Professional Documents
Culture Documents
172313
.
STRUCTURAL S I Z I N G OF A SOLAR POWERED AIRCRAFT
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Langley Research Center Hampton,Virginia 23665
.
SECTION
DESCRIPTION OF W K R
2
2
V e h i c l e Designs
W i g h t s of Non-Spar Compnent Parts sumnary of tbn-wing Spar Weights Rracing Schemes Analyzed
Sizing Algorithms
27
28
77
83
83
86
87 91 93
94
REFEREXES
96
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NUMBER 1. 2.
DESCKI PTION
PAGE -
3
4
6 8 9
Concepts
3.
4.
5.
6.
11 15
16 17
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
19
21
23
13.
14.
25
26
15.
16. 17.
Free-Body R e p r e s e n t a t i o n of Strut-Braced
W i n g Spar
30 30 31
31
Determination of Load C e n t e r of G r a v i t y
For Strut-Braced Wing
18.
Reactions i n Main Spar From Dead weight Items Main Spar Net Runninq Lcad R e a c t i o n s
Rending Moments i n Main Spar Bending Manent Inboard of S t r u t
Spar Cross-Sect ion
19.
20 21. 22.
8
32 33 34
36
37
23.
24.
39
iii
LIST OF FIGUKES
FIGURE NUMBER
25. 26. 27. 28 29.
DESCRIPTION
PAGE
30a. 30b. 31
32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39 40. 41. 42. 43. 44.
45.
46.
Chordwise Shear and Bending Manent 41 Diagram 42 Wing Torsion h e to Pitchinq Manent Wing Normal Rending Loads in the 44 Lift Truss 45 Wing Torsion Loads in Spar Truss 47 S m r y of Net Load in Wing Truss Members 51 Spar Cap Size Distribution 52 Sumnary of Spar Cap Sizes and Lengths Shear and Bending Mcment Diagrams For Fully 55 Cantilevered Wing Distribution o Spar Cap Sizes Along f 57 Semispan 53 Sumnary o Spar Cap Sizes f 59 Lmds in Wing Truss h e to Torsion 60 Wing Spar Design 60 Running m d s in Spar 64 Loads and Centroids o Wing Sections f 65 Shears and Bending Moments 69 Winq Normal Bendinq Manents @ ~ 3 . 0 70 Resultant Normal Hending Moments @ n=3.0 71 Wing Shear Diagram Distribution o Chord Wise Shear Loads Along Span 71 f Wing Chordwise Bending Manents 72 Resultant Chordwise Rending Moments 73 Chord Shear Diagram 74 75 Sumnary o Spar Cap Sizes f iv
FIGURE NUMBER
47.
48.
DESCRIPTION
P l o t of Spar Cap Tube Area Vs.
PAGE -
Aspect Ratio
78
Leading Edge and Control Weights Vs. Aspect Ratio and W i n g Area
85
88
49. 50
89
51.
52.
Tailplane Weight V s . Gross Weight and T a i l Volume Coefficient Propeller Wight vs. W i n g I d i n g 90
92
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NUMBER
DESCRIYTION
PAGE -
1.
2.
3. 4.
of C a l c u l a t e d T a i l Parameters
12
o f T a i l Load F a c t o r s
of Longeron Loads i n T a i 1booms
13
17
18
20
5.
6.
S m r y o f Vertical T a i l Weights
W i n g Chordwise b a d s i n t h e Drag T r u s s
43
48
7.
8 .
9.
50
54
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
62 67 68
76
15.
16. 17.
76 82
18.
vi
SYMBOLS
UNITS A
Cross-sectional Area Aspect Ratio Wingspan Chord or Coe f f ic i ent Chordwi se C o e f f i c i e n t Drag Coe f f ic ient L i f t Coefficient Wing L i f t Curve Slope
sq f t
AR
ft
f t or dimensionless
b
C
CC
CD
CL
per degree
CM
P i t c h i n g Moment Coeffi c i ent Normal Force Coeff icent Incremental Distance o r Force Young's Modulus Force or Stress Aerodynami c E f f i c i e n c y Height or Depth Moment o f I n e r t i a Aspect Correction Factor
f t or i n
CN
E
F
f
psi/in l b or p s i
h
I
lb-in4
varies
Constant Length Moment Normal Force Load Factor Load Dynamic Pressure R e s d t a n t Force
L
M
in-lb lb
n
P
lb
PSf
9
R
v ii
Wing Area Torque Thickness-to-Chord R a t i o Freestream Velocity Airspeed Weight Longitudinal D i stance Angle o f Attack Aerodynamic T w i s t Moment
3.14159
sq ft
in-1 b
T
tI C
U
I
f S f Ps
V W
lb in
a
E
lJ
TI
1b / f t 3
Density
viii
INTRODUCTION
Previous weight e s t i m a t i o n techniques used t o s i z e s o l a r HAPPs (High A1 t i tude Powered P1atforms) have been based on a1g o r i thms accepted i n t h e aerospace industry (References 1 through 4 1. These methods were modi f ied where appropriate t o r e f l e c t t h e very l i g h t w e i g h t m a t e r i a l s being used and t o agree c l o s e l y w i t h a thorough preliminary design o f another s o l a r HAPP done i n 1980 by Stanhall Aerosystems. p r o p r i e t a r y and remain unpubl 1shed. The r e s u l t s o f t h i s work have been
The work done f o r NASA i n FY82, which culminated i n t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e methodology needed t o design s o l a r HAPP's, l a y s o u t t h e equations used t o a r r i v e a t a rough weight statement. Since t h e primary purpose o f t h i s work was t o analyze t h e i n t e r a c t i o n s of power t r a i n components t o assess t h e e f f e c t s o f improvements i n t h e state-of-the-art, an o v e r a l l vehicle. these methods were adequate t o f i l l i n t h i s very important gap i n r e l a t i n g a power t r a i n t o The algorithms developed t o describe power t r a i n i n t e r a c t i o n s were, i n f a c t , thorough enough t h a t confidence i n t h e i r accuracy should be w i t h i n +lo%. This i s n o t t r u e o f e i t h e r t h e aerodynamic
o r s t r u c t u r a l a1 g o r i thms
Purpose o f Current Work The purpose of t h e work described i n t h i s r e p o r t i s t o b u i l d a more accurate s t r u c t u r a l weight estimation model t o be used w i t h t h e power t r a i n methodology p r e v i o u s l y done o r w i t h other conceptual design e f f o r t s .
Scope The c u r r e n t work analyzes three wing bracing schemes,and scales one w i t h gross weight, wing loading, aspect r a t i o , and wingspan. The work does n o t include r e v i s i o n s t o e i t h e r power t r a i n o r aerodynamic a n a l y t i c a l methods
~
DESCRIPTION O WORK F
Vehicle Designs The conceptual HAPP RPV (Remotely P i l o t e d Vehicle) which was chosen f o r d e t a i l e d s t r u c t u r a l analyses i n t h i s work i s a m o d i f i c a t i o n o f t h e MK20 v e h i c l e analyzed i n Reference 5. train. The wing i s the same, as i s t h e power These surfaces replace t h e Figure 1 presents a Changes include a d d i t i o n o f a h i g h h o r i z o n t a l t a i l supported by
Basic v e h i c l e parameters such as wingspan, aspect r a t i o , wing area, gross mass, wing thickness-to-chord r a t i o , and h o r i z o n t a l and v e r t i c a l t a i l volumes are t h e same f o r both t h e MK20 and MK21. than s t r u c t u r e are a l s o t h e same f o r consistency. modified w i t h three bracing schemes:
0 @
. '
PT
4
0 wl
It
m 0
0
!I
Design o f non-wing components was done once,and t h e r e s u l t s were used w i t h a l l t h r e e designs. Weights of Non-Spar Component P a r t s Since a change i n b r a c i n g scheme i n t h e wing would o n l y a f f e c t wing spar, s t r u t , and w i r e b r a c i n g weights, a l l o t h e r s t r u c t u r a l components i n t h e a i r c r a f t c o u l d be l e f t constant. This includes wing l e a d i n g and t r a i l i n g edges, wing r i b s , a i l e r o n s , and s p o i l e r s , a l l o f which w i l l be discussed here. Wing Leading and T r a i l i n g Edges. The wing l e a d i n g and t r a i l i n g edge concepts used i n t h i s work are shown i n F i g u r e 2. The l e a d i n g edge has been designed
'
,,.Ol6"
Leading E*
B i r c h Ply Web
Concept
L 2#/ft3
Fi2.
t o h o l d shape i n order t o minimize v a r i a t i o n s i n a i r f o i l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s along t h e wing. Basic s t r u c t u r e i s b i r c h plywood w i t h spruce caps and foam l e a d i n g
s edge partial ribs every ten inches. The trailing edge structure i shaped birch plywood. The partial ribs are 0.300 inch thick Styrofoam with a density of two pounds per cubic foot. Each piece would weigh 0.0105 pound s and all pieces would be the same size. If rib spacing i ten inches, then 193 would be required. Spruce caps would be one-quarter inch square and a total o 1934.4 inches long each for a total weight o 3.92 pounds. The f f 0.016 inch birch plywood web would be 16.2 inches deep and would weigh 15.23 pounds over the entire span. Since the plywood canes in 50 inch square sheets, one-inch wide gussetts will be required every 50 inches for an additional weight of 0.31 pound. The 0.016 inch birch plywood leading edge skin would cover the entire span and be 24 inches wide for a weight of 22.57 pounds. One-inch gussetts would again be required for an additional 0 4 pound weight for 39. Total weight of these gussetts for the web and .6 f leading edge, then, i 0.77 pound. This brings the total weight o one s wing leading edge, including 15% for adhesives, to
= =
1.15
51.21
(2.03
#
%ING
# LE = 102.42
The trailing edge would he made up of 0.025 inch thick 3003 H14 aluminum sheet weighing 1.4 ounces per foot. For a 124 f o o t run, t h i s would be 10.86 pounds, or 21.72 pounds for both sides.
Winq Ribs. The airfoil section used is a Liebeck L1003 (Ref. 6 ) of 20% thickness-to-chord ratio. Figure 3 s h m s the makeup of a typical wing rib. Materials are birch plywood and spruce rod. Appendix A presents a photo of the authors holding a full-scale wing rib built o these materials. Ribs f f in both the untapered and tapered sections o the wing are similar in s construction. Total length of 0.300 inch square spruce members i 500 inches, and density i 0.0162 pound per cubic inch, so the weight o these s f mmbers is 0.73 pound per rib. The 0.300 x 0.12 inch spruce members will weigh 0.074 pound at the same density. The 0.031 inch birch gussetts will weigh 0.099 pound for a total area of 0.704 square foot ahead of the 40% .7 chord rib center of gravity, 1 0 square feet aft, and a total weight of 0.29 pound per rib. Rib weight in the untapered section of the wing will be, then, 1.31 pounds including 10% adhesive weight.
Section A-A
.016" birch ply .30"x .12"spruce .031" thick birch ply gussets - both sides sol i d .30" square spruce
Airfoil: Weight:
.016" Thick Birch Ply Gusset - Both Sides 20% Liebeck L1003 1.31%
Figure 3.
The average weight of a rib in the tapered section of the wing will be
weight o f a
wingtip r i b .
w~~~~,IB
0.507*
An average r i b , then, i s
Since plywood thickness stays the same i n r i b s and i s n o t tapered w i t h decreasing chord, t h i s number w i l l be increased about 20% t o 1.10 pounds t o be conservative. Each wing h a l f i s made up o f 43 constant chord r i b s and 2 1 tapered r i b s . Wing
a i 1erons ( x-axi s) , e l evators (y-axis) , rudders (2-axi s) , and spoi 1e r s ( x and z axes). Each a i l e r o n i s 450 inches long and i s made up o f an aluminum t r u s s w i t h t h e t r a i l i n g edge being an aluminum sheet. Covering i s doped f a b r i c . The a i l e r o n main spar i s 0.020 i n c h t h i c k 3003H14 aluminum channel measuring 5.4 inches high by 0.600 i n c h wide. Ribs are formed sheet approximately 29 inches l o n g by 5.4 inches high. Figure 4 shows d e t a i l s o f a i l e r o n construct i o n . A l l aluminum pieces have l i g h t e n i n g holes varying from 3.75 i n c h diameter i n t h e spar t o an i n c h i n the r i b s .
7
450"
-4
.020" 3003)114
Figure 4.
A i l e r o n S t r u c t u r a l Concept
The a i l e r o n spar w i l l be formed from 6.6 i n c h wide sheet and w i l l weigh 5.94 pounds w i t h o u t 1i g h t e n i n g holes ' o r 4.13 pounds w i t h 82 1i g h t e n i n g holes o f 3.75 i n c h diameter. The r i b s w i l l be formed from 29 i n c h l o n g tapered blanks weighing 0.2262 pound each. With seven l i g h t e n i n g holes tapered from 2.75 t o For 32 r i b s , t h i s 1.00 inches, t h i s weight w i l l be reduced t o 0.1903 pound. w i l l be 6.09 pounds per a i l e r o n . The a i l e r o n t r a i l i n g edge w i l l be formed from t h e same material and w i l l be i d e n t i c a l i n concept t o t h e wing t r a i l i n g edge. Weight w i l l be 3.28 pounds f o r t h e t r a i l i n g edge y i e l d i n g a s t r u c t u r a l weight of 13.5 pounds per a i l e r o n . Covering i s accounted f o r i n wing weight. The MK21 HAPP w i l l use s p o i l e r s f o r added r o l l c o n t r o l and g l i d e Spoilers. path c o n t r o l . Figure 5 presents d e t a i l s o f s p o i l e r c o n s t r u c t i o n w i t h wood and foam as t h e primary m a t e r i a l s f o r both t h e s p o i l e r s and t h e i r r e l a t e d structure. The s p o f l e r f r o n t spar w i l l be made from a 29 i n c h l o n g x 0.38 The r e a r i n c h wide x 1.00 i n c h h i g h piece o f spruce weighing 0.178 pound.
Ribs
Spruce
Spoiler Open
Fwd
'L--7.584
Rib
Ribs
Spar Truss
L.E. Skin
x% ."lf p e
20" TYP
y2.0"
Spruce
0" P l v ye
L - 8 . 0 4
Spoiler Well
Figure 5.
w i l l be 7.5 inches long spruce x 0.12 i n c h thick and will weigh0.018 pound each. A t o t a l of 5 will be required f o r a weight of 0.090 pound for each s p o i l e r . Upper and lower skins will be 0.016 inch birch plywood weighing The foam i s 2 pounds per cubic f o o t density and 0.315 pound 0.211 pound. will be required f o r each s p o i l e r . Total spoiler w e i g h t will be 0.98 pound. Associated control horns and hinges will boost this t o 1.28 pounds. Six s p o i l e r s (one wing panel) will weigh 7.68 pounds. Figure 5 a l s o shows d e t a i l s of the spoiler wells made from birch and spruce. Total weight of well s i d e s p l u s s t i f f e n e r s i s 0.775 pound per spoiler. Six wells would weigh 4.65 pounds. Total weight o f spoilers p l u s wells f o r both wing halves i s 24.66 pounds.
Tail booms. The MK2l's load diagram, o r V-n diagram, i s presented i n Figure 6. I t has been recalculated from t h a t shown i n Ref. 5 i n order t o be i n closer agreement w i t h Part 23 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. The positive and negative limit loads are +2 and -1 g, respectively. The critical design conditions are the nighttime configuration a t the low speed end and the daytime configuration a t the high speed end since cruise speed varies during each 24 hour cycle. A t sea level,, i n the nighttime configuration, the stall of +1.5 i s 18 f p s ; the corresponding negative angle o f speed f o r a C L~~~
of -0.7 i s 26
fps.
The l i m i t i n g h i g h
speeds are established as percentages of daytime and n i g h t t i m e cruise speeds e x t r a p o l a t e d from a l t i t u d e by keeping cruise dynamic pressures constant. The s a l i e n t corners for structural design purposes are:
10
+ Gust Factor
Figure 6.
.Velocity
2g'S;
0 P o s i t i v e Low Angle o f Attack i n t h e daytime c o n f i g u r a t i o n (+LAADAy) of 36.1 f p s a t + 2g's; 0 Negative High Angle o f Attack i n t h e n i g h t t i m e c o n f i g u r a t i o n of s ( - H A A ~ ~26.2 ~f p~ a t -1g; and ~ 0 Negative Low Angle o f Attack i n t h e daytime c o n f i g u r a t i o n (-LAADAy) . o f 36.1 f p s a t -1g.
I n order t o s i z e t h e t a i l boom s t r u c t u r e i t i s f i r s t necessary t o determine t h e g u s t loads which w i l l be encountered by t h e h o r i z o n t a l and v e r t i c a l t a i l s . The i l l u s t r a t i o n below defines t h e coordinate system used and shows forces and moments a c t i n g on both t h e wing and t h e h o r i z o n t a l t a i l . The forces a c t i n g on
11
L
t h e h o r i z o n t a l t a i l may be resolved i n t o normal (C,) components, which are def ined as:
__
-___
Cc
CD
COSQ
- CL
)IO.
1
ITEH
w = Gross ut.
v = Velocity
2
3 4
6 "
5 q/s =
7
- -
- fps
lbs.
1757.4
- - 1757.4 +IuA
+lM 1757.4
-HAA
-LM
1757.4 36.09 1.55
.57 2.72 -1.5' -.55 .037 3 .lo15 -.03 -.082 -.04R5 1.549 1015 -85.23
34.0
36.09
28.7
34.8
.98
36.09 1.55
A0
cc =
n
,XI
12 n' = 13 = 14 nx2 * 15 1 16 CL
l7
"i -
.00119~(2)~ 1.44 .57 (3)/(4) 2.53 Load factor (wing) 3.0 (6)/(5) 1.19 cD cos cL stn .0337 (R) x ( 5 ) .0053 -.03 -.076 T a i l load factor .0311 ( 6 ) (12) -3.031 (9) -.005 ( 1 ) x (12) = lbs. 54.66
1.55 a98 .57 .57 2.72 1.72 3.0 -i.5* 1.10 -.07 .0373 .0357 .lo15 .0614 -.03 -.03 -.082 -.052 .02R7 -.0400 -3.02 1.540 -.lo15 -.0614 50.44 -70.30 .367 ,0315 .0015 .0330
-.G7
1 -44
.oo
1.RO 3.00 1.67 .0134 .024 1 -.03 054 .0396 -3.04 -.024l 69.59
.no
1.94 3.00 1.55
.0189
.no
1.23 -1.5 -1.22 -.0309 -.03 -.037
-.OXO
-.
-. O W
-.
.037? -3.04 0367 66.25 .516 .022 ,0030 .0250
.0367 -.03
-.0380
1.54 .0300 -63.27
.81G
.0357
-.0396 -.0367
69.59 .516 .022 1.54
-.u3 -.058
-.
t a i l load
coo coi
.555
,tin
.99Y9 .0119
0030
.0250 .G8 .9999 .0119 .0189
.oins
-.0309
12
n3 *
Results a r e presented
in
Tab1 e 2.
+HA&
*LAA
-HAA
I (1)
FLT.
-LAA
.0427
.0508
.0307
.0508
DAYTIME
(2)
(3) 1/(2)
(4 1 nl
(51
CONO
tHAA
X3-X2
nx1 h7
-.OS4 -.OM
.0121 ,0184
.I807
.1807
.la07
5.54
5.54
-.037
.0190 .0184
-.I43
-LAA
i
-.os8
- 143
13
n3
"x h2
"1
x2)
.30
.I81
.167 -.233 -.283
.0311
-.0400
- .0485
.0287
(6)
(7)
(4)-(5)+(6)
(8)-n,
(3)x(7)
nl X 2
.285 .285
-.0396
n = 12
K~~~~
"aN.
498 (n/s)
where
K~~~~
2(w/s)
.PN9
The wind studies shown i n Appendix A o f Ref. 5 y i e l d a maximum gust a t a l t i t u d e o f 3.9 mps, o r 12.8 fps. Using t h i s value f o r U i n the equation above y i e l d s t h e gust envelope shown i n F i g u r e 6. The v e r t i c a l t a i l gust l o a d t u r n s o u t t o be t h e s i z i n g c r i t e r i o n f o r t h e tailbooms given t h e h i g h i n e r t i a o f t h e v e h i c l e d i r e c t i o n a l l y as opposed t o p i t c h w i t h w i n g t i p s up. Loads on t h e tailbooms a r e shown i n F i g u r e 7. one t y p i c a l tailboom bay. F i g u r e 8 sumnarites t h e combined loads i n
\.
Vertical Tai 1
R
Boom
78.33#
c ,
2808# 28081
7 19.5"
t -
-+ 30.43" II
700"
345.7#
8066#--
1 30.43" .
30"
80661
:: :
From Side Load
700"
21.5"
On V e r t i c a l Tail
Figure 7.
15
+3851 T5zFT
-251 5
+1343
-5437
+4033
- 1404
-5437
F i g u r e 8. Sumnary o f Loads i n Tailboom
+m
9)
16
TABLE 3.
BAY NO.
23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
S Y -
5201 lbs 4964 4728 4492 4256 4019 3783 3546 3310 3074 2837 2601 2360 2129 1892 1656 1420 1182 946 709 473 237 0
-2515 l b s -2400 -2286 -2172 -2058 -1943 -1829 -1714 1600 -1486 -1371 -1257 -1148 -1029 -914 -800 -686 -512 -458 -343 -229 -115 0
2629 l b s 2515 2400 2286 2172 2058 1903 1829 1714 1600 1486 1371 1257 1148 1029 914 800 686 572 4 58 343 229 -115
-5437 l b s -5201 -4964 -4728 -4492 -4256 -4019 -3783 -3546 -3310 -3074 -2837 -2601 -2360 -2129 -1892 -1656 -1420 -1182 -946 -709 -473 -237
7000
6000
1 .OOx .04g4
- 7
For longeron s i z i n g purposes, O.D. o f each tube i s designed t o f i t I.D. o f next l a r g e r tube
5000
4000Y
n <
30002000 1000
23 21 19
17
15
13
11 700"
BAY NO.
Figure 9. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Longeron Sizes Along L e n g t h o f Boom 17
Once longeron tube sizes had been determined, trusses could be sized t o t r a n s f e r n e t loads. The highest l o a d i n any t r u s s member i s 351 pounds. ( I t can be computed from t h e longeron loads shown i n Figure 7 . ) The longest column i s 42.73 inches. safety. 4.
A h a l f i n c h outside diameter (O.D.)
tube o f 0.049
TABLE 4.
Uunbcr
Arcr
Volune
lJr1ght
1.W)xO.O49x95
0.875x0.049x150 0.750~0.049~192 0.625x0.049xlA3 Vevt Ical I 0.500x0.049x16.751awgl Diagonals 0.500x0.049x34.84 ( rvg Top 6 Dottom Trusses
CrOSS bk!I&'?VS
2 2 2 2
27.8in3
1.701 3.n~
c
23
23
0.500x0.049x25.7S(rvgl
0 1agonal s
23
23
2.51
0.5WxO.O49~39.9R( nvg)
TOTAL UT O 1 SIDE O OOUi TRUSS F F
39 . 21.521
43.04
TOTAL WEIGHT OF BOTH SlDES OF Boot4 TRUSS JOINTS 6 ADHESIVES (15%) F TOTAL WElGllT O 1 BOO4 TRUSS
\~OOOEII STRINGERS o.25~o.50~700
49.474 0.125
6.43 -
350
5.671
0.05 6.521 -
413ft2
8.031
V e r t i c a l T a i l Design.
surfaces were k e p t constant from t h e MK20 t o t h e MK21 as were t a i l volumes t o maintain s t a t i c s t a b i l i t y . Figure 10 presents d e t a i l s of t h e v e r t i c a l f i n
design. pounds.
The u l t i m a t e l o a d shown i s a f r a c t i o n o f t h e t o t a l f i n load o f 346 This t r a n s l a t e s t o a t e n s i o n load i n one f i n spar t r u s s o f 586 pounds
The f i r s t , shown i n F i g u r e 10
( c e n t e r , l e f t ) , i s a r i b o f aluminum weighing 2.63 pounds ( w i t h l i g h t e n i n g holes) The second i s shown i n Figure 10 ( c e n t e r , r i g h t ) and i s made o f spruce and b i r c h plywood. It weighs 2.10 pounds f o r 6 r i b s , o r 21% l i g h t e r than t h e aluminum r i b . See Appendix B f o r a f u r t h e r discussion o f l i g h t w e i g h t b u i l d i n g materials. x 155 i n c h g r a p h i t e epoxy tube. The f i n l e a d i n g edge i s a 0.625 x 0.028 w a l l The f i n shape i s maintained w i t h doped f a b r i c
covering. The rudder and t r a i l i n g edge are made s i m i l a r l y t o t h e a i l e r o n s . Table 5 summarizes v e r t i c a l t a i l weights.
h=yTb
I 4
-a=12088
db=60)-
-b
.
PuLT'233#
4 3 O b
--I
6.67"
7 k13.33#
I-
Spar Truss
Side View
.25" S q u q e Spruce
Spar Truss
. P l y Gussetts
.016" Birch Ply
Rudder Design
Figure 10. V e r t i c a l T a i l Design
19
TABLE 5.
F I N SPAR TRUSS Lower Caps Upper Caps CHORD MEMBERS CHORD DIAGONALS CROSS MEMBERS CROSS OIAGONALS
4
771n. 75 13.5 32 10 32
308in.
1.219~ 0.935
300
162 320 120
12 10 12 10
0.505
0.996 0.374 1.000
6.13
16.35
320
JOINTS 6 ADHESIVES
UT O 1 F I N TRUSS F RIBS (SPRUCE 6, BIRCH) caps Verticals Diagonals Chord Members 0.031 Plywood 0.016 Plywood RIB UElGHT ADHESIVE (15Xl TOTAL RIB UEIGHT 94 48
50
28
__-
0.063
42 84
0.041
0.041 -
TOTAL UT O f 6 RIBS
FOR 1 VERTICAL FIN LEADING EDGE UT FABRIC COVERING 6 DOPE VERTlCAL F I N ( s i m i l a r construction) RUDDER Caps Cross Members 01agonal I 2 45 9.86 Y 0.961 0.189 0.496 2win2 12.83ft 5.84 0.241 95ft2 2.10 __1
0.4961
1.8471
L50.0
9.8 31.0 47.0
300 59 155
6 5
12
Ribs
J o i n t s L Adhvll5X) T r a i l i n g Edge f a b r i c 6 Dope TOTAL UT OF 1 VERTICAL F I N
1.12
93f t7
1.81
31.611 63.621 -
TOTAL UT OF BOTH
VERTICAL FINS
The h o r i z o n t a l t a i l i s s t r u c t u r a l l y analogous t o the v e r t i c a l b u t i s constrained and loaded d i f f e r e n t l y . If a f a c t o r o f 2 i s applied t o account f o r t h i s difference, then t h e h o r i z o n t a l w i l l weigh approximately 19.00 pounds.
Horizontal Tail.
20
The fuselage pod shown i n t h e general arrangement i s t h e r e t o The main s i z i n g load i s ground impact a t a 15' nose down The
enclose power t r a i n and payload items and may n o t be necessary on a l l versions F i g u r e 1 presents fuselage pod l o a d and c o n s t r u c t i o n d e t a i l s . 1
2bf=3515#
S i d e Views
See Pylon R e v i s i o n
r
Truss Structure
____----_
I
--7
aTop
>
View
Figure 1 . 1
n e g l i g i b l e loads and, hence, can be made o u t of t h e l i g h t e s t p r a c t i c a l s i z e tubes f o r manufacturing and handling, 0.500 i n c h O.D.
21
The mid-section w i l l c a r r y a maximum l o a d o f 6100 pounds i n compression. The smallest s i z e tube a v a i l a b l e t o handle t h i s , 1.25 x 0.035 w a l l x 33, w i l l handle almost 7500 pounds, so t h e s t r u c t u r e w i l l be somewhat overdesigned i n t h i s section. Lower longerons must handle a 2600 pound t e n s i o n load. A tube s i z e o f 1.25 x 0.028 w a l l w i l l be used t o f a c i l i t a t e j o i n i n g t o o t h e r t r u s s members. V e r t i c a l s w i l l be 1.25 x 0.035 x 52 inches and w i l l c a r r y a compression load o f 3600 pounds. The a f t section w i l l absorb a 14,100 pound compression l o a d and w i l l be 1.62 x 0.049 w a l l x 30 inches. Lower longerons w i l l be 1.62 x 0.028 w a l l f o r consistency o f c o n s t r u c t i o n with v e r t i c a l pieces which a r e 1.62 x 0.028 w a l l x 40 inches. Diagonals w i l l a l l be i n t e n s i o n w i t h t h e maximum tension l o a d being 5600 pounds. Tube s i z e s o f 0.500 x 0.035 w a l l w i l l be adequate t o handle t h i s with t h e exception of one diagonal s i d e brace, which has a 21000 pound tension l o a d and must, therefore, be 1.25 x 0.049 w a l l tube. Pod upper and lower trusses w i l l be s i m i l a r l y s i z e d since t h e l a n d i n g l o a d i s expected t o be t h e worst case load. The pod f a i r i n g w i l l be made up o f spruce, b i r c h plywood, f i b e r g l a s s and doped f a b r i c as shown i n F i g u r e 12. Both nose and t a i l f a i r i n g s w i l l be f i b e r g l a s s . B i r c h plywood w i l l be 0.031 i n c h Including The 12 spruce f a i r i n g s t r i p s w i l l be 0.25 x 0.80 x 385 inches and t h e 52 supports w i l l be 0.25 x 0.25 x 70 inches. t h i c k and each support w i l l be approximately 0.59 square foot. pounds. Fabric and dope w i l l add 9.76 pounds.
j o i n t s and adhesives, t o t a l weight o f f a i r i n g s t r i p s and supports w i l l be 20 F i g u r e 12, bottom, presents drawings o f the nose cone and t a i l cone. pounds and 8.13 pounds, r e s p e c t i v e l y . The l a n d i n g s k i d i s a l s o a p a r t of t h e fuselage pod.
It w i l l weigh roughly
22
-1
Nose Cone
r 2 Lavers o f
ith
-k
T a i l Cone
H=114" d i
Figure 1 2 .
23
T a i l cone
Landing s k i d Motor mount
TOTAL
presents d e t a i l s o f t h e s t r u c t u r e envisioned f o r t h e p y l o n and motor f a i r i n g as w e l l as c r i t i c a l loads encountered i n t h e 15' nose-down l a n d i n g case. Given t h e loads shown i n F i g u r e 13, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o e s t i m a t e tube s i t e s . The forward caps w i l l experience a 21,656 pound compressive l o a d which can be handled by tubes 1.62 x 0.065 w a l l x 30.67.
A f t caps w i l l experience an
18,496 pound tension load, so 1.62 x 0.028 w a l l w i l l be used. Chordwise p y l o n tubes w i l l have 2473 pound compressive loads which can be handled by 0.62 x 0.049 w a l l x 24 i n c h tubes. i n t e n s i o n and 0.62 x 0.028 w a l l w i l l be used. f o r t h e MK21. Weights w i l l be: Diagonals w i l l have 4013 pounds
F i g u r e 1 4 presents a
24
--
. -
4331 1#
i
372031 4331 1#
37203#
/ - -
/
\
P l y L.E. 6.25'
Ribs
-A
Figure 13.
rAluminum T.E.
-/I
I
----
->
46"
-r
t
140"
-L
Design o f Pod F a i r i n g
25
g
X N rD
F
2
X N
(0
00
/Original
Pylon Outline
Figure 14.
26
TOTAL
ITEM Forward Caps Aft Chordwise members Spanwise members Diagonal s TOTAL 1.62 ~0.0651 n 1 . 6 2 ~ 0 028 0.62x0.049 0.62x0.049 0.62x0.028
LENGTH
AREA
0.31861 n2 0.1405 0.0887 0.0887 0.1050
1 309 9.838#
The pod f a i r i n g w i l l have a b i r c h plywood l e a d i n g edge, spruce r i b s , and a t r a i l i n g edge s i m i l a r t o t h e a i l e r o n s w i t h covering b e i n g doped f a b r i c . A p p l y i n g t h e same u n i t weights as comparable wing p a r t s , pod f a i r i n g weights are:
ITEM -
11.78#
The f i b e r g l a s s motor f a i r i n g w i l l be made up o f 2 p l i e s o f 4 ounce c l o t h and 5 coats o f resin. T o t a l area i s 116 square feet, and weight is 18 pounds.
The v a r i o u s p a r t s o f t h e MK21 whi h have been discussed so f a r were l e f t c o n s t a n t as wing design was changed t o evaluate t h e e f f e c t o f b r a c i n g concept on wing weignt. These p a r t s m a y be summarized, as below: 27
WEIGHT
FRACTION O TOGW F
Spoi 1ers d we1 1s T a i l booms V e r t i c a l f i n s & rudders Hori zontal t a l 1 Fuselage pod Landing s k i d Pod support pylon TOTAL
102.42% 21.72 159.92 27.00 24.66 128.04 63.62 19.00 74.27 27.00 21.62 669.27#
0.0583 0.0124 0.0910 0.0154 0.0140 0.0729 0.0362 0.0108 0.0423 0.0154 0.0123 0.3808
Strut-Braced Wing.
these a l t e r n a t e wing concepts and they are: 0 Wing l o a d i n g i s uniform across t h e span;
0 No t i p losses;
0 Design l o a d f a c t o r i s t 3.0; 0 Vehicle gross weight remains constant a t 1757.4 pounds (797Kg); and 0 Vehicle wing area and planform remain constant a t 3088 square f e e t (287 square meters)
28
I
I I
53.7'
+ ,
S2 = 1098.65 sq.ft.
107.5l
10.22'
I- ,
--
The l i f t l o a d per panel i s 2636 pounds and t h i s i s a r r i v e d a t by applying t h e design l o a d f a c t o r t o h a l f t h e gross weight. Wing dead weight items may be approximated by m u l t i p l y i n g the wing panel area by a f a c t o r o f 0.164 p s f which was a r r i v e d a t i n e a r l i e r LMSC studies. Add t o t h i s t h e f o l l o w i n g items:
0
Fixed s o l a r panel o f 283 square f e e t , weighing about 170 pounds i n c l u d i n g s o l a r c e l l s on t h e panel ; and Movable w i n g t i p and s o l a r c e l l s weighing about 130 pounds.
This i s a s t a r t i n g p o i n t f o r
purposes o f l o a d c a l c u l a t i o n and w i l l be r e f i n e d as t h e analysis continues. The l i f t l o a d may be expressed i n terms o f a running l o a d i n t h e spar o f 1.46 pounds p e r inch. 15. This w i l l be taken o u t by t h e support scheme shown i n Figure Figure 16 presents t h e l i f t reactions and c a l c u l a t i o n o f t h e l o a d center
o f g r a v i t y . S i m i l a r l y , t h e dead weight items create a running l o a d i n t h e spar and have reactions a t t h e j o i n t s shown i n Figure 17. L i f t and dead weight shears on both tapered and constant chord sections may then be calculated,and t h e n e t reactions are presented i n Figure 18.
29
Figure 15.
I 103.64 sq.ft.
645"
*I 3
* - I
341,53 s q r f t .
1098.65 sq.ft.
16 12 .2 I'
xCG
XCG
=
r
1544
916.58"
Figure 16.
Wing bending moments f r o m both l i f t and dead weight may be calculated, Figure 19 presenting t h e r e s u l t s . The s t r u t attaches t o t h e wing a t wing s t a t i o n (W.S.) 690.0 and t h e r e s u l t a n t bending moment t r a n s f e r r e d t h e r e i s 606,262 inch-pounds. pounds. The s t r u t a l s o induces an a x i a l l o a d i n t h e spar o f 11,488 I f t h e inboard section o f t h e wing spar i s assumed f i x e d a t both
30
126W
2 59#
Figure 17.
STA 690
I
7-i
\
1
+866#
-33rnb
+1269
(dom)
Figure 18.
31
r 814*8
- - - - -I
@I
0
STA 690
I
251.5#
Figure 19.
32
ends, then t h e bending moment inboard o f t h e wing s t r u t may be c a l c u l a t e d as shown i n F i g u r e 20. Peery's method (see Ref. 7, pg. 355) then y i e l d s a bending moment as f o l l o w s :
.
L J
=
690 -= 539.4 1.28;
C1 =
11.6
T
f
w L~
0 . 7 8 8 ~ ( 6 9 0 ) ~=
11.6
32,342iM
W = .788#/in
I i t I t
-P
= 11488#
F i g u r e 20.
The product E I , known as .bending s t i f f n e s s may be c a l c u l a t e d f o r t h e spar using a value o f 'Young's modulus, E, a r r i v e d a t i n previous work o f 30x10 p s i . Figure 21 presents the spar cross-section t o be analyzed.
Pitch
epoxy
Spar Cross-Section
Figure 21.
Continuing w i t h c a l c u l a t i o n o f reactions a t t h e p o i n t s o f support i n the strut-braced wing, the r e a c t i o n t o t h e 1082 pound n e t l o a d i n t h e wing spar outboard o f WS 690 w i l l be a downward shear a t WS 690 o f equal magnitude. Inboard o f t h e wing s t r u t , t h e shear and bending moment reactions may be a r r i v e d a t as follows:
pg =
60626Y w
= .788#/in
yPC = 254618 \
L = 690"
34
= -254618
- 2
= =
- 606262 272
-788 x 690
1248
1520 l b s
606262
5902
= =
(-254618)
,788 x 690
1248
- 272
976 l b s .
.5W(d-()
.5 x 544
(d
-690 ) = L
272
-d2 690
35
d
0 138 276 414 552 690
d2
0
-d2/L
0 27.60 110.4 248.4 441.6 690.0
-d-d2/690
0 110.4 165.6 165.6 110.4 0
M -
Figure 22 summarizes the wing normal shear l o a d d i s t r i b u t i o n and F i g u r e 23 summarizes t h e wing normal shear bending moment d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r t h i s strut-braced wing.
L i f t Shear\
Net
1934.4 5376
76 i
15208 Figure 22. Wing Normal Shear Load Diagram a t Ultimate Load Factor
36
/
/
/
Q)
0 E
a J
cc
0)I
0)'
p :
7
U c ,
0 N
-r
L 0 I
I
I
37
Maximum r e a l i s t i c C
i s 1.6.
L~~~
Def in i ng chord forces a r e bel ow: The chord 1oad, dl + dp, w i l l be determined as dl + d2 =
2636 sincr + CDw
q SREF C O S a
I f angle o f a t t a c k a t
?MAX
L MAX i s estimated by
C
La
Abbott
; VonDoenhoff 1
a,
E-
cL MAK
a o ~+
Jc
as -4 degrees, and j
is
I f section
0.1185/degree
, where E
= 1.013.
38
will be 10.52 a t C
L~~~
~t
9
DW
DP
+ Di
COP
The wing efficiency parameter (1+6) i s defined i n Ref. 8 a s 1.05, so CDi becomes 0.0255 and the chord load can be calculated as 462.9 pounds a c t i n g forward. The chord load d i s t r i b u t i o n may then be approximated a s shown i n Figure 24 bel ow.
Figure 24.
The chord shear diagram i s presented i n Figure 25 a s i s the chord bending moment diagram.
39
I n a d d i t i o n t o normal and chordwise loads on the wing spar, t o r s i o n will be Torsion, may be present due t o the b a s i c a i r f o i l p i t c h i n g moment, C
MC/4
defined a s
P=
C
MC/4 q
c3
where S and C3 are a r r i v e d a t as numerical i t e r a t i o n s a c r o s s the wing, the product being i n d i c a t i v e of the a c t i o n o f a changing moment arm on a c o n s t a n t p f t c h i n g moment across the wing from r o o t t o t i p . Schematically,this i s shown
below.
Chord a ,
C1
c2
= =
.667
[a+b
- ab a+b
10.22 f t .
40
Strear Dimram
.
1934 .4
1546
Wing S t a t i o n
424946#
ytly
c
Statim
Figure 25.
41
Wing t o r s i o n due t o p i t c h i n g moment may then be c a l c u l a t e d t a b u l a r l y and the r e s u l t s presented g r a p h i c a l l y as i n F i g u r e 26. Calculations were made a t t h e c r u i s e condition a t a l t i t u d e and a 50% safety f a c t o r was added t o account f o r off-design operation.
m
Moqwnt (in. l b . )
3000
0
12
11
10
ITEM 12
STA.
1853.9 1692.8 1531.7 1370.6 1209.4 1048.1 886.9 775.6 564.4 403.1 241.9 80.6
a , FT.
7.33 8.29 9.23 10.22
C1,
FT.
C2,
FT.
0
Cj.
FT.
6.89 7.82 8.29 9.75 9.86 9.93 9.98
A ~ .F T ~
91.89 196.68 314.45 405.18
A2, FT2
s,
FT2
91.89
M, i n . l b .
0
0
-153 -375 -629 -1047 -1385 -1725 -2063 -2399 -2741 -3080 -3416 -3753
11
10 9 8
7
0 0 0
10.22
198.68 314.45 445.18 582.50 719.83 857.16 994.49 1131.83 1269.16 1406.49 1543.80
0 0
137.33 274.66 411.99 549.32 686.66 823.98 961.32
5
4 3
10.00 10.04 10.06 10.07 10.22 10.22 9.75 10.22 10.08 445.18
2 1
1098.65
Figure 26.
42
Normal bending loads i n t h e l i f t t r u s s may be c a l c u l a t e d and a r e shown i n Figure 27. Chord bending loads i n the drag t r u s s may a l s o be c a l c u l a t e d and S i m i l a r l y , t o r s i o n loads may be c a l c u l a t e d Note t h a t t h e caps do n o t those a r e presented i n Table 6. c a r r y any t o r s i o n loads.
TABLE 6.
0-30 30-60 60-90 90-120 120-150 150-180 180-210 210-240 240-270 27 0 300 300-330 330-360 360-390 390-420 420-450 450-480 480-510 510-540 540-570 570-600
c
212473 206000 198500 192500 185500 179000 173000 166500 160500 155500 148500 142500 137000 131000 126000 121000 116000 111500 107000 102500 96000 92500 87000
357
-10896 -10564 -10179 -9872 -9513 -9179 -887 2 -8538 -8231 -7974 -7615 -7308 -7026 -67 18 -6462 -6205 -5949 -5718 -5487 -5256 -4923 -4744 -4462
10539 10213 9834 9533 9180 8853 8550 8222 7921 7671 7318 7017 6740 6438 6 188 5937 5688 5462 5236 5011 4685 4510 4234
426 4 18 411 404 396 389 383 376 369 36 1 354 347 341 334 327 319 312 305 302 294 287 281 274
351
345 339 333 326 322 316 310 303 297 291 286 280 274 268 26 1 256 251 245 238 234 228
152
1413
f
+ M
'
fwd
H [Sign i s + f o r Tension]
240
210
180
150
120
90
60
30
STA 240-480
-7820 -
-6778
-5755
-4750
-3764
-2796
-1845
-914
= 7802
690
660
13302
630
12170
600
11056
Figure 27.
in the L i f t Truss
44
Load i n BWbW
, where: 1
= Twgm, i n . l b s . L = ~ c n g t h f rnernbcr, i n . o
.
Length o f rr#Rbers
i n t y p i c a l panels
Mote t h a t
t o r s i o n loads do
V I q Tersion
Loads i n S a Truss pr
= Tension
= Cmpression
Torsion Envrlopq
.
Figure 28.
Wing
45
t o t a l o f 322 members. Since c a l c u l a t i n g t h e n e t loads i n each o f these 322 members i s time consuming and c o s t l y , only 4 bays w i l l be investigated:
0 WS 690-660 which has t h e highest p o s i t i v e bending
moment from l i f t ; 0 WS 300-270 which i s close t o t h e lowest p o s i t i v e bending moment from 1ift;
0 WS 210-180 which i s close t o t h e lowest negative bending
moment from l i f t ( t h e loads i n t h i s bay are opposite i n s i g n t o those i n WS 300-270) 0 WS 30-0 which has t h e highest negative bending moment
from lift.
Note t h a t bending moment from l i f t i s reasonably l i n e a r from WSO t o WS690. S i z i n g o f t r u s s members i n t h i s area w i l l , therefore, assume a l i n e a r v a r i a t i o n i n loads. t r u s s members. Figure 29 presents t h i s summary o f n e t loads i n wing Recall t h a t These data are presented t a b u l a r l y i n Table 7.
0 L i f t loads a r e based on u l t i m a t e l o a d (n=+3);
c
L~~~
0 Torsion loads a r e based on VMAX i n l o o k i n g a t Figure 27 and Table 7. Since these c o n d i t i o n s w i l l n o t occur
simul taneously , t h i s shoul d be a conservative estimate o f 1oads. The loads i n t h e spar caps may be c a l c u l a t e d next. L i f t loads (column loads) outboard o f WS690 may be c a l c u l a t e d assuming t h a t lower cap column loads are h a l f upper cap loads. This assumption i s based on t h e v e h i c l e having a negative l o a d f a c t o r of h a l f t h e p o s i t i v e value. The r e s u l t i s presented below i n Table 8.
46
- 0
7-
A f t Truss-Lookdng Fnd. C6
- 2008.6
c5
P -
Ln
g,
'6
*5
c2
-4986
A6
- 11388
Upper Truss-Lookinq Down
L
*For selected bays
Truss-tQaQr$rtgl & R w
MITE:
Assum effect of torsion i n STA. 180-210 bay same as 270-3clIj bay (loads are sinail)
Ftgrrrs 29.
47
TABLE 7.
NOTE:
MAX
Torsion
This i s l i k e l y a worst-on-worst
condition,
STA.
MEMBER
AIBl
TORSION*
NET LOAD
0-30
5630
-500 -512 +5910 -6679 -917 -500 -512 +5910 -6679 -917
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
A2B2 A1A2 B1B2 A2B1 CIDl C2D2 c1c2 D1D2 C2D 1 lA1 C2A2 C2A1
DIBl
-644 -656 +16449 +3860 -917 -644 -656 -4986 -17575 -917 -232 -228 +859 +201 -84 +426 -729 -741 +5826 +8585 +1112 -729 -741 -9829
+lo539 +lo539
0
0
-144
- 144
0
-10896 -10896
0
0
0 0
0
-123 -123
0
0 0
767 1 7671
0 0
0
-123 -123
0
-7974
TABLE 7.
SUMMARY
.
--
STA.
MEMBER
TORSION*
- -.-.
D3D4 c4D3 C3A3 C4A4 C4A3 OqB3 D4B4 270-300 660-690 D4B3 A5B5 A6B6 A5A6 gB6 A6B5 C5D5 sD6 5 6 D5D6 sD5 CgA5 sA6 sA5 D5B5 660-690 D6B6 D6B5 3553 4780 3553
0 0 0 0
+225 +123 +123
0 -9 1
t914 +1112
0 0
-7974
0 -20 1
0
0 0 0
+594 -78 -74 +369 -851 -863 -11388 +18687 +1395 -851 -863 -20084 +9991 +1395 -228 -224 +441 -137 -133 +274
-91
0 0 0
+4234 +4234
0 0 0
-91 -9 1
0 0
0
-15622 +14453
+1395
0 0 0 0 0 0
-4462 -4462
0
0
0
+167 +91 +9 1
0
*TORSION = M
**TORSION
STA x dp STA 0
LOAD
TSTA
5630
Truss members inboard of WS690 will be s i z e d t o a c t as s h o r t columns except f o r t h e l a s t two in t h e t a b l e which will be t r e a t e d a s long columns. Candidate tubes are then:
TUBE SIZE
'P
FC
STRENGTH= Fc x A
Note:
L'
Spar cap s i z e s f o r both forward and a f t spar t r u s s e s will be made t h e same s i z e f o r ease o f manufacturing. Upper caps a r e designed f o r the highest column load i n the bay (looking down) f o r t h e maximum p o s i t i v e load f a c t o r case. Lower caps will be designed f o r the maximum negative load f a c t o r case. A l l other members will be 0.75 O.D.xO.028 wall as s i z e d by the maximum column load i n diagonal members. The spar cap s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n i s shown i n Figure 30 f o r both upper and lower caps. Diagonals and v e r t i c a l s i n t h e l i f t truss may now be s i z e d assuming a l l members will have the same 0.0. f o r c o s t and case of manufacture. I t should be noted t h a t diagonals a r e i n tension a t a l l p o s i t i v e f l i g h t conditions and i n compression i n a l l negative f l i g h t conditions. A l l members will be 0.62 inch i n diameter and wall thickness w i l l vary from 0.028 inch the f i r s t t h r e e bays t o 0.022 inch i n the r e s t . V e r t i c a l s , on the o t h e r hand, will vary i n diameter from 0.50 inch a t the t i p t o 0 . 6 2 inch as column s t r e n g t h dictates.
50
Upper Cap Applied Load = M x h 20084* 15622 b+Tube 1.62x.065-Tube Span Size Load, Lbs. 20,000
h = spar depth
- 15,000
Tube Column Strength .
5,000
1934.4
1800
20084# = Net load i n member C5C6, 15622# = L i f t load o n l y i n member C5C6 r a t i o , 20084/15622 used as c o r r e c t i o n t o M/h t o g i v e r a p i d estimate o f n e t laods outbd. o f sta. 690 due t o combined' l i f t , drag &.torsion'. Loads inbd. o f sta. 690
Net column loads a r e 1/2 those shown i n curve above, except those inbd. o f Sta. 690
Load, Lbs.
.".
" _ . V
.-
\Applied
5,000
1 1934.4 1800
7' 67" m a W
1600 1400 1200 1000
800
0 0
600
400
Wing Sta.
Figure 30a.
Spar Cap S i z e D i s t r i b u t i o n
51
.
7
Sta. 1934.4
Sta.
p,
21 0"
159"
m
4 Strut
S t a . 690
254"
.62x.O49
276"
255" .875x.049
195"
696"
1 .25x .OM
I
.75x.O49
8
8
7
1.50x.065
Figure 30b.
52
The wing s t r u t may be s i z e d a t t h i s p o i n t . R e f e r r i n g t o t h e loads shown i n Figure 18, t h e 2233 pound shear load a t WS690 t r a n s l a t e s t o an 11488 pound
a x i a l l o a d and an 11703 pound t e n s i l e l o a d i n t h e s t r u t which i n t e r c e p t s t h e wingspan a t an 1 degree angle. If t h e column l o a d i s h a l f t h e t e n s i l e load, 1 then 5852 pounds must be designed f o r . The t o t a l l e n g t h o f t h e s t r u t i s 703 inches (58.6 f e e t ) . I f a j u r y s t r u t i s added a t t h e halfway p o i n t i n t h e x 0.120 i n c h s t r u t , then o v e r a l l s t r u t s i z e can be as small as 4.00 i n c h O.D.
wall.
Diagonals and chordwise drag t r u s s members can be s i z e d next. This can be handled by a 0.62 O.D.
are roughly 36 inches i n l e n g t h and must absorb a maximum o f about 600 pounds.
x 0.022 w a l l g r a p h i t e epoxy tube. Chordwise members are roughly 20 inches i n 1ength;and t h e worst l o a d i n any member i s 232 pounds. The same s i z e tube can handle t h i s l o a d w i t h an excessive margin o f safety, b u t 0.022 i n c h w a l l thickness i s about t h e minimum p r a c t i c a l s i z e f o r manufacturing. Outboard o f WS690 t h e same design approach applies. Both diagonal and chordwise members w i l l be 0.50 i n c h O.D. x 0.022 i n c h w a l l thickness. The v e r t i c a l members w i l l have t o mate w i t h caps and so w i l l be 0.62 i n c h O.D. x 0.022 i n c h w a l l thickness. Table 9 summarizes tube t h i c k nesses and gives a weight breakdown f o r t h e truss.
F u l l y Cantilevered Wing. Much t h e o r e t i c a l and e m p i r i c a l work has been done on Referring
t o t h e shear and bending moment c a l c u l a t i o n s f o r t h e strut-braced wing, t h e s t r u t may be removed and the shears and bending moments r e c a l c u l a t e d as shown i n F i g u r e 31. Wing t r u s s s t r u c t u r a l d e t a i l s may then be addressed. Several s t a t i o n s may be chosen and t h e c r i t i c a l loads calculated. presented i n Table 10. Results are presented i n Table 11. telescope together. Results are
Once t h i s i s done, tube sizes may be calculated. Figures 32 and 33 present an idea o f t h e
53
TABLE 9.
-SILE
l.624.WSI63'
ARiA .I186 tn' YOLUIE
YElGHT
.2430
1.22 lbs.
1.11
.m15
,in49
.I464
2.17 2.51
1.42 1.63 1.92 12.64 ~ b r .tor 1 twss
.I212
.IO19
L w r Cap lubes
1.25i.049a264' I .Wr0.49a195" .81Sa.O491255' .15r.M9a216' .62r.MPa254' .I849 i n Z .I464 .I212 .lo19
U . 8 in3
2.98 lbs.
1.74
. l W
_-
truss
Otrgonbl s
NU.
SlA.
IYIU)LRS
SILE
AREA
VOLUIE
YElGHT
-69(1-/8U
180-1290
12W-1934.4
3 I1 11
.62X.U28135.18' .KZr.022x35.78'
.OS25
.Ua.022134.20'
.MI1 .MI1
.34 lbs.
1.55 1.82
for
Truss
M A G TRUSS
011SOMIS
0-810
~lO-I290
1290-1934.4
29 I4 21
4 3 . 3 In3
16.5
73.6
lor
Truss
Chordwlse Umbers
0-690 190-1290 1290-1934.4
23
20
.6Za.022~19.5'
.MI1 In2
.0310
21
.0330
2.60 l b s . for
Truss
54
SkPrS
# m m o , 19oa#1 W i n e , m t
3.0
Shear D i agr am
in.
1934
Wing
Sta.
Scale = 1/350
,497,400 i d b .
Scale
500,000"#/ In.
Monent Diagram
1934
.
Figure 31. Shear and $ending Moment Diagram For Fully Cantilevered Wing
55
TABLE 10.
STA
.
0
LWR. CAP LOADS x 19.5/lb 26,700 1bs 16,533 8,764 2,570 722
400
800
1290 1600
TABLE 11.
STRENGTH= TUBE S I Z E 3. OOx .083 2.50x.065 2.75~. 049 2.75x.058 1 . 6 2 ~ .065 1.50~.065 1.38~ .065 1 . 2 5 ~ .049 1 OOx .049 . .875x. 049 .750x. 049 .625x. 049 2.7 5x. 065 2.7 5x. 083 2.50~. 049 A .7606 ,4972 .4158 .4905 .3186 .2930 .2675 .la44 .1464 .1272 .lo79 .OB87 .5483 .6954 .3773
P
L'/p
FC
Fc x A
56342 l b s . 37164 31573 37228 21317 18976 16611 10916 7206 5251 3339 1828 41600 52712 28232
i' n
1.0317 i n . .8612 .9551 .9520 .5520 .5079 .4637 .4250 .3307 .2925 .2484 .2044 .9496 .9434 .8667
24.49 28.44 25.64 25.72 44.38 48.24 52.83 57.65 72.77 83.76 98.63 119.86 25.79 25.96 28.26
in.
76706 psi 74747 75933 7 5899 66908 64765 62098 59197 49218 41279 30438 20610 75872 75802 74825
56
h = Spar Depth,
CL t o CL
Tube C o l m Strength
t W [Scale! = 113qlQl
F i g u r e 32.
57
-1
243"
--'T
--I .25x.049
=--I1 !m
201
7
0
I n
I n
ru
N
2.50x.083
Lower Cap.
171" STA. 1934.4
'1
a
u )
251.4" .62x.049
288"
.75x.049
0 0
( u
- I
Figure 33
58
be t h e same as f o r t h e strut-bracedwing since loads are t h e same f o r both wings. From WSO t o WS690, t h e l o a d i n any member w i l l be
Load i n any member = Torsion Load - L i f t Load - Drag Load + + Figure 34 presents a s l i g h t l y d i s t o r t e d view o f t h e bay from WSO t o WS30 with t o r s i o n a l l o a d signs shown. drag loads i n Table 12. These loads are summarized along w i t h l i f t and Members CD and
EB w i l l be column c r i t i c a l f o r t h e
maximum p o s i t i v e load c o n d i t i o n and member C ' D i s column c r i t i c a l f o r the maximum negative l o a d condition. calculated. Members may then be sized and t h e i r weights Results are presented i n Table 13 f o r t r u s s weights. C a l c u l a t i o n o f loads i n w i r e braced s t r u c t u r e s i s more For t h a t
reason, t h e wing w i l l be broken i n t o elements s t a r t i n g a t t h e wingtip. The bracing scheme chosen f o r analysis i s shown i n Figure 35. Running loads are shown i n Figure 36. Loads i n each element w i l l be c a l c u l a t e d assuming elements are n o t connected, then t h e r e s u l t s w i l l be superimposed t o o b t a i n a representative l o a d i n g for t h e e n t i r e wing. Torsion @ Sts.
STA. 0
= %XI i n . lbs.
#ember
Length, In.
T o r s i o n Load, Lbs.
B'C
C'C C'D E'D
L
35.78 30.00
35.00
35.78
-1
19.5"
-4
E'E B'E
30.00
35.00
= o
Figure 34.
Bracing Scheme
Figure 35.
.w /in
8214
6386
k----W.S"&
Figure 36.
5 1 5 . M t 1 - b 773.76"
Running
1-
Loads i n Spar
60
TABLE 12.
MEMBER BC CD DE EB
B'C
LIFT LOAD
0 lbs.
NET LOAD
-232 l b s . -805 -232 -805 +712 +1284 +1846 +138
-805
0
-232
0 -805 0
+1565 +1565
0
0
+425
B'E
C 'D E'D
-281
0
0
+281 -287
+425
Element AB i s a f u l l y c a n t i l e v e r e d section o f outboard wing, and t h e loads which w i l l be t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e r e s t o f t h e wing a t i t s inboard e x t r e m i t y can be c a l c u l a t e d accordingly. Element BC can be considered f i x e d a t both ends as can element CD f o r purposes o f bending moment calculations, and both can be considered simply supported f o r shear l o a d c a l c u l a t i o n s . F i g u r e 37 (top) shows t h e loadings of each o f these sections,and t h e r e s u l t a n t l o a d c e n t r o i d s are presented a t t h e bottom. on t h e wing. F i g u r e 38 presents t h e shear and f r e e moment diagrams f o r each wing section. Table 14 sumnarites t h e moment d i s t r i b u t i o n
61
TABLE 1 3 ,
UPPER CAPS
SIZE
AREA
VOLUME
WEIGHT
3.00x.083~60" 2.75~ .083x105" 2.50x.083~279" 2.25~ .065x219" 1.75x.065~201" 1.38x.065~186" 1.25x.049~243" 1. OOx .049x141 " .875x.O49x213" .75x.049x288.4"
-7606 in2 .6954 .6302 .4462 .3441 .2675 .1849 .1464 .1272 .lo79
45.64 in3 73.02 175.83 97.72 69.16 49.76 44.93 20.64 27.09 31.11
2.78 Ibs 4.45 10.73 5.96 4.22 3.04 2.74 1.26 1.65 1.90 = 38.731 f o r 1 T r u s s
77.461 f o r 1 S p a r
(2 Trusses)
LOWER CAPS
SIZE
AREA
VOLUME
WEIGHT
2.50X.049X108" 2. OOx .058x171'I 1.62x.065~186" 1.38x.065~306" 1.25 x .049x 189" l.OOx.049~189" .875x.O49x246" .750x.O49x288" .62x.O49x251.4"
.3773 in2 .3539 .3186 .2675 .1849 .1464 .1272 .lo79 .0887
2.49 3.69 3.61 4.99 2.13 1.69 1.91 1.90 1.36 = 23.77 f o r 1 T r u s s 47.54 f o r 1 S p a r
( 2 Trusses)
VERTICALS
IN L I F T TRUSS
NO.
STA. MEMBERS SIZE AREA VOLUME WEIGHT
0-1290
1290-TIP
43 21
.62X.O22X18" .62~.022~14.6"
TAB LE 13.
SPAR
k
"$
DIAGONALS I N LIFT TRUSS 0-690 690-1290 1290-TIP 23 20 21 .62x.O28x35" .62~.022~35" .62~.022~31.5" .0525 in2 .0417 .0417 42.26 29.19 27.58 in3 2.58 l b s . 1.78 1.68 6.04#(1 Truss) CHORDWISE MEMBERS I N DRAG TRUSS 0-1290 1290-TIP 43 21 .62x.022x19.5" . 6 2 ~ .022~15.82" .0417 i n 2 .0417 34.97 i n 3 13.85 2.13 .85 2.98#(1 Truss) DIAGONALS I N DRAG TRUSS 0-690 690-1290 1290-TIP 23 20 21 .62x.028x35.78" .62~.022~.35.78" .62~.022~34.10" .0525 in2 .0417 -0417 43.20 i n 3 29.84 29.86 2.64 l b s 1.82 lbs.
1.82
6.28#(1 Truss)
ITEM
Upper Caps Lower Caps Verticals Diagonals i n L i f t Truss Diagonals i n Drag Truss Chordwi se Members
UT. OF 1 COMPLETE SPAR ( 2 TRUSSES) 77.46 l b s 47.54 5.50 12.08 12.56 5.96 -161.10 l b s
Total W t .
--
370.53 l b s .
= 388.221.
63
It ol
h
T
e
h h
m
II
I---
cn
c
0
m
I1
. C
st d
m m
II
cn
E
. C
fv
d
Q,
3 ; cc
0
=r
V
st
u l
or-
m
h
L c, t
Q)
m
0
0
Q
c
4
F
N
cn
U 4 0
I n
m
T*
10
3
7
I "
c
m
d
m ./
T
m m
ol
7
c .#\
*
h
'(L
64
lk
N
_I
kl
Shear Diagram
f
Scale: 200#/in.
2Q '
391.4#
-Scale: 343.1#
l/l50-
t
Scale: 25,000 i n . l b / i r
"
'
--
\
I-
v)
m
( u
B/
1
128.95
128.95 398"
140.1
+ ,
I 125.33
mela
I
Element BC
125.33 376"
125.33
,C
xA =.)13 18
Figure 38.
Element CD
d
We .r i
-1
774"
W = 635.8#
4 D
Rc = 317.91
RD = 317.91
317.9%
f' 45,236"/#
Elament BC
48 ; 961 / #
Element CO
Mewent
66
TABLE 14.
-t
4
Constant E 1 Asswed
-4
!2
--+- 1 -; \
C
l2
S t i f f ness R a t i of
-45236 -5118
.571 -41009
-41009 -3079 -44088
+41009
.1540 +39469
+50354
-50354
+44086
el
The presence o f f l y i n g w i r e s i n t h e a i r c r a f t s t r u c t u r e induces a x i a l l o a d s i n the wing spar and these a f f e c t both shears and bending moments. Given t h e b r a c i n g geometry shown i n F i g u r e 35, these e f f e c t s may be c a l c u l a t e d . These r e s u l t s may be used t o estimate E 1 f o r the spar. Table 15 summarizes these calculations. Figures 39 and 40 present wing normal bending moments and r e s u l t a n t
TABLE 15.
SUMMARY
ELEMENT
4 EI/L
K =
z C L
KICK
BC
CD
93
10,900,775 13,170,542
10,138,700 12,248,604
.45
.93
.55
C=
22,387,304
t
Fixed End Moment Release B Release C Final Moments
t50354 -50354 +50354 -49009 -1345 +49009 -740 +48269 -3371 +44898 -40779 -4120 -44899 -2266 +38513 -40779 +40779
68
c)
I
u
-+
/
m
U
QI
m
J
.f-
9)
m
LL
lb.
c3
c
v)
L
.
Q 0
er
L
aJ
n n
0
d
aJ
.I
LL.
*r-
c ,
a J
0
0 rD
0 d
0 (v
la
I-
wing shears may be estimated and these are presented i n Figure 41.
4W.M
K5.7X
267.4U
Scale: 300#/
0
/
386.9
4
-511 .' 6v
-Scale
300"/in.-
-700.4 #
1 ,
STA. 1548 Figure 41.
Fwd.
.2553#/ in
.1589#/ i n
Figure 42.
Wing chord moments due t o drag may be c a l c u l a t e d , spar i s shown i n Figure 42.
r e s u l t a n t wing chordwi se bending moments a r e presented in F i g u r e 43 ,and F i g u r e Chordwi se wing shears may be c a l c u l a t e d as b e f o r e and a chord shear diagram ( F i g u r e 45) can be constructed. Noment-in.
60
l b s . x 10-?40,000
i n . lbs./in.]
I
Fwd.
40 20
0
Figure 43.
Next, l i f t and chord loads i n t h e wing spar t r u s s members may be c a l c u l a t e d f o r selected s t a t i o n members as with t h e o t h e r two b r a c i n g schemes. may then be p u t together and spar cap s i z e s may be determined. sumnarizes t h e cap sizes chosen. chosen and spar weight c a l c u l a t e d . Net loads F i g u r e 46
F i n a l l y , l i f t and l a n d i n g wires may be s i z e d and t h e i r weight estimated. Using t h e same values f o r non-spar items i n t h e wing then produces t h e wing weight sumnary given i n Table 17.
72
i o
c
I
I
v)
-p
c
i
Y
I . L - 1 0 0 0
cu
-Scale:
1/300-
1934.4
I_L
1220
1
STA. 0
Figure 45.
74
Upper Caps
. Zero
Mcwncnt S t a s .
. 6 2 ~ . 0 3 5 *7
240"
240"
78"
1934.4
I 1548
Shaded Areas
S o l i d Lines
= =
1
1130
Wing Sta.
I 774
1 375
STA. 0
1-s
;I)
Lower Caps
1
1934.4
I 154%
ns
*
75
STA. 0
Figure 46.
TABLE 16.
ITEM UPPER CAPS LOWER CAPS VERTICALS L I F T TRUSS DIAGONALS CHORDWISE MEMBERS DRAG TRUSS DIAGONALS WIRE ATTACH STR. [EST] TOTAL
WEIGHT
T o t a l w e i g h t o f spars f o r both w i n g s = 2 x 70.22 = 140.44 lbs. TABLE 17. WING WEIGHT SUMMARY [BOTH WING PANELS]
WT.-LBS
A I ERONS L SPOILERS & STRUCT. L I F T , LDG. 8I DRAG WIRES FABRIC 81 DOPE FIXED SOLAR PANEL TOTAL
.2050 .2335
.1812
.0394 .0360
.0147
.1886
.1016 1.0000
76
a moment.
should be noted:
V a r i a t i o n s o f Aspect Ratio.
d i f f e r e n t b r a c i ng schemes f o r one a i r c r a f t conf ig u r a t i on was t o provide comparable baselines f o r examination o f t h e e f f e c t s o f changes i n design This was done by choosing several d i f f e r e n t values o f each parameter and r e c a l c u l a t i n g wing weight based on i t s change. Trends coul d then be exami ned and general ized expressions coul d be devel oped. The dominant e f f e c t o f aspect r a t i o changes w i l l be on wing spar weight,but o t h e r The basic approach w i l l be t o apply a given l o a d a t t h e geometrical a.c? o f constant-chord wings o f varying aspect r a t i o and determine t h e upper spar cap tube s i z e required t o handle t h e r e s u l t i n g column l o a d i n each. spar cap area. Bending moment f o r an aspect r a t i o = 10 wing could be s e t t o correspond t o a column l o a d c a p a b i l i t y of 1.00 inch O.D. x 0.049 i n c h w a l l composite tube 30 inches long. From t h i s moment, a wing l o a d i n g could be chosen assuming t o t a l reference wing area i s 1000 square f e e t and t h e l o a d derived therefrom a p p l i e d t o each wing. Next, a spar cap tube could be designed t h a t w i l l handle t h e moment thus developed, w i t h minimum margin o f safety. then be p l o t t e d against aspect r a t i o . Required tube area can The weight o f t h e spar f o r each aspect Spar weight w i l l be c l o s e l y proportional t o items o f wing s t r u c t u r e may be affected, too. The f i r s t parameter t o be investigated w i l l be aspect r a t i o (AR). parameters on s t r u c t u r a l weight.
aerodynamic center
77
m
*I-
QJ
N
( u
E
. C
rg
a J
aJ
3 I -
i s s e t (b t / c MAX; Spar cap tubes a r e a l l 1/4" below f l u s h w i t h t h e wing surface ( t o a l l o w f o r 1/4" r i b caps); Column l e n g t h o f tubes i s 30 inches; Only l i f t loads on t h e wing a r e considered; Tube end f i x i t y ( c )
1.5.
Given a sample wing geometry as below, t h e column l o a d may be c a l c u l a t e d , a tube s i z e determl ned and i t s r e s u l t a n t margin o f safety estimated.
AR 20 -
t384.85
"
70.71
W/S
'
__---I
.931 psf
1
/--44 +--2
.PSI'
197,493 i n . l b s .
T -
15.27''
-T
J3.27"
* -18 x 84.85
= 15.27
- 1.5 -
15.27'' . 5 = 13.27"
14,883#
13.77
A = ,2234 i n
P =
.5133
= 24.49
Tim
= 47.71 [ s h o r t column1
79
Fc
= 80,000
.3027
(m) 1
47.71 l o 5
M.S. = 14010
14883
- 1 = -.059
Aspect r a t i o s from 10 t o 45 were considered. .Two p o i n t s are p l o t t e d f o r each of the aspect r a t i o s chosen. The f i r s t assumes the standard tube nearest i n s i z e t o a margin o f s a f e t y o f zero. I n every case, t h e tubes chosen have s l i g h t l y negative margins o f safety ( f o r AR = 20, t h e margin o f safety i s
5.9%). These p o i n t s f a l l on o r close t o the dotted l i n e . I f tube area i s adjusted t o b r i n g the margin o f safety t o approximately zero, then t h e p o i n t s
f a l l on the s o l i d l i n e . Two p o i n t s are o f i n t e r e s t , one on each curve. The f i r s t occurs around aspect r a t i o 20 on the zero margin o f safety l i n e and corresponds t o the p o i n t o f diminishing r e t u r n s where tube s i z e goes up f a s t e r than aspect r a t i o . The second i s t h e corresponding p o i n t on "nearest r e a l tube size" l i n e a t aspect r a t i o 27. .Assumptions were also made t o estimate t h e e f f e c t o f aspect r a t i o on t h e weight o f wing components:
A l l r i b s are assumed t o be made o f spruce with 1/4 i n c h
square members.
then, w i l l be proportional only t o wing chord; Leading edge m a t e r i a l f o r a l l aspect r a t i o s w i l l be made o f t h e thinnest plywood avai 1ab1e; Metal t r a i l i n g edges come i n standard sizes w i t h weight a f u n c t i o n o f t r a i l i n g edge length; Fabric covering i s a function only o f wetted area which remai ns constant f o r a1 1 wings considered.
80
= b2
b =
___fiR*SREF
JAR
) i~~ ARiG
81
TABLE 18.
ITEM
AR-20
WING
CHANGE
150.44# 159.90 102.40 21.70 12.18 8.26 6.56 24.66 129.20 97.20 712.5#
89.52# 159.90 132.73 16.74 15.79 8.26 4.89 24.66 129.20 97.20 678.89#
1.681 1.ooo 0.771 1.296 0.771 1.000 1.342 1.000 1.000 1.ooo 1.050
TRAILING EDGE AILERON R I B S AILERON SPAR AILERON T.E. SPOILERS & STRUCT. FABRIC & DOPE SOLAR CELLS
w i l l vary markedly from aspect r a t i o 20 t o aspect r a t i o 33.6, t o t a l wing weight w i l l increase only 5%. This small change i n t o t a l wing weight f o r a 68% change i n aspect r a t i o i s due t o t h e l a c k o f dependence o f most wing s t r u c t u r a l components on aspect r a t i o and the small f r a c t i o n o f spar weight t o wing weight t o begin with.
It i s one o f t h e o b j e c t i v e s o f t h i s follow-on r e p o r t t o d e r i v e a s e t of
equations
f o r p r e l i m i n a r y weight analysis o f t h i s c l a s s of a i r c r a f t .
From previous studies i t has been determined t h a t t h i s c l a s s o f a i r c r a f t f a l l s somewhere between human powered a i r c r a f t (HPA) and l i g h t wing loading sailplanes, i n terms o f s t r u c t u r a l weight. So, t o d e r i v e t h e empirical equations desired, those two areas were used as sources o f weight data and weight estimation equations. The d e t a i l l e v e l t h a t i s expected t o be known about a p a r t i c u l a r a i r c r a f t has determined t h e form and accuracy o f t h e equations presented here. has been determined t h a t t h e known f a c t o r s would be gross weight, wing area and span, t a i l volume c o e f f i c i e n t , a i r f o i l thickness r a t i o , and f l i g h t dynamic pressure. I n a d d i t i o n t o these factors, methods o f construction, types o f material s used, and u l t i m a t e 1oad f a c t o r s are a1 so assumed t o be known.
T o help i n d e r i v i n g t h e equations t h e f o l l o w i n g
It
MIN -
MAX -
1 Aspect r a t i o . 2. W i ng 1oadi ng
10
35 1.5 l b s / f t 2 3000 l b s
0.5 1000
3.
Gross weight
The weight estimation equations a r r i v e d a t are presented here i n f o u r groups: t h e wing, fuselage, t a i l surfaces and p r o p e l l e r . The equations are expected t o produce e r r o r no greater than - 15 percent f o r the given + restrictions
The Wing To a r r i v e a t a reasonably accurate wing weight, t h e wing was d i v i d e d i n t o s i x subgroups. Those groups are the spar, l e a d ng edge, t r a i i n g edge, r i b s , coveri ng , and c o n t r o l s.
83
-I
0.2n
where
K1
K2
= =
c a n t i l e v e r o r s t r u t braced wing
0.011
K3
1 + 0.008AR
w ~ . =~ 0.0332 .
(3i:7*5*
W~.~.
P
where
KTE
= weight o f T.E.
The v a r i a t , o n o f leading edge weight w i t h aspect r a t i o and wing area i s shown i n Figure 48. I n a fashion s i m i l a r t o t h e t r a i l i n g edge, t h e covering weight can be found by m u l t i p l y i n g t h e per u n i t weight o f the covering m a t e r i a l by the wing surface area w i t h a c o r r e c t i o n f a c t o r included f o r wing thickness. This f a c t o r must be included because, f o r t h i s type o f wing the a i r f o i l i s q u i t e t h i c k causing a higher requirement f o r covering than j u s t t w i c e t h e wing area. So, t h e r e s u l t a n t equation i s :
Wc
=
KC ( 2 5 + 1/2
t -b)
C
where
KC
=
84
200
150
0.32 WLE)
( # ) 100
t
10
50
&! t
2d
i ,
7/
\ 2000
4000
3 000
\ 1000 40
i
~
10
Figure 48.
Leading Edge and Control Weights Vs. Aspect R a t i o and Wing Area 85
~~~~
= KR
where
KR
=
The f i n a l considt h e r e s u l t should be m u l t i p l i e d by a f a c t o r o f 0.9. e r a t i o n o f t h e wing s e c t i o n i s t h e c o n t r o l s . The c o n t r o l weight has been found t o vary as:
"CONT
= 0.0106
(sog5
(SI
study o f wing component weights f o r varying aspect r a t i o s . This d e t a i l e d analysis was done as a p a r t o f t h i s contractual study. The equations f o r t h e covering and r i b s are modified equations used f o r HPA work. The Fuselage Under t h i s study, a d e t a i l e d weight work-up was done f o r o n l y one fuselage design, a pod and boom type. Given t h i s , t h e e q u a t i o n d e r i v e d is for t h a t t y p e o n l y and i s based on wing l o a d i n g and f l i g h t dynamic p r e s s u r e . The
r e s u l t i n g e q u a t i o n is:
L s
86
shown i n Figure 49. For t h i s p l o t , WG =-1758 l b s and n = 3. HAPP landing gear weight is based on s a i l p l a n e landing gear and varies with t h e gross
weight as:
' S K
1.1
W L 150
The Tai 1planes Assuming t h a t both t h e v e r t i c a l and h o r i z o n t a l t a i l s employ the same c o n s t r u c t f o n methods, one weight equation can be given f o r both surfaces. That equation i s :
where
N =
number o f t a i l surfaces
( 2 vert.,
KTP =
3 vert.,
1 horiz.,
etc.)
1=
= FTP =
STp
This equation i s a modified version o f t h e ones given i n Reference 9 They were modified so t h e t a i l volume c o e f f i c i e n t would appear i n t h e equation. I t should be noted t h a t t h e above equation includes c o n t r o l s and i s graphed i n Figure 5 1 w i t h n = 3 , FTp = 1.0, N = 1 and KTP = 1.
400
350
3 00
FUSE L AGE WEIGHT ('1 250
200
150
Figure 49.
88
30
LAROIHG GEAR
3000
GROSS WEIGHT (#)
Figure 50.
89
TAILPLANE
WEIGHT
Figure 5 1 .
Tail Plane Weight Vs. Gross bleight and Tail Volume Coefficient
90
The Propeller
Based on the work in Reference 5 , the following propeller weight equation was derived. The propeller weight i s based on wing loading'as follows:
91
5bo
200
1
1000
15.0
PROPELLER WEIGHT
'REF
(#I
1oc
5(
1
Figure 5 2 . Propeller Weight V s . Wing Loading
92
APPENDIX
The design o f the MK-21 v e h i c l e c a l l s f o r using t h e most s t r u c t u r a l l y e f f i c i e n t m a t e r i a l s available, now o r i n t h e near term. i s based upon strength p e r u n i t weight. Few, i f any, m a t e r i a l s can match t h e graphi te/epoxy composite on those terms, and f o r t h a t reason graphite/epow, which i s very s t i f f , s t r u c t u r a l member o f t h e wing, t h e spar. comprises t h e primary Due t o t h e unusually r i g i d requirements f o r low v e h i c l e weight, s t r u c t u r a l e f f i c i e n c y o f t h e MK-21
For other structures, however, t h e loads are so low and/or t h e requirement t h a t they be f l e x i b l e enough t o bend t o given shapes so g r e a t as t o r u l e o u t graphite/epox,y. Such s t r u c t u r e s are t h e wing and t a i l r i b s , t h e wing leading edge and f a i r i n g s t r i p s and formers on t h e pylon and pod, a l l s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t r i b u t o r s t o the o v e r a l l weight. These s t r u c t u r e s are made o f wood, because t o make them o f anything e l s e would be t o impose unnecessary weight penal t i e s and, very 1i k e l y , unnecessary p e n a l t i e s i n manufacturing cost. The wing l e a d i n g edge i s a case i n p o i n t . As configured i n t h i s study the
leading edge comprises a D-tube o f .016 i n c h t h i c k b i r c h plywood and 1 / 4 i n c h square spruce corner s t r i p s . This s t r u c t u r e , which i s 322.2 f e e t i n length, weighs 102.4 pounds, o r about 5 ounces per f o o t . I f t h e s t r u c t u r e were made o f 2024T3 aluminum a l l o y o f t h e same thickness (which i s t h e t h i n n e s t s t r u c t u r a l aluminum a l l o y sheet made) i t would weigh 365.7 pounds, o r 3.57 times as much. I t would, i n fact, weigh more than t w i c e t h e weight o f the spar,and t h e loads on t h e l e a d i n g edge a r e e s s e n t i a l l y n o n e x i s t e n t .
A weight comparison o f
This
study showed t h e s u p e r i o r i t y o f a t r u s s made o f spruce s t r i p s and plywood gussets, much i n t h e manner o f r i b s used i n l i g h t t r a i n i n g and pleasure a i r c r a f t o f an e a r l i e r vintage. The accompanying t a b l e shows t h e comparative s t r u c t u r a l e f f i c i e n c e s o f spruce, b i r c h plywood, 2024T3 ( c l a d ) sheet and graphite/epoxy. Observe t h a t spruce beats 2024T3 i n a l l b u t s t i f f n e s s (and weighs o n l y 1/7 as much) and t h a t b i r c h plywood beats 2024T3 i n both column and shear b u c k l i n g e f f i c i e n c y about 1/4 as much. The s u p e r i o r i t y o f graphite/epoxy shows c l e a r l y i n t h e table. manufacture However, t h e
- and weighs
m a t e r i a l i s simply t o o s t i f f f o r a p p l i c a t i o n s r e q u i r i n g f l e x i b i l i t y i n
f o r example.
The above paragraphs are o f f e r e d because, although t h e acceptance o f new m a t e r i a l s by design engineers i s sometimes d i f f i c u l t , i t i s f r e q u e n t l y more d i f f i c u l t t o draw t h e i r a t t e n t i o n t o t h e f a c t t h a t on a case by case basis, some "old" m a t e r i a l s have b e t t e r a p p l i c a t i o n than t h e new ones s o l a r HAPP i s seen as one o f those a p p l i c a t i o n s .
TARLE 3-1
- and t h e MK-21
CCFIPAItATIVE WIGWE
6 S R I R L T WU A
(1)
Tendon EFF.
I
Stiffness
x
WT.
I
I
Material
in.^
F T q
x 10-
P51 x lod
spruce
Birch Plyumd 2024T3 A l .
.015
.028
626
79 39
32
104
38 22
56
14 .
1.2 10.7
40.0
307
600
'
.loo
n ( 1 ) Re. NASA CR-1215 "Fotential Structural Materials A d Design Concepts For Light Aircraft".
(2)
95
REFERENCES
1.
2.
wotA, K.D.,
Aerospace V e h i c l e Design, Johnson P u h l i s h i n q Company, Boulder, Colorado, 1968. Nicolai, Leland M.: Fundamentals of Aircraft Desiqn. U n i v e r s i t y
o f Dayton, Dayton, OH, 1975. Hoerner, S i g h a r d F. : Fluid-Dynamic Draq.
( B r i c k Town, N J ) ,
C.
3.
Hoerner F l u i d Dynamics
1965.
Hall, D.W.,
F o r t e n b a c h , C.D.,
D i m i c e l i , E.V.,
P a r k s , R.W.,
7.
8.
Peery, D.J.,
1983.
9.
Uruhn, E . F . , A n a l y s i s and Design o f F l i q h t V e h i c l e S t r u c t u r e , T r i - S t a t e O f f s e t Carpany, C i n c i n n a t i , OH, 1965. J o u r n a l of Aircraft, V o l . 15, No. 9, Sept. ' 7 8 , p. 550.
Athott, I.H.,
Theory o f A i r f o i l S e c t i o n s ,
AV Hoe Company
NY, I b v e r , 1959.
13.
96
1. Report No.
- CR-172313 NASA
4. Title and Subtitle
5. Report Oate
April 1984
6. Pdorming Organization Code 8. Performing Organization Report No.
+
7. Author(s)
LMSC-D878711
10. Work Unit No.
Lockheed Missiles and Space Company 1111 Lockheed Wy a Sunnyvale, Cal i forni a 94086
2. Sponsoring Agency Name and. Address
NAS1-16975
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Contractor r e p o r t
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
16. Abstract
T h i s study was conducted t o develop s i z i n g algorithms f o r very l i g h t w e i g h t a i r c r a f t s t r u c t u r e s . Three types of bracing schemes were analyzed: Fully canti 1evered s t r u t braci ng and w i re bracing and s c a l i ng rules were determi ned . Wire bracing appears t o provide the lightest wing structure f o r Solar H i g h A1 t i tude Powered P1 atforms.
This r e p o r t follows a more comprehensive study of So,lar Powered A i r c r a f t , N S AA CR 3699, and i s meant t o provide an a d d i t i o n t o the e a r l i e r work.
Solar Power
RPV
Structural Si zing
19 Security Clauif. (of this report)
22. R i c e
Unc 1a s s i f i ed
Uncl a s s i f i ed
105
A06