical data and can be adhered to at the initial stage of tail design. Statistically
obtained data of tail aspect ratio and taper ratio for various types of aircraft is as shown in figure
5.2.

Figure 5. 2 Tail aspect ratio and taper ratio for various types of aircraft [1]

Other geometric parameters are selected based on the following guidelines:


 Tail thickness ratio is similar to wing thickness ratio as per historical guidelines
provided in the wing geometry section. Since the aircraft designed is a commercial
transport aircraft, the airfoil selected for the tail is NACA0012 which is similar to the
thickness of the wing airfoil.
 Horizontal tail leading edge sweep is set to about 5 deg more than the wing sweep. It
enables the tail to stall after the wing and provides the tail with higher critical Mach
number. Hence loss of elevator effectiveness due to shock formation is avoided.
 Vertical tail sweep varies from 35 to 55 deg for most aircrafts. This is to ensure that the
vertical tail has higher critical Mach number than the wing.
Data obtained from wing design and fuselage design of the given aircraft is as shown in table5.1
Table 5. 1 Design data of wing and fuselage

Sweep angle
30

Wing (airfoil-NACA 63412)


Sw
Bw
Croot
AR
2
(m )
(m)
(m)
120
9
0.3 32.86 5.62

Ctip
(m)
1.69

Cmac
(m)
4.61

Fuselage
Overall length
(m)
35.898

Geometrical data supposed for tail design is as shown in table 5.2


Table 5. 2 Geometrical data supposed for tail design

Horizontal tail (airfoil-NACA 0012)

sweep angle
35

AR
4

0.3

Vertical tail (airfoil-NACA 0012)

sweep angle
45

AR
1.5

0.3

Aircraft Conceptual Design

54

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

5.5 Tail sizing


The primary purpose of a tail is to counter the moments produced by the wing. Hence its
effectiveness is directly proportional to the lift produced by the tail and to the tail moment arm. The
lift force produced by the tail depends on the tail area. Therefore, the tail effectiveness is directly
proportional to the tail area times the tail moment arm. The tail volume coefficient method for
initial tail sizing defines this. Now, wing yawing moments to be countered directly depends on its
span and wing pitching moment to be countered depends on its chord. Hence by tail volume
coefficient method we get:

And,

UV =

UV 

}V HV
H

}V HV
U H

Where, L = moment arm measured from tail quarter chord to wing quarter chord
bw = wing span
Sw = wing area
Cw = wing mean chord
The Cvt and Cht values are obtained through historical data from various aircrafts and are as shown
in figure 5.3.

Figure 5. 3 Tail volume coefficient [1]

Hence for a twin engine general aviation aircraft we have:


Cvt = 0.07 and Cht = 0.80

Aircraft Conceptual Design

55

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

The tail arm L is taken to 50% of the fuselage length.


 L = 35.898/2 = 18m
Thus we can find tail area by:
}V HV
U H
18 HV
0.80 =
4.61 120
UV =

We get,

HV = 24.58 m2

Similarly

}V HV
H
18 HV
0.07 =
32.86 120
UV =

We get,

HV = 15.33 m2

5.6 Tail layout


From the above calculated parameters the geometric dimensions required for layout can be obtained
as follows:

= E H

UV =

2H
(1 + T)

UV = T UV

\EU =
Therefore we get for horizontal tail,

2 UM (1 + T + TJ )
3
1+T

= 4 24.58 = 9.91 = 10m


UV =

JJR.gQ

h.hN(NO.S)

= 3.815 m

UV = 0.3 3.815 = 1.144 m

\EU =
For vertical tail we get,

2 (3.815 (1 + 0.3 + 0.3J ))


= 2.72 m
3
1 + 0.3

= 1.5 15.33 = 4.79 = 4.8 m

Aircraft Conceptual Design

56

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

UV =

JNg.SS

R.h NO.S)

= 4.92 m

UV = 0.3 4.923 = 1.47 m

\EU =

2 4.92 1 + 0.3 + 0.3J ))


= 3.5 m
3
1 + 0.3

The tail design data thus obtained is as shown in table 5.3

Table 5. 3 Tail Design configuration

Parameters

Tail Design configuration


Horizontal tail (airfoil-NACA 0012)

Vertical tail (airfoil-NACA 0012)

sweep angle

35

45

AR

1.5

0.3

0.3

Area (m )

24.58

15.33

Span (m)

10

4.8

Croot (m)

3.815

4.92

Ctip (m)

1.144

1.47

MAC (m)

2.72

3.5

The coordinates for the NACA 0012 airfoil with deflected control surface is taken from java flow
applet. The deflection of the control surface is at 25% of chord from trailing edge and deflected to
an angle of 35 as shown in figure 5.4.

Figure 5. 4 NACA 0012 airfoil coordinates with deflected control surface

The deflection gives a Cl value of -2.257 at zero angle of attack shown in figure 5.5.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

57

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure 5. 5 Velocity distribution and Cl values with deflected control surface

The coordinates are taken as input and an airfoil is created in CATIA as shown in figure 5.6.

Figure 5. 6 NACA 0012 airfoil with deflected control surface in CATIA

With calculated parameters the horizontal and vertical tail is modelled in CATIA as shown in figure
5.7 and figure 5.8.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

58

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure 5. 7 CATIA model-Horizontal tail

Figure 5. 8 CATIA model-Vertical tail

6.1 Empty weight build up and C.G location


A critical part of an aircraft design process is weight estimation. Detailed weight estimation for an
aircraft involves expertise in many engineering disciplines involved in the design.
Conceptual design of an aircraft begins with weight estimation. It involves coming up with a
takeoff gross weight and further breaking it up into structural weight payload weight, fuel weight

Aircraft Conceptual Design

59

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

etc. The next level in weight estimation involves estimating the weight for various components and
then sum for the total empty weight. The initial balance calculations for component weight build up
is based on planform areas, wetted areas and percents of gross weight. C.G. locations for each of
the components are found. As the design phase progresses more refined c.g locations are
determined. These are summed and divided by the total weight to determine the actual c.g. location.
At this stage of the design it is acceptable to do a rough estimate of the c.g. this can be done with a
statistical approach as shown in figure 6.1. Each of the components weight is determined from
historical values for weight per square foot of exposed planform area or wetted area or a fraction of
the takeoff gross weight. This technique also involves determining approximate locations of c.g. for
each of the component. These weights can be used as a check in more detailed weight estimations.

Figure 6. 1 Approximate empty weight build up and c.g. location [1]

From figure 1.9 we have:


Wing weight = 2.5 * SWing(ft2)
= 2.5 * 1291.67
= 3229.175 lb = 1465 kg
Approximate location of c.g is at 40% of MAC.
 C.g location = 1.844 m from leading edge
Horizontal tail weight = 2 * SHtail(ft2)
= 2 * 264.58
= 529.16 lb = 240 kg
Approximate location of c.g is at 40% of MAC.
 C.g location = 1.088 m from leading edge
Vertical tail weight = 2 * SVtail(ft2)
= 2 * 165
= 330 lb = 150 kg
Approximate location of c.g is at 40% of MAC.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

60

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

 C.g location = 1.4 m from leading edge


Fuselage weight = 1.4 * SFuselage wetted area (ft2)
= 1.7 * 7825.36
= 13303.11 lb = 6034 kg
Approximate location of c.g is at 40% - 50 % of length.
 C.g location = between 14.36 m and 17.95 m from nose
Landing Gear weight = 0.057 * TOGW (lb)
= 0.057 * 107916.28
= 6151.23 lb = 2790 kg
Installed engine weight = 1.4 * Engine weight (lb)
= 1.4 * 5250
= 7350 lb = 3334 kg
Empty weight of other components = 0.1 * TOGW (lb)
= 0.1 * 107916.28
= 10791.628 lb = 4895 kg
Approximate location of c.g is at 40% - 50 % of length.
 C.g location = between 14.36 m and 17.95 m from nose
The determined values can be tabulated as shown in table 6.1.
Table 6. 1 Empty weight build up and c.g. location

Component

Weight (kg)

C.G. position

Wing

1465

1.844 m from leading edge

Horizontal tail

240

1.088 m from leading edge

Vertical tail

150

1.4 m from leading edge

Fuselage

6034

Between 14.36 m - 17.95 m from nose

Landing gear

2790

Installed engine

3334

Others

4895

Between 14.36 m - 17.95 m from nose

6.2 Performance
Having designed the conceptual aircraft for the given requirements, performance for the same can
be calculated. Necessary data, derived from the design, required for performance calculations is as
shown in table 6.2.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

61

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Table 6. 2 Derived data from design

Parameters
TOGW (kg)
Fuel weight (kg)
Landing weight (kg)
Cl
Cd
Wing area (m2)
Wing loading (kg/m2)
V stall (m/s)
Take off thrust (KN)
SFC (N/N-s)
Thrust-weight ratio
Mu-Concrete

Value
48950
12854.27
36095.73
0.41
0.031
120
410
66
130
1.00034*10-4
0.3
0.04

The performance parameters for the designed aircraft are calculated as follows:
Range is given by the equation
F = 2

L i

L L

Waaa^ ba^

Considering 12 km altitude we get, range R = 4780 km


Endurance is given by the equation

= YHU U  V 

1

U

Endurance E = 11 hours
Take off distance is given by

Take off distance = 1.556 km


Landing distance is given by

Landing distance = 1.557 km

H =
=

ln

E = d

` N

 i

~[U U +

 J

H =

ln 1 ] J

Rate of climb is given by the equation:

Aircraft Conceptual Design

62

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

  i i
FU
= 1
^
S L


i i
J

Where,
= 1 + 1 +

i i

Rate of climb = 10.75m/s


Turning rate is given by:

^ = d 
J

L i

Turning rate at 12km altitude = 20 /s

Radius of turn
Radius of turn is given by:

F =

`i N

Radius of turn = 583.52 m


The aircraft designed has characteristics as shown in table 6.3.
Table 6. 3 Designed aircraft characteristics

Conceptual design-80 seat passenger


Length(m)
Fuselage Width (m)
Dimension
Wing Span (m)
Wing Area (m2)
Aspect Ratio
Gross Takeoff Weight (kg)
Landing Weight (kg)
Weight
Fuel Weight (kg)
Empty Weight (kg)
Payload (kg)
Range (km)
Max. Thrust (kN)
Performance
Wing Loading (kg/m2)
Thrust Loading (T/W)
Take Off Distance (m)

35.898
3.5
32.86
120
9
48950
36100
12850
18908
9600
4780
150
410
0.3
1556

Aircraft Conceptual Design

63

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Landing distance (m)


Endurance (hr)
Rate of climb (m/s)
Seating Capacity (Max)

1557
11
10.75
80

7.1 Assembly

Figure 7. 1 Front View

Figure 7. 2 Top view

.
Figure 7. 3 Side view

Aircraft Conceptual Design

64

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

Figure 7. 4 Isometric view

8.1 Conclusion
The aeroplane is designed to meet the requirements to fly at 0.85 Mach with a range of 3000 nm
flying at an altitude of 12-14 km. The layout and claculations used are for preliminary design and
further refinment needs to be done as and how finer details are established. Expecially when
accurate weight are established for all the components there will be changes in wing loading and
thrust loading which will effect the wing area and thrust required. Chages will also effect the range
and endurance and hence needs to be iterated for every changes and a compromise needs to be
reached to attain the mission requirements with minimum weight penality and cost to manufacture.
Weight will also effect with the advancment of material technology, control system will be effected
with the introduction of advanced control systems that will drastically effect the weight and hence
all the dependent parameters accociated to gross weight.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

65

MSRSAS - Postgraduate Engineering and Management Programme - PEMP

REFERENCES
________________________________________________________________________________
[1] Daniel P. Raymer, Aircraft design-A conceptual approach, Current Science, AIAA, 2nd
edition, 2004
[2] Thomas C. Corke., Design of Aircraft, second edition, Pearson Education, 2005.
[3] Ajoy Kundu, Aircraft Design, Cambridge University Press, 2010.

[4] Mohammad Sadraey, Wing Design, Daniel Webster College.


[5] Ira H. Abbott, Albert E. Von Doenhoff and Louis S. Stivers Jr, National Advisory Committee
For Aeronautics Report No. 824, Summary of Airfoil Data, 1945.
[6] Lloyd R. Jenkinson, Paul Simpkin and Darren Rhodes Civil Jet Aircraft Design, Hodder
Headline Group, 1999.
[7] Dr. Jan Roskam Airplane design Part V component weight estimation, Roskam Aviation and
engineering Corporation.
[8] Norman S. CurreyAircraft Landing Gear Design: Principles and Practices American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. 370 L'Enfant Promenade, S.W., Washington,
D.C. 20024. AIAA Education Series
[9] http://www.b737.org.uk/cfm56_soi.htm retrieved on 30th August 2012.
[10] http://www.cfmaeroengines.com/engines/cfm56-5b retrieved on 30th August 2012.
[11] http://www.jet-engine.net/civtfspec.html retrieved on 5th September 2012.

Aircraft Conceptual Design

66

You might also like